UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on August 16, 2002

   NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKETS OST-98-3846 & OST-98-4296

________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of      Delta Air Lines, Inc.     filed   6/27/02  to:

XX  Renew for two years exemptions under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide the
following service:

(1) Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between a point or points in the United States and Cotonou, Benin, and
to integrate this authority with its existing certificate and exemption
authority.  Delta plans to operate this service pursuant to a
third-country code-share arrangement with Air France (Docket
OST-98-4296).  (2) Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons
property, and mail between a point or points in the United States, on
the one hand, and Luanda, Angola; Yaounde, Cameroon; Ndjamena, Chad;
Libreville, Gabon; Nouakchott, Mauritania; Agadir, Marrakech, and Rabat,
Morocco; Niamey, Niger; Seychelles; and Sfax, Tunisia, on the other, and
to integrate this authority with its existing certificate and exemption
authority.  Delta plans to operate this service pursuant to a
third-country code-share arrangement with Air France (Docket
OST-98-3846).

Applicant rep:  Robert E. Cohn<PHONE_NUMBER>    DOT Analyst:
Sylvia Moore<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted (subject to conditions, see below)

The above action was effective when taken:   August 16, 2002, through
August 16, 2004, or until 90 days after final action on Delta’s
corresponding certificate application in Docket OST-99-6246, whichever
occurs earlier.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		    Office of International Aviation

XX  The authority granted to serve Morocco and Cotonou, Benin is
consistent with the aviation agreements between the United States and
Morocco and Benin, respectively.  The authority granted to serve the
remaining points is consistent with the overall state of aviation
relations between the United States and the foreign countries involved.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  XX Holder’s
certificates of public convenience and necessity

	   XX  Standard exemption conditions (attached)

	   XX  Statement of authorization approving Delta/Air France code-share
operations dated

	           August 6, 1998, and conditions therein

(See Reverse Side)

2

Conditions:  The route integration authority granted is subject to the
condition that any service provided under this exemption shall be
consistent with all applicable agreements between the United States and
the foreign countries involved.  Furthermore, (a) nothing in the award
of the route integration authority

requested should be construed as conferring upon Delta rights (including
fifth-freedom intermediate and/or beyond rights) to serve markets where
U.S. carrier entry is limited unless Delta notifies the Department of

its intent to serve such a market and unless and until the Department
has completed any necessary carrier

selection procedures to determine which carrier(s) should be authorized
to exercise such rights; and

(b) should there be a request by any carrier to use the limited-entry
route rights that are included in Delta’s authority by virtue of the
route integration exemption granted here, but that are not then being
used by Delta, the holding of such authority by route integration will
not be considered as providing any preference for Delta in a competitive
carrier selection proceeding to determine which carrier(s) should be
entitled to use the authority at issue.

________________________________________________________________________
______________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department's regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) grant of the exemption authority was consistent with the
public interest; and (3) grant of the authority would not constitute a
major regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of
1975.  To the extent not granted, we denied all requests in the
referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

APPENDIX

U.S. CARRIER

Standard Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of operations authorized by the attached notice, the
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with the applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration Regulations and with all U.S. Government requirements
concerning security; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

 Originally Delta operated this service pursuant to a code-share
arrangement with Sabena Belgian World Airlines, but that arrangement has
been discontinued.


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 238 (Monday, December 12, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 77111-77113]
[FR Doc No: 2011-31215]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 30815; Amdt. No. 3454]

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

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

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

DATES: This rule is effective December 12, 2011. The compliance date
for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the

regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of
December 12, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matters incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:
    For Examination--
    1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located;
    3. The National Flight Procedures Office, 6500 South MacArthur
Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call (202)
741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    Availability--All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available
online free of charge. Visit http://www.nfdc.faa.gov to register.
Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may
be obtained from:
    1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA-200), FAA Headquarters Building,
800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; or
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard A. Dunham III, Flight
Procedure Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs
Divisions, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration,
Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd. Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by establishing,
amending, suspending, or revoking SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPs.
The complete regulators description of each SIAP and its associated
Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed on FAA form
documents which are incorporated by reference in this amendment under 5
U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR 97.20. The applicable FAA
Forms are FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, and 8260-15B when
required by an entry on 8260-15A.
    The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, in addition
to their complex nature and the need for a special format make
publication in the Federal Register expensive and impractical.
Furthermore, airmen do not use the regulatory text of the SIAPs,
Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead refer to their depiction on
charts printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. The advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on
FAA forms is unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR
sections and specifies the types of SIAPs and the effective dates of
the associated Takeoff Minimums and ODPs. This amendment also
identifies the airport and its location, the procedure, and the
amendment number.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR Part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP as contained in the
transmittal. Some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and textual ODP amendments
may have been issued previously by the FAA in a Flight Data Center
(FDC) Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) as an emergency action of immediate
flight safety relating directly to published aeronautical charts. The
circumstances which created the need for some SIAP and Takeoff Minimums
and ODP amendments may require making them effective in less than 30
days. For the remaining SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, an
effective date at least 30 days after publication is provided.
    Further, the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs contained in this
amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these SIAPs and
Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied to the
conditions existing or anticipated at the affected airports. Because of
the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs, Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and
public procedures before adopting these SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and
ODPs are impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where
applicable, that good cause exists for making some SIAPs effective in
less than 30 days.

Conclusion

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule '' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979) ;
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air Traffic Control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, and
Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 25, 2011.
John M. Allen,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) is amended by
establishing, amending, suspending, or revoking Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and/or Obstacle Departure
Procedures effective at 0902 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

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

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

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:

Effective 15 DEC 2011

Rota Island-North Mariana Island, CQ, Rota Intl, GPS RWY 9, Orig-C,
CANCELLED
Rota Island-North Mariana Island, CQ, Rota Intl, GPS RWY 27, Orig-C,
CANCELLED
Rota Island-North Mariana Island, CQ, Rota Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9,
Orig
Rota Island-North Mariana Island, CQ, Rota Intl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27,
Orig

Effective 12 JAN 2012

Hampton, IA, Hampton Muni, NDB RWY 17, Amdt 4B, CANCELLED
Mount Vernon, IL, Mount Vernon, ILS OR LOC RWY 23, Amdt 11A
Ashland, OH, Ashland County, NDB RWY 19, Amdt 11B
Ashland, OH, Ashland County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 19, Orig-B
Ashland, OH, Ashland County, VOR-A, Amdt 9B
Celina, OH, Lakefield, NDB RWY 8, Amdt 5, CANCELLED

Wapakoneta, OH, Neil Armstrong, LOC RWY 26, Amdt 3D, CANCELLED
Fort Hood/Killeen, TX, Robert Gray AAF, RADAR-1, Orig
New Market, VA, New Market, RNAV (GPS) RWY 6, Orig
New Market, VA, New Market, RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Orig
Roanoke, VA, Roanoke Rgnl/Woodrum Field, LDA RWY 6, Amdt 11

Effective 9 FEB 2012

Huntsville, AL, Huntsville Intl--Carl T Jones field, Takeoff
Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2
Chico, CA, Chico Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 6
Concord, CA, Buchannan Field, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 19R, Amdt 1
Concord, CA, Buchannan Field, RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 19R, Orig
Torrance, CA, Zamperini Field, VOR RWY 11L, Amdt 15
Eaton Rapids, MI, Skyways Estates, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Orig, CANCELLED
Eaton Rapids, MI, Skyways Estates, VOR OR GPS-A, Amdt 1A, CANCELLED
Gaylord, MI, Gaylord Rgnl, ILS OR LOC RWY 9, Amdt 1
Harbor Springs, MI, Harbor Springs, VOR-A, Amdt 2
Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 18C, Amdt 10A
Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 36C, ILS RWY
36C (CAT II), ILS RWY 36C (CAT III), Amdt 16A
Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 18C, Amdt 3A
Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 36C, Amdt 3A
Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 18C, Orig-B
Charlotte, NC, Charlotte/Douglas Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 36C, Orig-C
New York, NY, John F Kennedy Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 4R, Amdt 1C
Kent, OH, Kent State Univ, NDB RWY 1, Amdt 13
Kent, OH, Kent State Univ, VOR-A, Amdt 14
Youngstown, OH, Lansdowne, NDB OR GPS-B, Amdt 8, CANCELLED
Youngstown, OH, Lansdowne, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2,
CANCELLED
Seymour, TX, Seymour Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig

[FR Doc. 2011-31215 Filed 12-9-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 82 (Friday, April 27, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25160-25161]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10184]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP12-611-000.
    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.
    Description: Products Extraction Update to be effective 5/17/2012.
    Filed Date: 4/17/12.
    Accession Number: 20120417-5130.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/30/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-612-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC.
    Description: Annual Adjustment to Rate Schedule SS-2 Storage Gas
Balances 2012 to be effective 5/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 4/18/12.
    Accession Number: 20120418-5043.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/30/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-613-000.
    Applicants: Centra Pipelines Minnesota Inc.
    Description: Revised Index of Shippers to be effective 6/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 4/18/12.
    Accession Number: 20120418-5072.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/30/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-614-000.
    Applicants: Horizon Pipeline Company, LLC.
    Description: Penalty Revenue Crediting Report of Horizon Pipeline
Company, LLC.
    Filed Date: 4/18/12.
    Accession Number: 20120418-5250.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/30/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-615-000.
    Applicants: Tuscarora Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Maps 2012 to be effective 5/21/2012.
    Filed Date: 4/20/12.
    Accession Number: 20120420-5014.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/2/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-616-000.
    Applicants: Northern Border Pipeline Company.
    Description: Maps 2012 to be effective 5/21/2012.
    Filed Date: 4/20/12.
    Accession Number: 20120420-5015.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/2/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-617-000.
    Applicants: Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: AGT 2012 Map Filing to be effective 5/21/2012.
    Filed Date: 4/20/12.
    Accession Number: 20120420-5051.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/2/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-618-000.
    Applicants: Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: MNUS 2012 Map Filing to be effective 5/21/2012.
    Filed Date: 4/20/12.
    Accession Number: 20120420-5052.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/2/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-619-000.
    Applicants: Big Sandy Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: BSP 2012 Map Filing to be effective 5/21/2012.
    Filed Date: 4/20/12.
    Accession Number: 20120420-5057.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/2/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-620-000.
    Applicants: Ozark Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: OGT 2012 Map Filing to be effective 5/21/2012.
    Filed Date: 4/20/12.
    Accession Number: 20120420-5074.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/2/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-623-000.
    Applicants: Gulf Crossing Pipeline Company LLC.
    Description: Update Section 6.10 (ROFR) to be effective 5/24/2012.
    Filed Date: 4/23/12.
    Accession Number: 20120423-5018.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/7/12.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP12-313-002.
    Applicants: Sea Robin Pipeline Company, LLC.
    Description: Hurricane Compliance on 4-19-12 to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 4/19/12.
    Accession Number: 20120419-5115.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/1/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-388-001
    Applicants: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Prearranged Sales of Capacity Compliance Filing to be
effective 3/21/2012.
    Filed Date: 4/20/12.
    Accession Number: 20120420-5119.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/2/12.
    Any person desiring to protest in any of the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, and service can be found at:
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other
information, call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-
8659.

    Dated: April 23, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-10184 Filed 4-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 236 (Wednesday, December 9, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76474-76475]
[FR Doc No: 2015-31051]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0039; FRL-9939-90-OAR]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request;
Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements of the HCFC Allowance System

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to submit an
information collection request (ICR), Reporting and Recordkeeping
Requirements of the HCFC Allowance System (EPA ICR No. 2014.06, OMB
Control No. 2060-0498) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public
comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as
described below. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is
currently approved through April 30, 2016. An Agency may not conduct or
sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before February 8, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2003-0039 online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Burchard, Stratospheric
Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs (6205T),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 343-2338; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting
comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of
the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology,

e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA will consider
the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR
package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval. At that
time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice to announce the
submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional
comments to OMB.
    Abstract: The international treaty The Montreal Protocol on
Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Protocol) and Title VI of the
Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) established limits on total U.S.
production, import, and export of class I and class II controlled ozone
depleting substances (referred to hereinafter as ``controlled
substances'').
    Under its Protocol commitments, the United States was obligated to
cease production and import of class I controlled substances (e.g.,
chlorofluorocarbons or CFCs) with exemptions for essential uses,
critical uses, previously-used material, and material that is
transformed, destroyed, or exported to developing countries. The
Protocol also establishes limits and reduction schedules leading to the
eventual phaseout of class II controlled substances (i.e.,
hydrochlorofluorocarbons or HCFCs).
    The U.S. is obligated to limit HCFC consumption (defined by the
Protocol as production plus imports, minus exports). The schedule
called for a 35 percent reduction on January 1, 2004, followed by a 75
percent reduction on January 1, 2010, a 90 percent reduction on January
1, 2015, a 99.5 percent reduction on January 1, 2020, and a total
phaseout on January 1, 2030. EPA is responsible for administering the
phaseout.
    To ensure U.S. compliance with these limits and restrictions, EPA
established an allowance system to control U.S. production and import
of HCFCs by granting control measures referred to as baseline and
calendar-year allowances. Baseline allowances are based on the
historical activity of individual companies. Calendar-year allowances
allow holders to produce and/or import controlled substances in a given
year and are allocated as a percentage of baseline.
    There are two types of baseline and calendar-year allowances:
Consumption and production allowances. Since each allowance is equal to
1 kilogram of HCFC, EPA is able to monitor the quantity of HCFCs being
produced, imported and exported. Transfers of production and
consumption allowances among producers and importers are allowed and
are tracked by EPA.
    The above-described limits and restrictions are monitored by EPA
through the recordkeeping and reporting requirements established in the
regulations in 40 CFR part 82, subpart A. To submit required
information, regulated entities can download reporting forms from EPA's
Web site (http://www.epa.gov/ozone/record), complete them, and send
them to EPA electronically, via mail, courier, or fax.
    Upon receipt of the reports, the data is entered into the ODS
Tracking System. The ODS Tracking System is a secure database that
maintains the data submitted to EPA and helps the agency: (1) Maintain
oversight over total production and consumption of controlled
substances; (2) monitor compliance with limits and restrictions on
production, imports, and trades and specific exemptions from the
phaseout for individual U.S. companies; and (3) assess, and report on,
compliance with U.S. obligations under the Montreal Protocol.
    EPA has implemented an electronic reporting system that allows
regulated entities to prepare and submit data electronically. Coupled
with the widespread use of the standardized forms, electronic reporting
has improved data quality and made the reporting process efficient for
both reporting companies and EPA. Most reporting is done
electronically.
    Pursuant to regulations in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B, reporting
businesses are entitled to assert a business confidentiality claim
covering any part of the submitted business information as defined in
40 CFR 2.201(c). EPA's practice is to manage the reported information
as confidential business information.
    Form numbers: Forms associated with this ICR are: Quarterly
Reports, Second Party Transformation Report, Second Party Destruction
Report, Transmission Verification Report, Destruction Efficiency
Report, Destruction Verification Report, Semi-annual Report,
International Transfer of Allowances Report, and the Domestic Transfer
of Allowances Report. All are under OMB Control Number 2060-0498.
    Respondents/affected entities: 40.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (Title VI of the
Clean Air Act Amendments).
    Estimated number of respondents: 40.
    Frequency of response: Annually, quarterly, or as needed.
    Total estimated burden: 1,434 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $153,264 (per year), includes $1,155
annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in estimates: The respondent numbers changed because the
reporting community continues to change as ODS are phased out in the
US. Specifically, we estimate fewer companies reporting on imports and
exports of Class II ODS. We also assume fewer companies reporting on
the destruction and transformation of this material. These updates are
based on 2014 reporting activity whereas our previous estimates were
based on 2010-2011 reporting activity.

    Dated: November 23, 2015.
Drusilla Hufford,
Director, Stratospheric Protection Division.
[FR Doc. 2015-31051 Filed 12-8-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 198 (Monday, October 18, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57564-57567]
[FR Doc No: 2021-22471]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0612; Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00650-R;
Amendment 39-21755; AD 2021-20-17]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Leonardo S.p.a. Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding emergency Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2018-23-52, which applied to all Leonardo S.p.a. Model AW169 and AW189
helicopters. AD 2018-23-52 required inspecting the nut, cotter pin,
lock-wire, and hinge bracket connected to the tail rotor servo-actuator
(TRA) feedback lever link, and each connection of the TRA feedback
lever link, and repair if necessary. AD 2018-23-52 also required
applying a paint stripe or torque seal on the nut and reporting certain
information. This AD requires repetitive inspections of the TRA,
repetitive inspections and checks of the tail rotor duplex bearings (TR
DB), installation of an improved TRA and TR DB, repetitive
installations and checks of thermal strips, replacement of the improved
TR DB (life limit), and applicable corrective actions, as specified in
a European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD, which is
incorporated by reference. This AD was prompted by a report of an
accident of a Model AW169 helicopter, which was observed to have lost
yaw control prior to the accident and a determination that certain
inspections and checks of the TR DB, installation of an improved TRA
and TR DB, certain other actions, and applicable corrective actions are
necessary to address the unsafe condition. The FAA is issuing this AD
to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective November 22, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of November 22,
2021.

ADDRESSES: For material incorporated by reference (IBR) in this AD,
contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany;
telephone +49 221 8999 000; email [email protected]; internet
www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this material on the EASA website at
https://ad.easa.europa.eu. You may view this material at the 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>. It is also available in
the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0612.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0612; 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 final rule, any comments received, and other information. The
address for Docket Operations is 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: Andrea Jimenez, Aerospace Engineer,
COS Program Management Section, Operational Safety Branch, Compliance &
Airworthiness Division, FAA, 1600 Stewart Ave., Suite 410, Westbury, NY
11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The EASA, which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the
European Union, has issued EASA AD 2020-0197, dated September 10, 2020
(EASA AD 2020-0197), to correct an unsafe condition for all Leonardo
S.p.A. (formerly Finmeccanica S.p.A., AgustaWestland S.p.A.) Model
AW169 and AW189 helicopters.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 to supersede Emergency AD 2018-23-52, Product Identifier
2018-SW-093-AD, dated November 8, 2018 (Emergency AD 2018-23-52).
Emergency AD 2018-23-52 applied to all Leonardo S.p.a. Model AW169 and
AW189 helicopters. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on August
5, 2021 (86 FR 42754). The NPRM was prompted by a report of an accident
of a Model AW169 helicopter, which was observed to have lost yaw
control prior to the accident and a determination that certain
inspections and checks of the TR DB, installation of an improved TRA
and TR DB, certain other actions, and applicable corrective actions are
necessary to address the unsafe condition. The NPRM proposed to require
repetitive inspections of the TRA, repetitive inspections and checks of
the TR DB, installation of an improved TRA and TR DB, repetitive
installations and checks of thermal strips, replacement of the improved
TR DB (life limit), and applicable corrective actions, as specified in
an EASA AD.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address failure of the TRA feedback
lever. This condition could result in loss of tail rotor control and
subsequent loss of control of the helicopter. See the EASA AD 2020-0197
for additional background information.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or
on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety
and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed,
except for minor editorial changes. The FAA has determined that these
minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    EASA AD 2020-0197 requires the following actions:

--Repetitive inspections of the slippage marking of the castellated nut
installed on the back-end of the affected TRA.
--Repetitive inspections of the roughness and breakaway force of the
affected TR DB.
--Repetitive installations of a thermal strip on the spacer next to the
TR DB.
--Repetitive checks of the condition of the thermal strip and the
indicated temperature.
--Repetitive inspections/checks for particles and additional roughness
of the TR DB.
--Installation of an improved TRA.
--Installation of an improved TR DB.
--Repetitive replacements of the improved TR DB (life limit).
--An inspection of an affected TR DB if the thermal strip is detached,
partially detached, or unreadable.
--Reporting information to the manufacturer.

--Sending parts to the manufacturer.
--Applicable corrective actions.

    Corrective actions include accomplishing instructions to address
the following findings: Evidence of rotation of an affected TRA nut;
thermal strip temperatures that exceed specified values; and any
discrepancies found during the inspection of an affected TR DB.
Discrepancies include roughness (meaning lack of free and easy
rotation), measured breakaway force(s) outside the allowed range, any
wear or other damage (including, but not limited to, broken seals), and
the presence of particles.
    EASA AD 2020-0197 also prohibits (re)installation of an affected
TRA and an affected TR DB on a helicopter. EASA AD 2020-0197 also
specifies, for certain helicopters, terminating action for the
repetitive inspections of the slippage marking of the castellated nut.
    This material 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.

Differences Between This AD and EASA AD 2020-0197

    EASA AD 2020-0197 requires sending parts to the manufacturer. This
AD does not require that action.
    EASA AD 2020-0197 specifies the earlier revisions of Leonardo
S.p.A. Emergency Alert Service Bulletin (EASB) 169-148, Revision D,
dated August 4, 2020; and Leonardo S.p.A. EASB 189-237, Revision D,
dated August 4, 2020; are acceptable for compliance for certain
actions. This AD does not allow credit for the earlier revisions.
    Where Note 1 of EASA AD 2020-0197 allows a non-cumulative tolerance
of 10 percent to be applied to the compliance times for the actions to
allow for synchronization of the required actions with other
maintenance tasks, this AD does not allow that tolerance.

Interim Action

    The FAA considers this AD to be an interim action and further AD
action might follow.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 10 helicopters of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
            Action                  Labor cost             Parts cost         Cost per product      operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspections and checks........  Up to 9 work-      $0.......................  Up to $765, per   Up to $7,650,
                                 hours x $85 per                               inspection/       per inspection/
                                 hour = $765, per                              check cycle.      check cycle
                                 inspection/check
                                 cycle.
Thermal strip installation....  1 work-hour x $85  $4.......................  $89, per          $890, per
                                 per hour = $85,                               installation      installation
                                 per installation                              cycle.            cycle
                                 cycle.
Installation of improved TRA    Up to 18 work-     Up to $39,000............  Up to $40,530...  Up to $405,300
 and TR DB.                      hours x $85 per
                                 hour = $1,530.
Replacement of improved TR DB.  10 work-hours x    $1,500...................  $2,350, per       $23,500, per
                                 $85 per hour =                                replacement       replacement
                                 $850, per                                     cycle.            cycle.
                                 replacement
                                 cycle.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates that it would take about 1 hour per product to
comply with the on-condition reporting requirement in this AD. The
average labor rate is $85 per hour. Based on these figures, the FAA
estimates the cost of reporting the inspection and check results on
U.S. operators to be $85 per product.
    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition inspections and thermal strip installations that would be
required based on the results of any required actions. The FAA has no
way of determining the number of helicopters that might need these on-
condition actions:

      Estimated Costs of On-Condition Inspections and Installations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 work-hours x $85 per hour = $340....              $0             $340
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has received no definitive data that would enable the
agency to provide cost estimates for the other on-condition actions
specified in this AD.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    A federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a current valid OMB control number. The control
number for the collection of information required by this AD is 2120-
0056. The paperwork cost associated with this AD has been detailed in
the Costs of Compliance section of this document and includes time for
reviewing instructions, as well as completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Therefore, all reporting associated with
this AD is mandatory. Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden
and suggestions for reducing the burden should be directed to
Information Collection Clearance Officer, Federal Aviation
Administration, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Fort Worth, TX 76177-1524.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products
identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    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) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The 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:

2021-20-17 Leonardo S.p.a.: Amendment 39-21755; FAA-2021-0612;
Project Identifier MCAI-2021-00650-R.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective November 22,
2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces Emergency AD 2018-23-52, Product Identifier
2018-SW-093-AD, dated November 8, 2018 (Emergency AD 2018-23-52).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all Leonardo S.p.a. Model AW169 and AW189
helicopters, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code 6400, Tail Rotor
System.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of an accident of a Model AW169
helicopter, which was observed to have lost yaw control prior to the
accident. The FAA is issuing this AD to address failure of the tail
rotor servo-actuator (TRA) feedback lever. This condition could
result in loss of tail rotor control and subsequent loss of control
of the helicopter.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Requirements

    Except as specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: Comply with all
required actions and compliance times specified in, and in
accordance with, European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD
2020-0197, dated September 10, 2020 (EASA AD 2020-0197).

(h) Exceptions to EASA AD 2020-0197

    (1) Where EASA AD 2020-0197 requires compliance in terms of
flight hours, this AD requires using hours time-in-service.
    (2) This AD does not allow the compliance time tolerance
specified in Note 1 of EASA AD 2020-0197.
    (3) The initial compliance time for the inspection specified in
paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2020-0197 is within the compliance time
specified in paragraph (1) of EASA AD 2020-0197, except for Group 1
helicopters on which the inspection identified in paragraph (1) of
EASA AD 2020-0197 has not been done, the initial inspection is
within 10 hours time-in-service after the effective date of this AD.
    (4) The initial compliance time for the inspection specified in
paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2020-0197 is within the compliance time
specified in paragraph (2) of EASA AD 2020-0197, except for Group 1
and 2 helicopters on which the inspection identified in paragraph
(2) of EASA AD 2020-0197 has not been done, the initial compliance
time is within 50 hours time-in-service after the effective date of
this AD.
    (5) The initial compliance time for the installation specified
in paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2020-0197 is within the compliance time
specified in paragraph (3) of EASA AD 2020-0197, except for Group 1
and 2 helicopters on which the installation identified in paragraph
(3) of EASA AD 2020-0197 has not been done, the initial compliance
time is within 20 hours time-in-service after the effective date of
this AD.
    (6) The initial compliance time for the check (inspection)
specified in paragraph (4) of EASA AD 2020-0197 is within the
compliance time specified in paragraph (4) of EASA AD 2020-0197,
except for Group 1 and 2 helicopters on which the check (inspection)
identified in paragraph (4) of EASA AD 2020-0197 has not been done,
the initial compliance time is within 10 hours time-in-service after
the effective date of this AD.
    (7) The initial compliance time for the inspection/check
specified in paragraph (5) of EASA AD 2020-0197 is within the
compliance time specified in paragraph (5) of EASA AD 2020-0197
except for Group 1 and 2 helicopters on which the inspection
identified in paragraph (5) of EASA AD 2020-0197 has not been done,
the initial compliance time is within 10 hours time-in-service after
the effective date of this AD.
    (8) Where paragraphs (6), (8), (9), and (11) of EASA AD 2020-
0197 specify contacting Leonardo for corrective action instructions,
the corrective action instructions must be accomplished in
accordance with FAA-approved procedures.
    (9) Where paragraphs (9) and (10) of EASA AD 2020-0197 use the
term ``discrepancy,'' for this AD, discrepancies include roughness
(meaning lack of free and easy rotation), measured breakaway
force(s) outside the allowed range specified in the service
information identified in paragraphs (2) and (7) of EASA AD 2020-
0197, any wear or other damage (including, but not limited to,
broken seals), and the presence of particles.
    (10) Where paragraph (12) of EASA AD 2020-0197 requires
reporting results to the manufacturer ``as required by paragraphs
(12.1) and (12.2) of this [EASA] AD'', for this AD, only report the
inspection and check results specified in paragraph (12.1) of EASA
AD 2020-0197. Submit the report at the applicable time specified in
paragraph (h)(10)(i) or (ii) of this AD.
    (i) If the inspection or check was done on or after the
effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 2 days after the
inspection or check.
    (ii) If the inspection or check was done before the effective
date of this AD: Submit the report within 2 days after the effective
date of this AD.
    (11) Where paragraph (13) of EASA AD 2020-0197, and the service
information specified in EASA AD 2020-0197, specify returning parts
and grease containers to the manufacturer, this AD does not include
those requirements.
    (12) Where EASA AD 2020-0197 requires compliance from March 20,
2020 (the effective date of EASA AD 2020-0048, dated March 6, 2020),
this AD requires using the effective date of this AD.
    (13) Where EASA AD 2020-0197 requires compliance from its
effective date, this AD requires using the effective date of this
AD.
    (14) This AD does not allow credit for the actions specified in
EASA AD 2020-0197 if those actions were done using the service
information specified in paragraphs (h)(14)(i) through (ix) of this
AD:
    (i) Leonardo S.p.A. Emergency Alert Service Bulletin (EASB) 169-
148, dated May 29, 2019;
    (ii) Leonardo S.p.A. EASB 169-148, Revision A, dated September
5, 2019;
    (iii) Leonardo S.p.A. EASB 169-148, Revision B, dated February
4, 2020;
    (iv) Leonardo S.p.A. EASB 169-148, Revision C, dated April 6,
2020;
    (v) Leonardo S.p.A. EASB 189-237, dated May 29, 2019;
    (vi) Leonardo S.p.A. EASB 189-237, Revision A, dated September
5, 2019;
    (vii) Leonardo S.p.A. EASB 189-237, Revision B, dated February
4, 2020;
    (viii) Leonardo S.p.A. EASB 189-237, Revision B, dated February
4, 2020, with Errata Corrige;
    (ix) Leonardo S.p.A. EASB 189-237, Revision C, dated April 6,
2020.

    (15) This AD does not require the ``Remarks'' section of EASA AD
2020-0197.

 (i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, International Validation Branch, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the manager of the International Validation Branch, send
it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (j) of
this AD. Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

 (j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Andrea Jimenez,
Aerospace Engineer, COS Program Management Section, Operational
Safety Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, FAA, 1600
Stewart Ave., Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone (516) 228-
7330; email [email protected].

(k) 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 this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2020-0197,
dated September 10, 2020.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For EASA AD 2020-0197, contact the EASA, Konrad-Adenauer-
Ufer 3, 50668 Cologne, Germany; telephone +49 221 8999 000; email
[email protected]; internet www.easa.europa.eu. You may find this
EASA AD on the EASA website at https://ad.easa.europa.eu.
    (4) You may view this service information at the 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>. This material may be
found in the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-
2021-0612.
    (5) You may view this material that is incorporated by reference
at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
[email protected], or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on September 23, 2021.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-22471 Filed 10-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


From:
Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Thursday, April 1, 2021 11:26 AM
To:
David Ailor<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc:
Raymond, Gabrielle<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
RE: coke model files have gone to EPA division QA

David  -  Thank you and everyone for careful scrutiny of the model file. The internal QA found the ethylene dichloride duplicates so we've taken care of that. We are waiting for the revised model file ourselves. When we get it we will send you all a copy. There may be other changes after first cut at the risk modeling by Matt and we will keep you posted on those as well. When the model file is firm we will send you a copy (if changed) and also post it to the coke NESHAP page on epa.gov.

We need to wait for Matt to get back to see when he can be ready to meet. I will check with Chris Owen today to see if he will be ready later next week. T could be that Chris is the lead person on the buoyancy analysis. Im not sure how they have divided the work. I will ask that today also.

Thanks again for your help on this.

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

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

From: David Ailor<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2021 10:45 AM
To: Jones, DonnaLee<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc: 'GABRIELLE RAYMOND'<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject: RE: coke model files have gone to EPA division QA

Thanks again for the update, Donna Lee.

We still have a few questions on the modeling files, and would appreciate a call with you and your team at the earliest opportunity to discuss them, as well as any questions/comments EPA may have on our F' White Paper.  With Matt being out until April 5, perhaps we could target the latter part of next week?  Please let me know what days/times work and who would be participating.  I'll run those past the COETF, towards getting something booked.

BTW, we would appreciate it if you could provide us ASAP with the latest, updated modeling files reflecting all the revisions being made.  Based on our quick review, we have discovered that EPA has listed Ethylene Dichloride twice for every source in the Category Modeling File.  The emission rates are not identical for each of the duplicated entries, and we do not know which one is correct.  If you can provide us with the latest files, we'd be happy to perform a more thorough review in a timely manner and, potentially, identify for you other such issues/errors before you get too far in the modeling.

DCA

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


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:This document concerns pages 1723 through 1957 of BMI France response of information collection request.


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 32 (Friday, February 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10362-10363]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03343]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-91126; File No. SR-NYSE-2020-85]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a
Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NYSE Listed Company Manual To Revise
the Shareholder Approval Requirements in Sections 312.03 and 312.04 and
the Requirements for Related Party Transactions in Section 314.00

February 12, 2021.
    On December 16, 2020, New York Stock Exchange LLC filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend Sections
312.03, 312.04 and 314.00 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual. The
Commission published notice of the proposed rule change in the Federal
Register on January 4, 2021.\3\ The Commission has received no comments
on the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 90803 (December 28,
2020), 86 FR 0148.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
45th day after publication of the notice for this proposed rule change
is February 18, 2021. The Commission is extending this 45-day time
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer
period within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that
it has

sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change. Accordingly, the
Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\5\ designates
April 4, 2021, as the date by which the Commission shall either approve
or disapprove or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove the proposed rule change (File Number SR-NYSE-2020-85).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-03343 Filed 2-18-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 22, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36398-36400]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15538]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0569; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-240-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; BAE SYSTEMS (OPERATIONS) LIMITED Model
BAe 146 and Avro 146-RJ Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

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

    BAE Systems have received reports of in-service failure of the
Main Landing Gear (MLG) shock absorber lower attachment pin.
* * * * *
This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to a MLG
collapse on the ground or during landing and consequently damage to
the aeroplane or injury to the occupants.

The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the
unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by August 8, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-40, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For BAE SYSTEMS (OPERATIONS) LIMITED service information identified
in this proposed AD, contact BAE SYSTEMS (OPERATIONS) LIMITED, Customer
Information Department, Prestwick International Airport, Ayrshire, KA9
2RW, Scotland, United Kingdom; telephone +44 1292 675207; fax +44 1292
675704; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/RegionalAircraft/index.htm.
    For Messier-Dowty service information identified in this proposed
AD, contact Messier Services Americas, Customer Support Center, 45360
Severn Way, Sterling, Virginia 20166-8910; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
703-404-1621; Internet https://techpubs.services/messier-dowty.com.
    You may review copies of the referenced service information at the
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Thompson, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1175; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No.

FAA-2011-0569; Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-240-AD'' at the beginning
of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall
regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this
proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date
and may amend this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
Airworthiness Directive 2010-0201, dated October 5, 2010 (referred to
after this as ``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. The MCAI states:

    BAE Systems have received reports of in-service failure of the
Main Landing Gear (MLG) shock absorber lower attachment pin.
    Investigation has shown that the pin failures were due to
corrosion.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to a
MLG collapse on the ground or during landing and consequently damage
to the aeroplane or injury to the occupants.
    For the reasons described above, this AD requires repetitive
[general visual] inspections [for damage (cracking, corrosion, and
exposed material)] of the MLG shock absorber lower attachment pins
and replacement, depending on findings.

The replacement, if damage is found, consists of installing serviceable
pins. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the
AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    BAE SYSTEMS (OPERATIONS) LIMITED has issued Inspection Service
Bulletin ISB.32-176, dated November 12, 2009. Messier-Dowty has issued
Service Bulletin 146-32-157, including Appendix A, dated February 12,
2009. The actions described in this service information are intended to
correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

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

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 1 product of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it
would take about 2 work-hours per product to comply with the basic
requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per
work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed
AD on U.S. operators to be $170 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would
take about 2 work-hours and require parts costing $14,000, for a cost
of $14,170 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited: Docket No. FAA-2011-0569;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-240-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by August 8, 2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to BAE SYSTEMS (OPERATIONS) LIMITED Model
BAe 146-100A, -200A, and -300A airplanes; and Avro 146-RJ70A, 146-
RJ85A, and 146-RJ100A airplanes; certificated in any category; all
serial numbers.

Subject

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

Reason

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

    BAE Systems have received reports of in-service failure of the
Main Landing Gear (MLG) shock absorber lower attachment pin.
* * * * *
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to a
MLG collapse on the ground or during landing and consequently damage
to the aeroplane or injury to the occupants.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Inspections

    (g) Within 4,000 flight cycles or 2 years after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first: Do the initial inspection
of the MLG shock absorber lower attachment pins in accordance with
paragraph 2.C of BAE SYSTEMS (OPERATIONS) LIMITED Inspection Service
Bulletin ISB.32-176, dated November 12, 2009; and paragraph 3. of
Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin 146-32-157, dated February 12, 2009.
    (h) Thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 8,000 flight cycles
or 4 years, whichever occurs first, repeat the inspection required
by paragraph (g) of this AD.

Corrective Action

    (i) If, during any inspection required by paragraphs (g) and (h)
of this AD, the chromium plating on the outer diameter of any pin is
found cracked, or the base material is exposed, or any corrosion is
found on the chromium plating on the outer diameter of any pin,
before further flight, replace the pin with a serviceable pin in
accordance with paragraph 2.C of BAE SYSTEMS (OPERATIONS) LIMITED
Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.32-176, dated November 12, 2009; and
paragraph 3. of Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin 146-32-157, dated
February 12, 2009.
    (j) Replacing the pin, as required by paragraph (i) of this AD,
does not constitute a terminating action for the repetitive
inspections required by paragraph (h) of this AD.

FAA AD Differences

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

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (k) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 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 International Branch, send it to ATTN: Todd
Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Information may be e-mailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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. The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this
AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

Related Information

    (l) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency Airworthiness
Directive 2010-0201, dated October 5, 2010; BAE SYSTEMS (OPERATIONS)
LIMITED Inspection Service Bulletin ISB.32-176, dated November 12,
2009; and Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin 146-32-157, dated February
12, 2009; for related information.

    Issued in Renton, Washington on June 10, 2011.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-15538 Filed 6-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 9, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37209-37210]
[FR Doc No: 2017-16752]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP17-475-000]

Southwest Gas Storage Company; Notice of Request Under Blanket
Authorization

    Take notice that on July 19, 2017, Southwest Gas Storage Company
(Southwest) 1300 Main Street, Houston, Texas 77002, filed in Docket No.
CP17-475-000 a prior notice request pursuant to sections 157.20,
157.208, 157.2135 and 157.216 of the Commission's regulations under the
Natural Gas Act for authorization to modify, replace, and abandon
certain natural gas storage facilities and convert certain injection/
withdrawal wells to observation status within Southwest's existing
Howell Storage Field, located in Livingston County, Michigan, all as
more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the
Commission and open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed
on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Enter the
docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC
Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at (866) 208-
3676, or TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Blair
Lichtenwalter, Senior Director of Certificates, Southwest Gas Storage
Company, 1300 Main Street, Houston, Texas 77002, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Specifically, Southwest requests authorization to abandon in place
seven storage lateral pipelines consisting of approximately 8,528 feet
of existing 4, 6, 8, and 12-inch-diameter lateral pipelines and
appurtenances, and to convert the connecting injection/withdrawal wells
to observation status.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    Any person may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant
notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's
Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of
intervention. Any person filing to intervene or the Commission's staff
may, pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under
the Natural Gas Act (NGA) (18 CFR 157.205) file a protest to the
request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the
proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day
after the time allowed for protest. If

a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time
allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as
an application for authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests, and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site (www.ferc.gov) under the e-Filing link.

    Dated: August 1, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-16752 Filed 8-8-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 61 (Thursday, March 29, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13457-13460]
[FR Doc No: 2018-06368]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2017-0164; FRL-9976-14--Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Ohio NSR PM2.5 Precursors

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve, under the Clean Air Act (CAA), revisions to Ohio's state
implementation plan (SIP) as requested by the Ohio Environmental
Protection Agency (OEPA) on March 10, 2017, and supplemented on July
18, 2017. The revisions to Ohio's SIP implement certain EPA regulations
for particulate matter smaller than 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5)
for nonattainment areas by establishing definitions related to
PM2.5 and defining PM2.5 precursors. The
revisions also incorporate the findings of a comprehensive precursor
demonstration performed by OEPA, which determined that volatile organic
compounds (VOC) and ammonia (NH3) are an insignificant
source of PM2.5 for the purpose of new source review in
nonattainment areas in Ohio.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 30, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2017-0164 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider

comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission
(i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional
submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charmagne Ackerman, Environmental
Engineer, Air Permits Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. Background

II. Review of State Submittals
III. What action is EPA taking?
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    On March 10, 2017, OEPA submitted to EPA revisions to Ohio
Administrative Code (OAC) chapter 3745-31-01. The revisions were made
to implement the ``Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality
Standards: State Implementation Plan Requirements.'' Subsequently, on
July 18, 2017, OEPA submitted to EPA a letter clarifying the March 10,
2017 submittal. OEPA clarified that limited portions of OAC 3745-31-01
should be included as a SIP revision. The revisions to OAC 3745-31-01,
specifically, subparagraph (LLL) (6), paragraph (NNN), paragraph
(WWWW), paragraph (NNNNN), paragraph (VVVVV), and subparagraph (LLLLLL)
(2) (ee) will make the rule consistent with 40 CFR 51.165 and 40 CFR
52.21.

II. Review of State Submittals

    On August 24, 2016, EPA published the ``Fine Particulate Matter
National Ambient Air Quality Standards: State Implementation Plan
Requirements'' (PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule)(81 FR 58009) as
a final rule in the Federal Register. These 2016 regulations provide
details on meeting the statutory SIP requirements that apply to areas
designated nonattainment for any PM2.5 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS). As part of the PM2.5 SIP
Requirements Rule, EPA has interpreted the requirements of the CAA to
allow the state to provide a ``precursor demonstration'' to the EPA
that supports the determination that one or more PM2.5
precursor need not be subject to control and planning requirements in a
given nonattainment area. EPA has determined that sulfur dioxide,
nitrogen oxides, VOC, and NH3 are factual and scientific
precursors to PM, and thus the attainment plan requirements of subpart
4 initially apply equally to emissions of direct PM2.5 and
all of its identified precursors. CAA section 189(e) explicitly
requires the control of major stationary sources of PM2.5
precursors, unless there is a demonstration to the satisfaction of the
Administrator that such major stationary sources do not contribute
significantly to PM levels that exceed the standards in the area. The
PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule became effective on October 16,
2016.
    OEPA provided a modeling analysis for both VOC and NH3
intended to show that increases in emissions of these precursors that
may result from new or modified sources would not make a significant
contribution to PM2.5 concentrations in the area. This
demonstration justifies the state's determination that major stationary
sources of these precursors do not need to be regulated under the NNSR
program for the area. For NNSR permitting purposes, CAA section 189(e),
as interpreted by the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, provides
an option for the state to provide a precursor demonstration intended
to show that increases in emissions from potential new and existing
major stationary sources of a particular precursor would not contribute
significantly to levels that exceed the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in
a particular nonattainment area. 40 CFR 51.1006(a)(3).
    In particular, EPA's regulations provide that a state choosing to
submit an NNSR precursor demonstration should evaluate the sensitivity
of PM2.5 levels in the nonattainment area to an increase in
emissions of the precursor. If the state demonstrates that the
estimated air quality changes determined through such an analysis are
not significant, based on the facts and circumstances of the area, the
state may use this information to identify new major stationary sources
and major modifications of a precursor that will not be considered to
contribute significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed the
standard in the nonattainment area under CAA section 189(e). Id.
51.1006(a)(3)(i). If EPA approves the state's NNSR precursor
demonstration for a nonattainment area, major sources of the relevant
precursor can be exempted from the NNSR major source permitting
requirements for PM2.5 with respect to that precursor. Id.
51.1006(a)(3)(ii).
    For NNSR permitting purposes, OEPA conducted sensitivity analyses
to examine potential increases in emissions through a model simulation
that evaluates the effect on PM2.5 concentrations in the
area resulting from a given set of precursor emission increases from
one or more new or modified stationary sources. On October 14, 2016,
OEPA submitted its non-significance finding, including the precursor
demonstration, as part of OEPA's attainment demonstration for the 2012
PM2.5 annual standard. The attainment demonstration for the
PM2.5 annual standard will be addressed in a separate
action.
    OEPA and the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) used
the 2011 and 2021 comprehensive modeling inventories and platforms for
this analysis. OEPA and LADCO initially ran a baseline model to predict
the PM2.5 concentrations in Cleveland in 2021, and then
modeled any potential increases of precursors for the same year to
determine the impact of the growth of precursors to the areas
concentrations. To help determine a theoretical growth scenario as a
result of major source expansion (new or modified), OEPA first prepared
inventories for VOC and NH3 for 2008 to 2014 for the entire
State from Ohio's annual emissions reporting program. OEPA used
inventories for the entire State in order to determine what types of
major sources/source categories are likely to expand (new or modified)
within the Cleveland area and at what magnitude (tons per year) those
expansions are likely to occur.
    Consistent with EPA's regulation and draft guidance, OEPA and LADCO
have performed sensitivity analyses of potential increases in emissions
through a model simulation that evaluates the effect on
PM2.5 concentrations in the nonattainment area (including
unmonitored areas) resulting from a given set of hypothetical
NH3 or VOC precursor emission increases from modified major
stationary sources of the respective precursors in the nonattainment
area.
    For the NH3 analysis, OEPA assumed emissions increases
at three existing locations of NH3 in the area, as these
would be the most likely future areas of growth in the Cleveland area.
EPA believes that the use of the historical inventories to predict
growth is reflective of the future potential increases specific to the
Cleveland area

given the current types of facilities and their respective locations,
the urban density and ability to expand or build, as well as the types
of state regulation or other federal requirements (such as National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants) on facility types and
controls required for other pollutants. EPA believes that this is an
acceptable approach to estimating potential future growth.
    In addition to the modeled emissions increases based on historical
growth at sources, LADCO and OEPA performed an additional
NH3 modeling analysis (submitted July 18, 2017) based on a
100 tons per year (TPY) emissions increase (to represent major sources)
in each modeled grid cell in the nonattainment area. EPA believes that
this is a sufficiently conservative analysis that exceeds the level of
actual potential NH3 emissions growth likely to occur in the
area. Thus, this analysis serves as a reasonable evaluation of the
sensitivity of PM2.5 concentrations to a large emissions
increase across the spatial area. Both of these approaches are
consistent with suggested modeling in EPA's draft guidance.
    For the VOC analysis, OEPA added 1,486 TPY of VOC emissions at 3
existing source locations where VOC emissions increases potentially
could occur in the nonattainment area. Compared to the 2011 inventory,
this represents a 75% increase in VOC emissions from existing
stationary sources (Electric Generating Units (EGU) and non-EGU).
Compared to the 2021 projected inventory, this represents an 80%
increase in stationary source emissions. For the NH3
analysis, OEPA added 325 TPY of NH3 emissions (scenario 1)
to 3 existing source locations where NH3 emissions increases
potentially could occur in the nonattainment area. Compared to the 2011
inventory, this represents a 447% increase in NH3 emissions
from existing stationary sources. Compared to the 2021 projected
inventory, this represents a 449% increase in NH3 from
stationary sources. The additional NH3 analysis (scenario 2)
had a total emissions increase of 1,700 TPY, which is over 500% higher
growth than the historical NH3 growth (scenario 1).
    OEPA found that the addition of the NH3 emissions
(approximately 350 TPY) into the model based on historical growth
(scenario 1) would result in a peak impact of 0.08 micrograms per cubic
meter ([mu]g/m\3\), and the addition of the above VOC emissions would
result in a peak impact of 0.02 [mu]g/m\3\. The modeled impacts are
well below the recommended significance contribution threshold of 0.2
[mu]g/m\3\; for VOC it is an order of magnitude difference, and for
NH3 the maximum value is less than half the recommended
significant contribution threshold level. The results of NH3
modeling for scenario 2 indicate that, even with a conservatively large
NH3 increase, the maximum impact was 0.24 [mu]g/m\3\, which
is only slightly above the recommended contribution threshold of 0.2
ug/m\3\.
    While the increase is slightly above the recommended contribution
threshold, EPA believes that it is reasonable to conclude that
NH3 emissions from major stationary sources (in the context
of a NNSR precursor demonstration) do not contribute significantly to
PM2.5 concentrations in the nonattainment area for the
following reasons: Historical growth of NH3 sources in the
area are significantly less than what was modeled for scenario 2; the
only likely future increases of NH3 emissions from major
sources in the area are from the increased use of NH3 for
EGU NOX control (ammonia slip) and would likely occur at
existing EGUs (as modeled in scenario 1); the area continues to trend
downward in both monitored PM2.5 concentrations and
PM2.5 (direct and precursor) emissions; and current
preliminary monitoring data shows the area is attaining the standard.
This small amount of additional ambient PM2.5 concentration,
based on the modeling analysis, would therefore not interfere with the
area's ability to attain the standard given that the current
preliminary design value for 2015-2017 is 11.3 [mu]g/m\3\, and the
additional modeled increase of 0.24 [mu]g/m\3\ would not impact the
areas ability to attain or maintain the NAAQS.
    Based on the results of the modeling demonstration and the
additional factors described in this section, EPA is proposing to
determine that emissions increases of either VOC or NH3 from
new and modified major stationary sources would not contribute
significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS in the Cleveland nonattainment area.
Accordingly, we are proposing to approve Ohio's submitted revisions to
its PM2.5 SIP, and new or modified major sources of VOC and
NH3 may be exempted from the state's NNSR program
requirements for PM2.5 in the Cleveland PM2.5
nonattainment area.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing approval of the SIP revision submittal. Ohio's SIP
revisions comply with regulations EPA designed to address the
PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA finds that these revisions implement the
NNSR rules by defining precursors for PM2.5, as required by
EPA's regulations.
    EPA is proposing approval of revisions to OAC 3745-31-01,
specifically subparagraph (LLL)(6), paragraph (NNN), paragraph (WWWW),
paragraph (NNNNN), paragraph (VVVVV), and subparagraph (LLLLLL)(2)(ee).
EPA finds that the revisions are consistent with Federal requirements.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference revisions to Ohio Administrative Code 3745-31-01 including
subparagraph (LLL)(6), paragraph (NNN), paragraph (WWWW), paragraph
(NNNNN), paragraph (VVVVV), and subparagraph (LLLLLL)(2)(ee), effective
on March 20, 2017 . EPA has made, and will continue to make, these
documents generally available through www.regulations.gov, and at the
EPA Region 5 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more
information.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: March 20, 2018.
Edward H. Chu,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2018-06368 Filed 3-28-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P