Event MON 863 Bt Cry3Bb1 Corn Response to Comments Document September 2005 Response to Comments Document Bacillus thuringiensis Cry3Bb1 Protein and the Genetic Material Necessary for its Production ( Vector ZMIR13L) in Event MON 863 Corn U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs Biopesticide and Pollution Prevention Division Event MON 863 Bt Cry3Bb1 Corn Response to Comments Document September 2005 ii Table of Contents Introduction .......................................................................................................... iii 1  Insect Resistance Management ( IRM) ............................................................. 1 1 1.1  Refuges 1.2  Resistance Defined 1.3  IRM Plan 1.4  Data Needs and Methods 1.5  Expression Levels 2  Health Effects .................................................................................................. 2 1 2.1  Human Health 2.2  Molecular Biology/ Product Characterization 2.3  Data Needs and Methods 2.4  Expression Levels 3  Environmental Assessment ............................................................................. 3 1 3.1  Non target Organism Effects 3.2  Environmental Fate/ Persistence/ Indirect Effects on Soil Biota 4  Gene Flow and Weediness .............................................................................. 4 1 5  Benefits ............................................................................................................ 5 1 5.1  Efficacy 5.2  Decreased Pesticide Use 5.3  Alternatives to MON 863 6  The Corn Rootworm Problem ( background) ................................................... 6 1 7  Registration/ Approval  General ...................................................................... 7 1 Event MON 863 Bt Cry3Bb1 Corn Response to Comments Document September 2005 1Currently with the USDA/ APHIS.

2Currently with the USDA/ CSREES.

iii Event MON 863 Bt Cry3Bb1 Corn Response to Comments Document Team Insect Resistance Management ( IRM) Robyn Rose, Ph. D. 1 Health Effects John Kough, Ph. D.

Environmental Assessment Zigfridas Vaituzis. Ph. D.

Gene Flow and Weediness Chris Wozniak, Ph. D. 2 Benefits Edward Brandt, M. A.

The Corn Rootworm Problem ( background) Mike Mendelsohn Registration/ Approval  General Mike Mendelsohn Legal Counsel Keith Matthews, J. D. Office of General Counsel Contract Work Assignment Manager Ibrahim Barsoum, Ph. D.

Event MON 863 Bt Cry3Bb1 Corn Response to Comments Document Team Leader Mike Mendelsohn Event MON 863 Bt Cry3Bb1 Corn Response to Comments Document September 2005 3The ICF Consulting project manager for this project was William B. Baird, wbaird@ icfconsulting. com.

iv Introduction On March 1, 2001, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) announced receipt of an application to register a pesticide product containing an active ingredient not included in any previously registered product pursuant to the provisions of section 3( c)( 4) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act ( FIFRA) ( 66 FR 15435). The applicant, Monsanto Company, submitted the registration application to register the product, Event MON 863: Corn Rootworm Protected Corn. Upon receipt of the application, EPA opened docket OPP 30509 for public comment on registration of this product. On March 13, 2002, EPA announced receipt of a revised application from Monsanto, and accepted comments under docket OPP 30509B ( 67 FR 11333). Finally, on July 24, 2002, EPA announced a meeting of the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel ( SAP) to consider and review corn rootworm plant incorporated protectant, insect resistance management and non target insect issues ( 67 FR 48461) and accepted comments under docket OPP 2002 0157.

This document presents the combined set of comments received by these three dockets and EPA's response based on EPA's judgement at the time of it's registration decision ( with the exception of gene stacking comments which were addressed in the YieldGard Plus & MON863 Gene Stacking Response to Comments Document).

Approximately 937 comments were received by EPA in response to these announcements. Comments were received from private citizens, independent farmers, farming cooperatives, farm industry representatives, trade organizations, advocacy groups, academic researchers, and government officials. Comments included handwritten letters, typed letters, e mails, faxes, and slide presentations from the SAP meeting.

EPA contracted with ICF Consulting of Fairfax, Virginia3 to provide technical assistance in the categorization and summary of these public comments using CommentWorks, ICF's proprietary comment analysis and response development software. ICF assisted EPA in scanning and importing letters from all three of the dockets into CommentWorks, identifying excerpts, and coding them to key issues identified by EPA.

Several organizations interested in the registration of MON 863 sponsored letter writing campaigns to promote their interests and provided form letters for members or other interested citizens to submit to EPA. ICF reviewed all of the substantive comments provided by EPA to Event MON 863 Bt Cry3Bb1 Corn Response to Comments Document September 2005 v identify such form letters. A number of non substantive letters were also received by EPA, but not provided to ICF. ICF identified six master form letters. The originating organizations for these campaign letters were not apparent, and the master letters were identified on the basis of the most consistently copied text. Most of the 937 comments received were form letters ( 81 percent). In some cases the form letters were signed and mailed without alteration. However, many commenters added personalized comments or edited the form letters to better express their individual views. ICF imported into CommentWorks only the unique and substantive text from master form letters and from altered form letters in order to avoid repetition. However, for each master form letter, ICF tracked the total number of both altered and unaltered form letters received. In total, 221 unique, substantive comments were imported into CommentWorks for detailed analysis.

About 88 percent of the 937 comments were received from private citizens. This number includes non substantive comments not provided to ICF. Comments submitted by independent farmers were not differentiated from private citizen comments, so the number of independent farmers submitting comments is not included here. Support or opposition of the registration was not tracked for individual commenters, however, all six of the master form letters expressed support for the registration of MON 863. Based on the large number of form letters received and the large number of letters received from private citizens, we conclude that most of the private citizens who commented on the application generally support registration.

Some of the major environmental or public interest groups included the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Foundation E. A. R. T. H., Greenpeace, The Sierra Club, The Xerces Society, and Union of Concerned Scientists. The Center for Science in the Public Interest did not express strong support or opposition to the registration of MON 863, but did provide a detailed analysis identifying what they viewed as flaws in the current Insect Resistance Management ( IRM) plan. Foundation E. A. R. T. H., an environmental organization focusing on agriculture, supported approval of the registration based on an impact survey of 300 corn growers who, by and large, were interested in reducing pesticide use and using a seed product like MON 863. Greenpeace, The Sierra Club, and The Xerces Society, all environmental advocacy groups, along with Union of Concerned Scientists, a public interest group, opposed approval of the application, claiming that insufficient scientific data are available. Each of these groups provided lengthy comments and/ or independent evaluations of the application materials submitted by Monsanto.

Agricultural trade associations generally supported approval of registration of MON 863. Among these trade associations were the American Seed Trade Association, the Agribusiness Association of Iowa, the Illinois Corn Growers Association, the Iowa Corn Growers Association, the Nebraska Corn Growers Association, the Iowa Seed Association, the National Grain and Feed Association, and the National Wild Turkey Federation. A representative of the National Corn Growers Association supported the registration and expressed the importance of a workable IRM plan. The Illinois Corn Growers Association expressed concerns about handling and marketing the product. Event MON 863 Bt Cry3Bb1 Corn Response to Comments Document September 2005 vi Approximately 20 seed and grain companies submitted comments in support of registration of MON 863. Entomologists from research and academic organizations including the NCR 46 committee ( a technical committee of research and extension entomologists), Iowa State University, Kansas State University, Michigan State University, Pennsylvania State University, and the University of Delaware also expressed support of the registration. Government representatives of the Illinois Department of Agriculture, Illinois State Senate, Iowa Department of Agriculture, Nebraska Department of Agriculture, Ohio Department of Agriculture, Texas House of Representatives, Texas Senate, and U. S. Department of Agriculture all supported registration of MON 863.

The remainder of this report presents relevant summaries or excerpts from all the unique, substantive comments received on the application. This report is organized according to the issues addressed by commenters ( see Table of Contents following this introduction). The first section addresses comments dealing with Insect Resistance Management ( IRM). Due to the large volume of comments addressing the same issues on IRM, EPA summarized the public comments in this section and provided responses following the comment summaries. The other sections of this document contain verbatim excerpts from public comments. In these sections, EPA responded to comments in two different ways. In cases where a commenter raised unique substantive points, EPA provided a response to a single comment excerpt. In other cases, the issues raised in different comment excerpts were similar enough to allow EPA to provide one response for a group of excerpts.


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 16 (Wednesday, January 25, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 3761]
[FR Doc No: 2012-1424]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12817-002, Project No. 14083-000]

Free Flow Power Corporation, Northland Power Mississippi River
LLC; Notice Announcing Filing Priority for Preliminary Permit
Applications

    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. Free Flow Power Corporation; Project No. 12817-002.
    2. Northland Power Mississippi River LLC; Project No. 14083-000.

    Dated: January 18, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-1424 Filed 1-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 9, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72968-72970]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28145]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0450; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-250-AD;
Amendment 39-18037; AD 2014-24-04]
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 MD-90-30 airplanes. This AD was prompted by
reports of cracks emanating from the aft-most barrel nut holes of the
left and right upper rear spar caps of the horizontal stabilizer. This
AD requires repetitive high frequency eddy current (ETHF) inspections
for cracks in the areas around the two aft-most barrel nut holes of the
upper rear spar caps, and corrective action if necessary; and
repetitive ETHF inspections for cracks in the areas around the two aft-
most barrel nut holes of any repaired or replaced upper rear spar cap,
and corrective actions if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect
and correct such cracks, which could propagate until the upper rear
spar cap severs, and result in failure of the horizontal stabilizer
upper center or aft skin panel and adversely affect the structural
integrity of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective January 13, 2015.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of January 13,
2015.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
3855 Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800-0019, Long Beach, CA 90846-0001;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 2; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
0450; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The address for the Docket Office (phone: 800-647-
5527) 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: George Garrido, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712-4137; phone: 562-
627-5357; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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 MD-90-30 airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on
July 18, 2014 (79 FR 41943). The NPRM was prompted by reports of cracks
emanating from the aft-most barrel nut holes of the left and right
upper rear spar caps of the horizontal stabilizer. The NPRM proposed to
require repetitive high frequency eddy current (ETHF) inspections for
cracks in the

areas around the two aft-most barrel nut holes of the upper rear spar
caps, and corrective action if necessary; and repetitive ETHF
inspections for cracks in the areas around the two aft-most barrel nut
holes of any repaired or replaced upper rear spar cap, and corrective
actions if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct such
cracks, which could propagate until the upper rear spar cap severs, and
result in failure of the horizontal stabilizer upper center or aft skin
panel and adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We have considered the comment received. Boeing supported the
NPRM (79 FR 41943, July 18, 2014).

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD as proposed, except for minor editorial changes. We have
determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (79 FR 41943, July 18, 2014) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (79 FR 41943, July 18, 2014).

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 52 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection...................  9 work-hours x $85 per hour =           $1,410   $2,175 per       Up to $113,100
                                $765 per inspection cycle.                       inspection       per inspection
                                                                                cycle.           cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary repairs and
replacements that would be required based on the results of the
inspection. We have no way of determining the number of aircraft that
might need these repairs and replacements:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Action                            Labor cost                   Parts cost        Cost per product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repair (per side)................  368 work[dash]hours x $85 per hour   Up to $90,129......  Up to $121,409.
                                    = $31,280.
Replacement......................  368 work[dash]hours x $85 per hour   $81,764............  $113,044.
                                    = $31,280.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

    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):

2014-24-04 The Boeing Company: Amendment 39-18037; Docket No. FAA-
2014-0450; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-250-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective January 13, 2015.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model MD-90-30
airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code Stabilizers, 55.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of cracks emanating from the
aft-most barrel nut holes of the left and right upper rear spar caps
of

the horizontal stabilizer. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct such cracks, which could propagate until the upper rear spar
cap severs, and result in failure of the horizontal stabilizer upper
center or aft skin panel and adversely affect the structural
integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspection

    At the applicable compliance time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-55A017, dated
September 27, 2013, except as provided by paragraph (j) of this AD:
Do a high frequency eddy current inspection (ETHF) for cracks in the
areas around the two aft-most barrel nut holes of the upper rear
spar cap; and do all applicable corrective actions; in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin MD90-55A017, dated September 27, 2013. Thereafter, repeat
the ETHF inspection at the applicable time specified in paragraph
1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-55A017,
dated September 27, 2013. Do all corrective actions before further
flight.

(h) Post-Repair/Replacement Actions

    For airplanes on which a splice repair or replacement was done
as specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-55A017: At the
applicable compliance time specified in paragraph 1.E.,
``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-55A017, dated
September 27, 2013, do an ETHF inspection for cracks at the two aft-
most barrel nut holes of any repaired or replaced upper rear spar
cap, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin MD90-55A017, dated September 27, 2013.
Thereafter, repeat the ETHF inspection at the applicable time
specified in paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin MD90-55A017, dated September 27, 2013. If any cracking is
found, before further flight, do the repair or replacement, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin MD90-55A017, dated September 27, 2013.

(i) Post-Repair Inspections

    The post-repair inspections of the upper rear spar cap of the
aft flange that has been splice-repaired specified in Table 1 of
paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
MD90-55A017, dated September 27, 2013, are not required by this AD.

    Note 1 to paragraph (i) of this AD: The damage tolerance
inspections (post-repair inspections of the upper rear spar cap aft
flange) specified in Table 1 of paragraph 1.E., ``Compliance,'' of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-55A017, dated September 27, 2013,
may be used in support of compliance with Section 121.1109(c)(2) or
129.109(b)(2) of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
121.1109(c)(2) or 14 CFR 129.109(b)(2)). The corresponding actions
specified in the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin MD90-55A017, dated September 27, 2013, are not required by
this AD.

(j) Exception to the Service Information

    Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin MD90-55A017, dated September
27, 2013, specifies a compliance time ``after the original issue
date of this service bulletin,'' this AD requires compliance within
the specified compliance time after the effective date of this AD.

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), 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 ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (l) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair 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, to
make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair
must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and 14 CFR
25.571, Amendment 45, and the approval must specifically refer to
this AD.

(l) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact George Garrido,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles
Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood,
CA 90712-4137; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(m) 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 MD90-55A017, dated September
27, 2013.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For Boeing service information identified in this AD,
contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800-0019, Long Beach, CA
90846-0001; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 2; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425 227-1221.
    (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 Renton, Washington, on November 19, 2014.
Suzanne Masterson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-28145 Filed 12-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 13, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8963-8965]
[FR Doc No: 2019-04530]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-1126; Product Identifier 2017-SW-125-AD; Amendment
39-19587; AD 2019-05-05]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH
(Previously Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH) Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 97-26-03 for
Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH Model MBB-BK 117 A-1, MBB-BK 117 A-3, MBB-
BK 117 A-4, MBB-BK 117 B-1, MBB-BK 117 B-2, and MBB-BK 117 C-1
helicopters. AD 97-26-03 required visual inspections for cracks in the
ribbed area of the main rotor (M/R) mast flange (flange). Since we
issued AD 97-26-03, we have determined that a certain reinforced M/R
mast is not affected by the unsafe condition. This new AD retains the
requirements of AD 97-26-03 and removes a certain M/R mast from the
applicability. The actions of this AD are intended to address an unsafe
condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective April 17, 2019.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain document listed in this AD as of April 17, 2019.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N. Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX
75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
or at http://www.helicopters.airbus.com/website/en/ref/Technical-Support_73.html. You may review this referenced service information at
the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101
Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. It is also available
on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA-2017-1126.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FAA-2017-1126; or in person at Docket
Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD, any incorporated-by-reference service
information, the economic evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The address for Docket Operations (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
Docket Operations, 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: Matt Fuller, Senior Aviation Safety
Engineer, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA,
10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to remove AD 97-26-03, Amendment 39-10246 (62 FR 65750,
December 16, 1997) (AD 97-26-03) and add a new AD. AD 97-26-03 applied
to Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH (now Airbus Helicopters Deutschland
GmbH) Model MBB-BK 117 A-1, MBB-BK 117 A-3, MBB-BK 117 A-4, MBB-BK 117
B-1, MBB-BK 117 B-2, and MBB-BK 117 C-1 helicopters. AD 97-26-03
required visual inspections for cracks in the ribbed area of the M/R
flange and replacing the M/R mast if a crack is found.
    The NPRM published in the Federal Register on September 13, 2018
(83 FR 46426). The NPRM was prompted by EASA AD No. 2017-0193, dated
September 29, 2017 (EASA AD 2017-0193), issued by EASA, which is the
Technical Agent for the member States of the European Union. EASA AD
2017-0193 superseded AD 97-276, effective September 25, 1997, issued by
Luftfahrt-Bundesamt (LBA), which is the airworthiness authority for
Germany, to correct an unsafe condition for Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH
Model MBB-BK 117 A-1, MBB-BK 117 A-3, MBB-BK 117 A-4, MBB-BK 117 B-1,
MBB-BK 117 B-2, and MBB-BK 117 C-1 helicopters. EASA advises that
reinforced M/R mast part number (P/N) 4639 305 095, which is part of M/
R mast assembly P/N 4639 205 016, is not affected by the unsafe
condition. EASA AD 2017-0193 retains the repetitive inspection
requirements of the LBA AD but only for helicopters with M/R mast P/N
4639 305 002.
    Since we issued AD 97-26-03, Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH
Helicopters changed its name to Airbus

Helicopters Deutschland GmbH. This AD reflects that change and updates
the contact information to obtain service documentation. Additionally,
the FAA's Aircraft Certification Service has changed its organizational
structure. The new structure replaces product directorates with
functional divisions. We have revised some of the office titles and
nomenclature throughout this AD to reflect the new organizational
changes. Additional information about the new structure can be found in
the Notice published on July 25, 2017 (82 FR 34564).

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD, but we did not receive any comments on the NPRM.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
Germany and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with Germany, EASA, its technical
representative, has notified us of the unsafe condition described in
its AD. We have reviewed the relevant information and determined that
an unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other
helicopters of these same type designs and that air safety and the
public interest require adopting the AD requirements as proposed.

Differences Between This AD and the EASA AD

    The EASA AD requires contacting Airbus Helicopters if a crack is
found on the flange for applicable instructions, whereas this AD
requires replacing the M/R mast with an airworthy M/R mast before
further flight.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin No. ASB MBB-
BK117-10-114, Revision 1, dated July 28, 2017. This service information
specifies visually inspecting the area of the holes on the underside of
the flange for cracks, especially in the ribbed area between the holes,
and if cracks are found, contacting Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH
before further flight for advice on how to proceed. This service
information applies to helicopters with M/R mast assembly P/N 4639 205
011.
    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.

Other Related Service Information

    We also reviewed Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin No. ASB MBB-
BK117-10-114, dated August 27, 1997, which specifies visually
inspecting the area of the holes on the underside of the flange for
cracks, especially in the ribbed area between the holes, and if cracks
are found, contacting Eurocopter Helicopter Deutschland GmbH before
further flight for advice on how to proceed. This service information
applies to helicopters with M/R mast assembly P/N 4639 205 011 or 4639
205 016.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 62 helicopters of U.S. Registry.
We estimate that operators may incur the following costs in order to
comply with this AD. Labor costs are estimated at $85 per work-hour.
    Visually inspecting the flange for a crack requires 0.25 work-hour
for an estimated cost of about $21 per helicopter and $1,302 for the
U.S. fleet per inspection cycle. Replacing the M/R mast requires 10
work-hours and parts cost $50,000 for an estimated cost of $50,850 per
helicopter.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify 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 to the extent
that a regulatory distinction is required, 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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
97-26-03, Amendment 39-10246 (62 FR 65750, December 16, 1997), and
adding the following new AD:

2019-05-05 Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (Previously
Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH): Amendment 39-19587; Docket No. FAA-
2017-1126; Product Identifier 2017-SW-125-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH
(previously Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH) Model MBB-BK 117 A-1, MBB-
BK 117 A-3, MBB-BK 117 A-4, MBB-BK 117 B-1, MBB-BK 117 B-2, and MBB-
BK 117 C-1 helicopters, certificated any category, with a main rotor
(M/R) mast assembly part number 4639 205 011 installed.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a crack in an M/R mast
flange. This condition could result in failure of the mast flange
and subsequent loss of helicopter control.

(c) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 97-26-03, Amendment 39-10246 (62 FR 65750,
December 16, 1997).

(d) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective April 17, 2019.

(e) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(f) Required Actions

    (1) Before further flight, and thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 100 hours time-in-service, visually inspect the flange in the
ribbed area for cracks using a 5-power or higher magnifying glass in
accordance with paragraphs 2.A.1 and 2.A.2 of the Accomplishment
Instructions in Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin No. ASB-
MBB-BK 117-10-114, Revision 1, dated July 28, 2017.
    (2) If a crack is found as a result of the inspections specified
in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, remove the cracked M/R mast and
replace it with an airworthy M/R mast.

(g) Credit for Previous Actions

    Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the procedures specified in AD 97-26-03, Amendment
39-10246 (62 FR 65750, December 16, 1997), are acceptable for
compliance with the corresponding actions specified in paragraphs
(f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD.

(h) Special Flight Permit

    A special flight permit will not be permitted.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Section, Rotorcraft Standards
Branch, FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to:
Matt Fuller, Senior Aviation Safety Engineer, Safety Management
Section, Rotorcraft Standards Branch, FAA, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy.,
Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office, before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(j) Additional Information

    (1) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin No. ASB MBB-BK
117-10-114, dated August 27, 1997, which is not incorporated by
reference, contains additional information about the subject of this
AD. For service information identified in this AD, contact Airbus
Helicopters, 2701 N Forum Drive, Grand Prairie, TX 75052; telephone
(972) 641-0000 or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at http://www.helicopters.airbus.com/website/en/ref/Technical-Support_73.html.
You may review a copy of the service information at the FAA, Office
of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy.,
Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177.
    (2) The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD No. 2017-0193, dated September 29, 2017. You
may view the EASA AD on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov
in Docket No. FAA-2017-1126.

(k) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6300, Main Rotor
Drive System.

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference 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) Airbus Helicopters Alert Service Bulletin No. ASB MBB-BK117-
10-114, Revision 1, dated July 28, 2017.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For Airbus Helicopters service information identified in
this AD, contact Airbus Helicopters, 2701 N Forum Drive, Grand
Prairie, TX 75052; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
(972) 641-3775; or at http://www.helicopters.airbus.com/website/en/ref/Technical-Support_73.html.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Office of the
Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-
321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (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 Fort Worth, Texas, on March 1, 2019.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-04530 Filed 3-12-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 12 (Wednesday, January 19, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2775-2777]
[FR Doc No: 2022-00922]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2701-061]

Erie Boulevard Hydropower, L.P.; Notice of Application Accepted
for Filing, Soliciting Motions To Intervene and Protests, Ready for
Environmental Analysis, and Soliciting Comments, Recommendations,
Preliminary Terms and Conditions, and Preliminary Fishway Prescriptions

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.

    a. Type of Application: New Major License.
    b. Project No.: 2701-061.
    c. Date filed: February 26, 2021.
    d. Applicant: Erie Boulevard Hydropower, L.P. (Erie).
    e. Name of Project: West Canada Creek Hydroelectric Project (West
Canada Creek Project).
    f. Location: The existing project is located on West Canada Creek,
a tributary of the Mohawk River, in the counties of Oneida and
Herkimer, New York. The project does not occupy federal land.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Steven Murphy, Director, Licensing,
Brookfield Renewable, 33 West 1st Street South, Fulton, NY 13069, (315)
598-6130, [email protected].
    i. FERC Contact: Emily Carter,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
[email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing motions to intervene and protests, comments,
recommendations, preliminary terms and conditions, and preliminary
prescriptions: 60 days from the issuance date of this notice; reply
comments are due 105 days from the issuance date of this notice.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene, protests, comments, recommendations, preliminary
terms and conditions, and preliminary fishway prescriptions using the
Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000
characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a paper copy.
Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, 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. The first page of any filing should include docket number P-
2701-061.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing
documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each
person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an
intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to
the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a
particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document
on that resource agency.
    k. This application has been accepted for filing and is now ready
for environmental analysis.
    l. The existing West Canada Creek Project consists of the following
two developments:
    The Prospect Development includes: (1) A 176-acre impoundment with
a normal surface elevation of 1,161.5 feet; \1\ (2) a dam that consists
of a 306-foot-long, 45-foot-high concrete overflow spillway with three
27-foot-wide Tainter gates; (3) a 400-foot-long, 47-foot-high north
dike and a 475-foot-long, 47-foot-high south dike; (4) a 4,500-foot-
long, 22-foot-high canal extending from the south dike to a concrete
intake; (5) a 430-foot-long, 13.5-foot-diameter steel penstock leading
from the intake to the 76-foot-long, 62-foot-wide reinforced concrete
powerhouse containing a single turbine generator unit with a nameplate
capacity of 17.3 megawatts (MW); (6) an approximate 1.2-mile-long
bypassed reach between the Prospect dam and the powerhouse; (7) 6.9-
kilovolt (kV) generator leads that run from the powerhouse to a
substation with a 15-kV breaker, 6.6/46-kV transformer, and a 46-kV
switch connecting to the National Grid interconnection point within the
substation; and (8) appurtenant facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ All elevations refer to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum
of 1929.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Trenton Development includes: (1) A 288-foot-long and 60-foot-
high concrete and masonry dam having an overflow section with a crest
elevation of 1,017.9 feet, approximately 100 feet long surmounted by 6-
foot hinged flashboards and a 10-foot by 15-foot sluice gate; (2) a
concrete spillway approximately 160 feet long with a crest elevation of
1,016.2 feet surmounted by a pneumatic flashboard system with a crest
elevation of 1,023.9 when fully inflated, discharging into a spillway
channel excavated into rock around the east abutment of the dam; (3) a
reservoir having a surface area of 9 acres and a gross storage capacity
of 264 acre-feet at a normal pool elevation of 1,023.9 feet; (4) six 5-
foot-diameter sluice pipes through the dam and two concrete-sealed 5-
foot-diameter pipes; (5) a reinforced-concrete intake structure having
a lift gate and trashracks along the west bank of the reservoir; (6) a
14-foot-diameter conduit comprising: (a) A 1,275-foot-long concrete-
lined tunnel section; (b) a 40-foot-long steel-lined tunnel section;
and (c) a 2,075-foot-long steel pipe section; (7) a bifurcation; (8) a
steel penstock comprising: (a) A short 12-foot-diameter section
connecting to a surge tank and leading to a 125-foot-long, 12-foot-
diameter section connecting to a manifold; and (b) three 138-foot-long,
7-foot-diameter sections serving generating Units 5, 6, and 7; (9) a
263-foot-long, 7-foot-diameter steel penstock to Units 1 through 4;
(10) Units 1 through 4 in Powerhouse No. 1 retired in-place and
Powerhouse No. 2 containing generating Unit 5 (7.4 MW), Unit 6 (7.65
MW), and Unit 7 (7.4 MW)--for a total nameplate rating of 22.45-MW
operated at a 255-foot head and a maximum flow of 1,450 cubic feet per
second; (11) the 13.2-kV generator leads, the 15-kV switchgear, the
13.2/46-kV transformers, the 46-kV switchgear connecting to the main
46-kV bus, and the associated station services transformer banks and
low voltage switchgear; and (12) appurtenant facilities.
    The West Canada Creek Project operates off of outflows from the New
York Power Authority's Hinckley-Jarvis Hydroelectric Project's (FERC
No. 3211) reservoir (Hinckley Reservoir) that discharges into the upper
end of the Prospect Development's reservoir.
    Erie proposes to continue operating the project in the same manner
as the current license and is not proposing to install any new
structures as part of the relicensing. The project generated an annual
average of 77,161 megawatt-hours between 2011 and 2019.
    m. A copy of the application may be viewed on the Commission's
website 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, contact FERC Online
Support.
    Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    n. Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene
in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure,
18 CFR 385.210, .211, and .214. In determining the appropriate action
to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments
filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with
the Commission's Rules may become a party to the

proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be
received on or before the specified comment date for the particular
application.
    All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title
``PROTEST,'' ``MOTION TO INTERVENE,'' ``COMMENTS,'' ``REPLY COMMENTS,''
``RECOMMENDATIONS,'' ``PRELIMINARY TERMS AND CONDITIONS,'' or
``PRELIMINARY FISHWAY PRESCRIPTIONS;'' (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, recommendations, terms and conditions or prescriptions must
set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the
requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the
application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or
motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the
applicant specified in the particular application. A copy of all other
filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof
of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the
Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and
385.2010.
    o. Procedural Schedule:
    The application will be processed according to the following
schedule. Revisions to the schedule may be made as appropriate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Milestone                           Target date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Filing of comments, recommendations,           March 2022.
 preliminary terms and conditions, and
 preliminary fishway prescriptions.
Filing of Reply Comments.....................  April 2022.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    p. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of this notice.
    q. A license applicant must file no later than 60 days following
the date of issuance of the notice of acceptance and ready for
environmental analysis provided for in Sec.  5.22: (1) A copy of the
water quality certification; (2) a copy of the request for
certification, including proof of the date on which the certifying
agency received the request; or (3) evidence of waiver of water quality
certification. Please note that the certification request must comply
with 40 CFR 121.5(b), including documentation that a pre-filing meeting
request was submitted to the certifying authority at least 30 days
prior to submitting the certification request. Please also note that
the certification request must be sent to the certifying authority and
to the Commission concurrently.

    Dated: January 12, 2022.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-00922 Filed 1-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 210 (Wednesday, November 1, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75093-75095]
[FR Doc No: 2023-24128]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

[OST Docket No. DOT-OST-2011-0022]

Notice of Submission of Proposed Information Collection to OMB
Agency Request for Revision of a Previously Approved Collection: Online
Complaint Form for Service-Related Issues in Air Transportation

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments. Revision of information
related to an active OMB control number.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, as
amended, this notice announces the Department of Transportation's
intention to revise information related to an OMB control number for an
online complaint form by which a consumer can electronically submit a
service-related complaint against an airline and other air travel-
related companies.

DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by January 2, 2024.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that you do not duplicate your docket submissions,
please submit them by only one of the following means:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for submitting
comments;
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W-12/140, Washington, DC 20590-0001; or
     Hand delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W-12/140,
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daeleen Chesley, Office of the
Secretary, Office of Aviation Consumer Protection (C-70), U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC
20590,<PHONE_NUMBER> (voice) or at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2105-0568.
    Title: Revision of the Office of Aviation Consumer Protection's
Online Air Travel Service Complaint/Comment Form.
    Abstract: The Department of Transportation's (Department) Office of
Aviation Consumer Protection (OACP) has broad authority under 49
U.S.C., subtitle VII, to investigate and enforce consumer protection
and civil rights laws and regulations related to air transportation.
OACP monitors compliance with and investigates violations of the
Department of Transportation's aviation economic, consumer protection,
and civil rights requirements.
    Among other things, the office is responsible for receiving and
investigating service-related consumer complaints filed against
airlines and other air travel-related companies. Complaints submitted
to OACP are reviewed by the office to determine the extent to which
these entities comply with federal aviation consumer protection and
civil rights laws and what, if any, action should be taken. OACP also
receives general comments and inquiries from air consumers via the
online form, but those are very few compared to the number of
complaints filed by consumers on an annual basis. (See Tables 1 and 2,
below).
    This request is to revise the current information collection due to
updates that OACP is making to the office's online air consumer
complaint form as part of an Information Technology (IT) system
modernization project.\1\ The updated process continues to allow
consumers to input information related to complaints about their flight
experience, as well as to submit general inquiries/comments. However,
air consumers submitting complaints or comments via the modernized
system will be efficiently guided through their entry by a data input
system using conditional logic. The modernized system includes
additional information fields and, combined with the guided entry, will
better ensure an individual air consumer's specific concerns are more
comprehensively captured in the system database.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ OACP's legacy database is the Consumer Complaint Application
System (CCA). OACP is updating its IT system and the modernized
system will be known as the Aviation Complaint, Enforcement, and
Reporting System (ACERS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The modernized process will also streamline OACP's ability to
review data and analyze complaints. The revised process will also
reduce manual analyst processing steps. These improvements will
increase the office's ability to effectively investigate individual
complaints against airlines and other air travel-related companies.
This consumer-driven submission process enhances the information
collected and positively impacts OACP's ability to learn about patterns
and practices that may develop in violation of aviation consumer
protection requirements. The information collection continues to

further the objectives of 49 U.S.C. 41712, 40101, 40127, 41702, and
41705 to protect consumers from unfair or deceptive practices, to
protect the civil rights of air travelers, and to ensure safe and
adequate service in air transportation.
    The type of information requested on OACP's online form that is
active and currently covered by the existing OMB Control number
includes complainant's name, address, phone number (including area
code), email address, and name of the airline or company about which
she/he is complaining, as well as the flight date and flight itinerary
(where applicable) of a complainant's trip. Air travel consumers use
the current form for complaints (to provide narrative information
regarding a specific air-travel related problem) or comments (to
comment about or ask for air-travel related information from OACP).
    The modernized intake process guides an aviation consumer through
the following four steps: (1) Contact Information, (2) Flight
Information, (3) Complaint Details, and (4) Complaint Review and
Submission. Similar information is requested for comments. New/updated
consumer-related information includes the country of residence, whether
the trip involved a flight through the U.S. or a U.S. territory,
certain booking information, and the passenger's arrival/departure
airports. As currently drafted, the modernized online multi-step intake
process allows consumers (via radio buttons) to include information
about problems associated with the following main categories/subject
areas:

(1) Flight Schedule Issues;
(2) Bumping or Oversales;
(3) Reservations/Ticketing/Boarding;
(4) Fees or Ticket Fares;
(5) Refunds;
(6) Baggage/Luggage;
(7) Customer Service;
(8) Disability Accommodations (including service animals);
(9) Advertising;
(10) Discrimination (not disability related);
(11) Animals/Pet (not service animals);
(12) Safety;
(13) Security;
(14) Inflight Sexual Misconduct; and
(15) Other Problems (e.g., frequent flyer miles, air ambulance).

    Once a consumer chooses a category, the consumer is guided through
a series of Yes/No questions that capture relevant information
pertaining to the nature of the complaint. An air travel consumer can
choose one or more complaint categories depending on the nature of his/
her experience and has the option to include narrative information.
    Both the currently active online air travel consumer complaint form
and the modernized guided intake process include the ability for a
consumer to upload documents relevant to the complaint/comment.
    Filing a complaint using a web-based form is voluntary and
minimizes the burden on respondents when compared with other methods of
submitting complaints. In recent years, consumers have submitted most
complaints online via their personal computer or on a mobile/electronic
device. Approximately ninety-seven percent of the submissions received
by OACP during calendar years (CYs) 2021 and 2022 were filed using the
web-based form as shown in the table below.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ As of CY 2020, OACP has received a higher number of online
submissions than those submitted in prior CYs. For example, our
CY17-19 average was 16,348 complaints submitted per year. In 2020,
the total was 100,613 and were mostly related to flight
cancellations and refund issues that resulted from the Covid-19
pandemic. In CYs 21 and 22, the number of submissions remain high
but are lower than the number of complaints submitted in CY2020. See
Table 1, above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OACP has limited the request to information necessary to meet its
aviation consumer protection monitoring and enforcement activities.

                                      Table 1--Complaints Received by OACP
                                                    [CY21/22]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Total number of    Total number of
                       Calendar year                         complaints filed   complaints filed   % of on-line
                                                                 on-line           with OACP        submissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2021......................................................             48,465             49,958           97.01
2022......................................................             75,731             77,656           97.52
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
    Average Total.........................................             62,098             63,807           97.27
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               Table 2--Comments (Non-Complaints) Received by OACP
                                                    [CY21/22]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Total number
                          Calendar year                             information    Total number    Total number
                                                                     requests       compliments      opinions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2021............................................................           5,799              14             444
2022............................................................           7,575              24            1008
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Average Total...............................................           6,687              19             726
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total Yearly Average........................................  ..............  ..............           6,782
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Air Travel Consumer Complaints Burden Calculations

    Respondents: Consumers that Choose to File an Online Complaint with
the Office of Aviation Consumer Protection.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 62,098 (based on averaging data
from CYs 2021-22).
    Estimated Total Burden on Respondents: 15,524.5 hours (931,470
minutes). The estimate was calculated by multiplying the average number
of cases filed using the online form in CYs 21-22 (62,098) by the
estimated time

needed to fill out the online form (15 minutes).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Feedback obtained during development of the modernized
guided input process suggests that the form will take no longer than
15 minutes for a consumer to complete.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Comment (Non-Complaint) Burden Calculations

    Respondents: Consumers that Choose to File an Online Comment with
the Office of Aviation Consumer Protection.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 6,782 (based on averaging data
from CYs 2021-22).
    Estimated Total Burden on Respondents: 565.17 hours (33,910
minutes). The estimate was calculated by multiplying the average number
of cases filed using the online form in CYs 21-22 (6,782) by the
estimated time needed to fill out the online form (5 minutes).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ An air consumer submitting these types of filing generally
provide less information, so we estimate 5 minutes is sufficient.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The information collection is available for inspection in
regulations.gov, as noted in the Addresses section of this document.
    Comments are Invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the
Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of
the proposed information collection; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents.
    All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the
request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of
public record on the docket.
    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter
35, as amended; and 49 CFR 1:48.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 27, 2023.
Kimberly Graber,
Deputy Assistant General Counsel, Office of Aviation Consumer
Protection.
[FR Doc. 2023-24128 Filed 10-31-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register: April 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 75)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 20890-20894]
[DOCID:fr17ap08-26]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 67

[Docket No. FEMA-B-7771]

Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on the proposed Base (1 percent annual-
chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and proposed BFE modifications for the
communities listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to
seek general information and comment regarding the proposed regulatory
flood elevations for the reach described by the downstream and upstream
locations in the table below. The BFEs and modified BFEs are a part of
the floodplain management measures that the community is required
either to adopt or show evidence of having in effect in order to
qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, these elevations, once
finalized, will be used by insurance agents, and others to calculate
appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and the
contents in those buildings.

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before July 16, 2008.

ADDRESSES: The corresponding preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRMs) for the proposed BFEs for each community are available for
inspection at the community's map repository. The respective addresses
are listed in the table below.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-7771, to
William R. Blanton, Jr., Chief, Engineering Management Branch,
Mitigation Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (e-mail)
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William R. Blanton, Jr., Chief,
Engineering Management Branch, Mitigation Directorate, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202) 646-3151 or (e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) proposes to make determinations of BFEs and modified BFEs for
each community listed below, in accordance with section 110 of the
Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR
67.4(a).
    These proposed BFEs and modified BFEs, together with the floodplain
management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are
required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must
change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their
floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact
stricter requirements of its own, or pursuant to policies established
by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These proposed
elevations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of
the NFIP and are also used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance
premium rates for new buildings built after these elevations are made
final, and for the contents in these buildings.
    Comments on any aspect of the Flood Insurance Study and FIRM, other
than the proposed BFEs, will be considered. A letter acknowledging
receipt of any comments will not be sent.
    Administrative Procedure Act Statement. This matter is not a
rulemaking governed by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C.
553. FEMA publishes flood elevation determinations for notice and
comment; however, they are governed by the Flood Disaster Protection
Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and the National Flood Insurance Act of
1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., and do not fall under the APA.
    National Environmental Policy Act. This proposed rule is
categorically excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR part 10,
Environmental Consideration. An environmental impact assessment has not
been prepared.
    Regulatory Flexibility Act. As flood elevation determinations are
not within the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility

Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required.
    Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. This
proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under the criteria
of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as amended.
    Executive Order 13132, Federalism. This proposed rule involves no
policies that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132.
    Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This proposed rule
meets the applicable standards of Executive Order 12988.

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67

    Administrative practice and procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.

    Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 67--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 67 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of
1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR,
1979 Comp., p. 376.

Sec.  67.4  [Amended]

    2. The tables published under the authority of Sec.  67.4 are
proposed to be amended as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  * Elevation in feet
                                                                (NGVD)  + Elevation in
                                                                feet  (NAVD)
         Flooding source(s)            Location of referenced    Depth in feet  (above     Communities affected
                                            elevation**                 ground)
                                                              --------------------------
                                                                Effective     Modified
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Habersham County, Georgia, and Incorporated Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Soquee River Tributary..............  Approximately 770 feet         +1307        +1308  City of Clarkesville.
                                       upstream of confluence
                                       with Soquee River.
                                      Approximately 380 feet         +1307        +1308
                                       downstream of State
                                       Highway 385/Alternate
                                       17/U.S. Highway 441
                                       Business/Grant Street.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* National Geodetic Vertical Datum.
+ North American Vertical Datum.
 Depth in feet above ground.
**BFEs to be changed include the listed downstream and upstream BFEs, and include BFEs located on the stream
 reach between the referenced locations above. Please refer to the revised Flood Insurance Rate Map located at
 the community map repository (see below) for exact locations of all BFEs to be changed.
Send comments to William R. Blanton, Jr., Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Mitigation Directorate, Federal
 Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472.

                                                    ADDRESSES
City of Clarkesville
Maps are available for inspection at City Hall, 210 East Water Street, Clarkesville, GA 30523.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Iberia Parish, Louisiana, and Incorporated Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bayou Petite Anse-Deblanc Coulee-     Approximately 300 ft            None          +10  Unincorporated Areas of
 Segura Branch.                        upstream of U.S. 90                                Iberia Parish.
                                       eastbound..
                                      Approximately 300 ft             +11          +12
                                       downstream of Southern
                                       Pacific RR.
Commercial Canal....................  Approximately 300 ft              +9          +10  Unincorporated Areas of
                                       downstream of Southern                             Iberia Parish, City of
                                       Pacific RR.                                        New Iberia.
                                      Approximately 450 ft            None          +11
                                       upstream of Admiral
                                       Doyle Drive..
Duboin Canal........................  Approximately 3,000 ft          None          +11  Unincorporated Areas of
                                       downstream of Admiral                              Iberia Parish, City of
                                       Doyle Drive.                                       New Iberia.
                                      Intersection with               None          +16
                                       Adrian St.
Jacks Coulee........................  Approximately 300 ft            None          +10  Unincorporated Areas of
                                       downstream of Weeks                                Iberia Parish.
                                       Island Road.
                                      Approximately 300 ft            None          +11
                                       upstream of U.S. Hwy
                                       90.
Jefferson Canal.....................  Approximately 300 ft            None           +3  Unincorporated Areas of
                                       downstream of Southern                             Iberia Parish.
                                       Pacific RR.
                                      Approximately 100 ft            None           +6
                                       upstream of Jefferson
                                       Island Road.
Little Valley Bayou.................  Approximately 300 ft            None           +9  Unincorporated Areas of
                                       downstream of                                      Iberia Parish.
                                       Patoutville Road..
                                      Approximately 600 ft            None          +11
                                       upstream of Smith Road.
Peebles Coulee......................  Approximately 3,250 ft          None          +12  Unincorporated Areas of
                                       upstream of J. Allen                               Iberia Parish, City of
                                       Daigre Drive.                                      New Iberia.
                                      Approximately 300 ft             +10          +12
                                       downstream of Weeks
                                       Island Road.
Poufette Canal--Bayou Petite Anse-    Approximately 100 ft            None          +10  Unincorporated Areas of
 Segura Branch.                        upstream of Norris                                 Iberia Parish.
                                       Road.

                                      Approximately 300 ft             +11          +13
                                       downstream of Southern
                                       Pacific RR.
Rodere Canal........................  Approximately 300 ft              +9          +12  Unincorporated Areas of
                                       downstream of Southern                             Iberia Parish, City of
                                       Pacific RR.                                        New Iberia.
                                      Approximately 2,900 ft          None          +14
                                       upstream of Center
                                       Street.
Tete Bayou..........................  Approximately 500 ft            None          +13  Unincorporated Areas of
                                       downstream of LA 3195.                             Iberia Parish, City of
                                                                                New Iberia.
                                      Approximately 250 feet          None          +15
                                       downstream of N. Lewis
                                       St..
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* National Geodetic Vertical Datum.
+ North American Vertical Datum.
 Depth in feet above ground.
**BFEs to be changed include the listed downstream and upstream BFEs, and include BFEs located on the stream
 reach between the referenced locations above. Please refer to the revised Flood Insurance Rate Map located at
 the community map repository (see below) for exact locations of all BFEs to be changed.
Send comments to William R. Blanton, Jr., Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Mitigation Directorate, Federal
 Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472.

                                                    ADDRESSES
City of New Iberia
Maps are available for inspection at 457 E. Main St, New Iberia, LA 70560.

                                      Unincorporated Areas of Iberia Parish
Maps are available for inspection at 209 W. Main St., Suite 102, New Iberia, LA 70560.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Livingston Parish, Louisiana, and Incorporated Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lake Maurepas--Entire Shoreline.....  Highest elevation               None           +9  Unincorporated Areas of
                                       approximately 40,800                               Livingston Parish.
                                       feet south of
                                       confluence with Amite
                                       River.
                                      Highest elevation at            None          +10
                                       confluence with
                                       Tickfaw River.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* National Geodetic Vertical Datum.
+ North American Vertical Datum.
 Depth in feet above ground.
**BFEs to be changed include the listed downstream and upstream BFEs, and include BFEs located on the stream
 reach between the referenced locations above. Please refer to the revised Flood Insurance Rate Map located at
 the community map repository (see below) for exact locations of all BFEs to be changed.
Send comments to William R. Blanton, Jr., Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Mitigation Directorate, Federal
 Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472.

                                                    ADDRESSES
                                    Unincorporated Areas of Livingston Parish
Maps are available for inspection at 29261 Frost Rd., Livingston, LA 70754.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Davidson County, North Carolina, and Incorporated Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Little Brush Fork Tributary 1.......  At the confluence with          None         +748  Town of Midway,
                                       Little Brushy Fork.                                Unincorporated Areas
                                                                                of Davidson County.
                                      Approximately 0.7 mile          None         +781
                                       upstream of the
                                       confluence of Little
                                       Brushy Fork Tributary
                                       1A.
Little Brushy Fork..................  At the confluence with          None         +732  Town of Midway,
                                       Brushy Fork.                                       Unincorporated Areas
                                                                                of Davidson County.
                                      Approximately 1.8 miles         None         +861
                                       upstream of Tom
                                       Livengood Road (State
                                       Road 1719).
Little Brushy Fork Tributary 1A.....  At the confluence with          None         +757  Town of Midway,
                                       Little Brushy Fork                                 Unincorporated Areas
                                       Tributary 1.                                       of Davidson County.
                                      Approximately 2,000             None         +786
                                       feet upstream of
                                       Garden Valley Drive.
Miller Creek........................  At the confluence with          None         +690  Town of Midway.
                                       Muddy Creek.
                                      Approximately 250 feet          +810         +811
                                       upstream of North
                                       Payne Road (State Road
                                       1510).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* National Geodetic Vertical Datum.
+ North American Vertical Datum.
 Depth in feet above ground.

**BFEs to be changed include the listed downstream and upstream BFEs, and include BFEs located on the stream
 reach between the referenced locations above. Please refer to the revised Flood Insurance Rate Map located at
 the community map repository (see below) for exact locations of all BFEs to be changed.
Send comments to William R. Blanton, Jr., Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Mitigation Directorate, Federal
 Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472.

                                                    ADDRESSES
Town of Midway
Maps are available for inspection at Midway Town Hall, 125 Gum Tree Road, Midway, NC.

                                     Unincorporated Areas of Davidson County
Maps are available for inspection at Davidson County Governmental Center, Planning and Zoning Department, 913
 Greensboro Street, Lexington, NC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Mercer County, North Dakota, and Incorporated Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Antelope Creek......................  100 feet Upstream from         +1743        +1745  Mercer County, City of
                                       Mercer County Road 18/                             Hazen.
                                       53rd Ave. SW.
                                      100 feet Upstream from         +1756        +1757
                                       Walk Bridge on
                                       Abandoned BNSF Railway
                                       Grade.
Antelope Creek Split................  100 feet Upstream from          None        +1754  Mercer County, City of
                                       BNSF Railway Bridge.                               Hazen.
                                      200 feet Upstream from          None        +1758
                                       13th Ave. W..
East Tributary Reach 1.....  100 feet Downstream             None        +1806  City of Beulah.
                                       from Roll Drive.
                                      100 feet Downstream             None        +1840
                                       from Beulah Dam.
East Tributary Reach 2.....  100 feet Upstream from         +1780        +1781  City of Beulah.
                                       BNSF Railway Bridge.
                                      100 feet Upstream from         +1792        +1795
                                       Beulah Eagle Road.
North Tributary.....................  Confluence with East            None        +1797  Mercer County, City of
                                       Tributary.                                         Beulah.
                                      100 feet Upstream from          None        +1819
                                       Seventh St..
Upstream Hazen Tributary............  100 feet Upstream from         +1754        +1753   City of Hazen.
                                       the Confluence with
                                       Antelope Creek.
                                      1000 feet Upstream from        +1754        +1753
                                       the Confluence with
                                       Antelope Creek.
West Hazen Tributary................  100 feet Upstream from         +1748        +1750  City of Hazen.
                                       Confluence with
                                       Antelope Creek.
                                      200 feet Upstream from          None        +1764
                                       Divide Street.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* National Geodetic Vertical Datum.
+ North American Vertical Datum.
 Depth in feet above ground.
**BFEs to be changed include the listed downstream and upstream BFEs, and include BFEs located on the stream
 reach between the referenced locations above. Please refer to the revised Flood Insurance Rate Map located at
 the community map repository (see below) for exact locations of all BFEs to be changed.
Send comments to William R. Blanton, Jr., Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Mitigation Directorate, Federal
 Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472.

                                                    ADDRESSES
City of Beulah
Maps are available for inspection at 120 Central Avenue North, Beulah, ND 58523.

City of Hazen
Maps are available for inspection at 146 Main St. E., Hazen, ND 58545.

Mercer County
Maps are available for inspection at 1021 Arthur Street, Stanton, ND 58571-0039.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Raleigh County, West Virginia, and Incorporated Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Soak Creek..........................  Approximately 100 feet          None        +2305  Unincorporated Areas of
                                       downstream of State                                Raleigh County, Town
                                       Route 29.                                          of Sophia.
                                      Approximately 80 feet           None        +2328
                                       upstream of McKinney
                                       Hollow Road.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* National Geodetic Vertical Datum.
+ North American Vertical Datum.
 Depth in feet above ground.
**BFEs to be changed include the listed downstream and upstream BFEs, and include BFEs located on the stream
 reach between the referenced locations above. Please refer to the revised Flood Insurance Rate. Map located at
 the community map repository (see below) for exact locations of all BFEs to be changed.

Send comments to William R. Blanton, Jr., Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Mitigation Directorate, Federal
 Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472.

                                                    ADDRESSES
Town of Sophia
Maps are available for inspection at Sophia Town Hall, 100 East Railroad Avenue, Sophia, WV 25921.

                                     Unincorporated Areas of Raleigh County
Maps are available for inspection at Raleigh County Commission Building, 116 \1/2\ North Heber Street, Beckley,
 WV 25801.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

    Dated: March 31, 2008.
David I. Maurstad,
Federal Insurance Administrator of the National Flood Insurance
Program, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
 [FR Doc. E8-8324 Filed 4-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-12-P