[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 224 (Monday, November 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71185-71186]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29377]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2010-52]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

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

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number

involved and must be received on or before December 2, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number FAA-2010-
0897 using any of the following methods:
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at
202-493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of our docket web site, anyone can
find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including
the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment
for an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keira Jones<PHONE_NUMBER>, Tyneka
Thomas<PHONE_NUMBER> or David Staples<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of
Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue,
SW., Washington, DC 20591.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 16, 2010.
Dennis Pratte,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

    Docket No.: FAA-2010-0897.
    Petitioner: Everts Air Fuel.
    Section of 14 CFR Affected: 14 CFR 91.313(a)(1), (2) & (c).
    Description of Relief Sought: Relief is sought to allow Everts Air
Fuel to operate Air Tractor AT-802 or AT-1002 (or equivalent) aircraft
modified to haul fuel (either company- or customer-owned) with an FAA-
approved tanks system to Alaskan villages, mines, cabins, and other
remote Alaskan sites.

[FR Doc. 2010-29377 Filed 11-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 188 (Friday, September 29, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45464-45465]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20900]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0679]

Safety Zone; North Atlantic Ocean, Ocean City, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation; change of enforcement
date.

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

SUMMARY: On August 7, 2017, the Coast Guard provided notice in the
Federal Register that the agency would enforce

the North Atlantic Ocean, Ocean City, NJ, safety zone from 9:00 p.m.
through 11:59 p.m. on October 10, 2017. The purpose of this document is
to announce a change in the enforcement date. The zone will be enforced
on October 7, 2017, instead of October 10, 2017.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.506 will be enforced from 9 p.m.
to 11:59 p.m. on October 7, 2017, for the safety zone listed as (a.)11
in the Table to Sec.  165.506.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notice of enforcement, you may call or email MST2 Amanda Boone, Sector
Delaware Bay Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone
215-271-4889, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Please refer to the notice of enforcement
published in the Federal Register on August 7, 2017 (82 FR 36688), FR
Doc. 2017-16506.

    Dated: September 22, 2017.
Scott E. Anderson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Delaware Bay.
[FR Doc. 2017-20900 Filed 9-28-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 130 (Monday, July 8, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32323-32326]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14226]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 385

[Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0165]
RIN 2126-AC01

Incorporation by Reference; North American Standard Out-of-
Service Criteria; Hazardous Materials Safety Permits

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA amends its Hazardous Materials Safety Permit regulations
to incorporate by reference the April 1, 2018, edition of the
Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance's (CVSA) ``North American Standard
Out-of-Service Criteria and Level VI Inspection Procedures and Out-of-
Service Criteria for Commercial Highway Vehicles Transporting
Transuranics and Highway Route Controlled Quantities of Radioactive
Materials as defined in 49 CFR part 173.403.'' The Out-of-Service
Criteria provide uniform enforcement tolerances for roadside
inspections to enforcement personnel nationwide, including FMCSA's
State partners.

DATES: This final rule is effective July 8, 2019. The incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved
by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 as of July 8, 2019.
    Petitions for Reconsideration of this final rule must be submitted
to the FMCSA Administrator no later than August 7, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Petitions for reconsideration must be written in English and
mailed or delivered to: Administrator, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael Huntley, Chief, Vehicle
and Roadside Operations Division, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001 or
by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, contact Docket Services, telephone
(202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Rulemaking Documents

A. Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    For access to docket FMCSA-2018-0165 to read background documents
and comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time, or
to Docket Services at U.S. Department of Transportation, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

B. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Executive Summary

    This rulemaking updates an incorporation by reference found at 49
CFR 385.4 and referenced at 49 CFR 385.415(b). Section 385.4(b)
currently references the April 1, 2016, edition of CVSA's ``North
American Standard Out-of-Service Criteria and Level VI Inspection
Procedures and Out-of-Service Criteria for Commercial Highway Vehicles
Transporting Transuranics and Highway Route Controlled Quantities of
Radioactive Materials as defined in 49 CFR part 173.403.'' The Out-of-
Service Criteria, while not regulations, provide uniform enforcement
tolerances for roadside inspections to enforcement personnel
nationwide, including FMCSA's State partners. In this final rule, FMCSA
incorporates by reference the April 1, 2018, edition, which includes
changes adopted in the April 1, 2017 edition.

III. Legal Basis for the Rulemaking

    Congress has enacted several statutory provisions to ensure the
safe transportation of hazardous materials in interstate commerce.
Specifically, in provisions codified at 49 U.S.C. 5105(d), relating to
inspections of motor vehicles carrying certain hazardous material, and
49 U.S.C. 5109, relating to motor carrier safety permits, the Secretary
of Transportation is required to promulgate regulations as part of a
comprehensive safety program on hazardous materials safety permits. The
FMCSA Administrator has been delegated authority under 49 CFR
1.87(d)(2) to carry out the rulemaking functions vested in the
Secretary of Transportation. Consistent with that authority, FMCSA has
promulgated regulations to address the congressional mandate on
hazardous materials. Those regulations on hazardous materials are the
underlying provisions to which the material incorporated by reference
discussed in this final rule is applicable.

IV. Background

    In 1986, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and CVSA entered into
a cooperative agreement to develop a higher level of inspection
procedures, out-of-service conditions and/or criteria, an inspection
decal, and a training and certification program for inspectors to
conduct inspections on shipments of transuranic waste and highway route
controlled quantities of radioactive material. CVSA developed the North
American Standard Level VI Inspection Program for Transuranic Waste and
Highway Route Controlled Quantities of Radioactive Material. This
inspection program for select radiological shipments includes
inspection procedures, enhancements to the North American Standard
Level I Inspection, radiological surveys, CVSA Level VI decal
requirements, and the ``North American Standard Out-of-Service Criteria
and Level VI Inspection Procedures and Out-of-Service Criteria for
Commercial Highway Vehicles Transporting Transuranics and Highway Route
Controlled Quantities of Radioactive Materials as defined in 49 CFR
part 173.403.'' As of January 1, 2005, all vehicles and carriers
transporting highway route controlled

quantities of radioactive material are regulated by the U.S. Department
of Transportation. All highway route controlled quantities of
radioactive material must pass the North American Standard Level VI
Inspection prior to the shipment being allowed to travel in the U.S.
All highway route controlled quantities of radioactive material
shipments entering the U.S. must also pass the North American Standard
Level VI Inspection either at the shipment's point of origin or when
the shipment enters the U.S.
    Section 385.415 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations,
prescribes operational requirements for motor carriers transporting
hazardous materials for which a hazardous materials safety permit is
required. Section 385.415(b)(1) requires that motor carriers must
ensure a pre-trip inspection is performed on each motor vehicle to be
used to transport a highway route controlled quantity of a Class 7
(radioactive) material, in accordance with the requirements of CVSA's
``North American Standard Out-of-Service Criteria and Level VI
Inspection Procedures and Out-of-Service Criteria for Commercial
Highway Vehicles Transporting Transuranics and Highway Route Controlled
Quantities of Radioactive Materials as defined in 49 CFR part
173.403.'' It is necessary to update the reference to ensure that motor
carriers and enforcement officials have convenient access to the
correctly identified inspection criteria that are referenced in the
rules. Copies of the reference are available to the public from CVSA
either through its website, or by contacting CVSA at the address, and
phone number provided, and from additional sources of information
associated with future incorporations by reference.
    According to 2012-2017 data from FMCSA's Motor Carrier Management
Information System (MCMIS), approximately 3.5 million Level I-Level VI
roadside inspections were performed annually. Nearly 97 percent of
these were Level I,\1\ Level II,\2\ and Level III \3\ inspections.
During the same period, an average of 842 Level VI inspections were
performed annually, comprising only 0.024 percent of all roadside
inspections. On average, out-of-service violations were cited in only
10 Level VI inspections annually (1.19 percent), whereas on average,
out-of-service violations were cited in 269,024 Level I inspections
(25.3 percent), 266,122 Level II inspections (22.2 percent), and 66,489
Level III inspections (6.2 percent) annually. Based on these
statistics, CMVs transporting transuranics and highway route controlled
quantities of radioactive materials are clearly among the best
maintained and safest CMVs on the highways today, due largely to the
enhanced oversight and inspection of these vehicles because of the
sensitive nature of the cargo being transported.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Level I is a 37-step inspection procedure that involves
examination of the motor carrier's and driver's credentials, record
of duty status, the mechanical condition of the vehicle, and any
hazardous materials/dangerous goods that may be present.
    \2\ Level II is a driver and walk-around vehicle inspection,
involving the inspection of items that can be checked without
physically getting under the vehicle.
    \3\ Level III is a driver-only inspection that includes
examination of the driver's credentials and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    FMCSA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on December
31, 2018 (83 FR 67705). Whereas the incorporation by reference found at
49 CFR 385.4 and referenced at 49 CFR 385.415(b) references the April
1, 2016, edition of CVSA's ``North American Standard Out-of-Service
Criteria and Level VI Inspection Procedures and Out-of-Service Criteria
for Commercial Highway Vehicles Transporting Transuranics and Highway
Route Controlled Quantities of Radioactive Materials as defined in 49
CFR part 173.403,'' the NPRM proposed to incorporate by reference the
April 1, 2018, edition, which also captures changes adopted in the
April 1, 2017 edition. Cumulatively, 15 updates distinguish the April
1, 2018, edition from the 2016 edition. Each of the changes was
described and discussed in detail in the NPRM. Generally, the changes
serve to clarify or provide additional guidance to inspectors regarding
uniform implementation and application of the out-of-service criteria,
and none is expected to affect the number of out-of-service violations
cited during Level VI inspections. The incorporation by reference of
the 2018 edition did not change what constitutes a violation of FMCSA
regulations.

VI. Discussion of Comments Received on the Proposed Rule

    FMCSA received one comment to the NPRM. The Commercial Vehicle
Safety Alliance (CVSA) commended FMCSA for publishing the NPRM, and
encouraged FMCSA to finalize the rule and update the incorporation by
reference because ``the current reference of the April 1, 2016 edition
is outdated and does not reflect the most up to date standard.'' In
addition, CVSA noted that the ``North American Standard Out-of-Service
Criteria and Level VI Inspection Procedures and Out-of-Service Criteria
for Commercial Highway Vehicles Transporting Transuranics and Highway
Route Controlled Quantities of Radioactive Materials as defined in 49
CFR part 173.403'' is updated annually, and encouraged FMCSA to take
the necessary action to update the regulations accordingly at that
time.

VII. Section-by-Section Analysis

    FMCSA revises Sec. Sec.  385.4 (a) and 385.415 (b) to conform to
formatting requirements of the Office of the Federal Register; to
update the reference in Sec.  385.4(b) from the April 1, 2016, edition
to the April 1, 2018, edition of the ``North American Standard Out-of-
Service Criteria and Level VI Inspection Procedures and Out-of-Service
Criteria for Commercial Highway Vehicles Transporting Transuranics and
Highway Route Controlled Quantities of Radioactive Materials as defined
in 49 CFR part 173.403;'' and to clarify that copies are available to
the public from CVSA either through its website, or by contacting CVSA
at the address, and phone number provided, and from additional sources
of information associated with future incorporations by reference.

VIII. International Impacts

    The FMCSRs, and any exceptions to the FMCSRs, apply only within the
United States (and, in some cases, United States territories). Motor
carriers and drivers are subject to the laws and regulations of the
countries in which they operate, unless an international agreement
states otherwise. Drivers and carriers should be aware of the
regulatory differences among nations.
    The CVSA is an organization representing Federal, State and
Provincial motor carrier safety enforcement agencies in United States,
Canada and Mexico. The Out-of-Service Criteria provide uniform
enforcement tolerances for roadside inspections conducted in all three
countries.

IX. Regulatory Analyses

A. E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O. 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review), and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures

    FMCSA has determined that this action is not a significant
regulatory action under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning
and Review, as supplemented by E.O. 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011), Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review. Accordingly, the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not reviewed it

under that Order. It is also not significant within the meaning of DOT
regulatory policies and procedures (DOT Order 2100.6 dated Dec. 20,
2018).

B. E.O. 13771 Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs

    E.O. 13771, ``Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs,'' does not apply to this action because it is a nonsignificant
regulatory action, as defined in section 3(f) of E.O. 12866, and has
zero costs; therefore, it is not subject to the ``2 for 1'' and
budgeting requirements.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), Public Law 96-354, 94
Stat. 864 (1980), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.),
requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of the regulatory
action on small business and other small entities and to minimize any
significant economic impact. The term ``small entities'' comprises
small businesses and not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.\4\
In compliance with the RFA, FMCSA evaluated the effects of the proposed
rule on small entities. The rule incorporates by reference the April 1,
2018, edition of CVSA's ``North American Standard Out-of-Service
Criteria and Level VI Inspection Procedures and Out-of-Service Criteria
for Commercial Highway Vehicles Transporting Transuranics and Highway
Route Controlled Quantities of Radioactive Materials as defined in 49
CFR part 173.403.'' DOT policy requires an analysis of the impact of
all regulations on small entities, and mandates that agencies strive to
lessen any adverse effects on these entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 5 U.S.C. 601.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When an Agency issues a rulemaking proposal, the RFA requires the
Agency to ``prepare and make available an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis'' that will describe the impact of the proposed
rule on small entities (5 U.S.C 603(a)). Section 605 of the RFA allows
an agency to certify a rule, instead of preparing an analysis, if the
final rule is not expected to impact a substantial number of small
entities. The final rule is largely editorial and provides guidance to
inspectors and motor carriers transporting transuranics in interstate
commerce. Accordingly, I hereby certify that this final rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.

D. Assistance for Small Entities

    In accordance with section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, FMCSA wants to assist small entities
in understanding this rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects. If the rule will affect your small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its
provisions, please consult the FMCSA point of contact, Michael Huntley,
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this rule.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce or otherwise determine compliance with Federal
regulations to the Small Business Administration's Small Business and
Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small
Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these
actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness to small
business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of FMCSA, call
1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). DOT has a policy regarding the rights
of small entities to regulatory enforcement fairness and an explicit
policy against retaliation for exercising these rights.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). ``The Rights of
Small Entities to Enforcement Fairness and Policy Against
Retaliation.'' Available at: https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/SBREFAnotice2.pdf (accessed April 20, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. The Act addresses actions that may result in the
expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $161 million (which is the value
equivalent to $100,000,000 in 1995, adjusted for inflation to 2017
levels) or more in any one year. This final rule will not result in
such an expenditure.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.),
Federal agencies must obtain approval from the OMB for each collection
of information they conduct, sponsor, or require through regulations.
FMCSA determined that no new information collection requirements are
associated with this final rule.

G. E.O. 13132 (Federalism)

    A rule has implications for federalism under section 1(a) of
Executive Order 13132 if it has ``substantial direct effects 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.'' FMCSA has determined that this rule
will not have substantial direct costs on or for States, nor will it
limit the policymaking discretion of States. Nothing in this document
preempts any State law or regulation. Therefore, this rule does not
have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
Federalism Impact Statement.

H. E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This final rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and
3(b) (2) of E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

I. E.O. 13045 (Protection of Children)

    E.O. 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks
and Safety Risks, requires agencies issuing ``economically
significant'' rules, if the regulation also concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that an agency has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, to include an evaluation of the
regulation's environmental health and safety effects on children. The
Agency determined this final rule is not economically significant.
Therefore, no analysis of the impacts on children is required. In any
event, the Agency does not anticipate that this regulatory action could
in any respect present an environmental or safety risk that could
disproportionately affect children.

J. E.O. 12630 (Taking of Private Property)

    FMCSA reviewed this final rule in accordance with E.O. 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights, and has determined it will not effect a taking of
private property or otherwise have taking implications.

K. Privacy Impact Assessment

    Section 522 of title I of division H of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2005, enacted December 8, 2004 (Pub. L. 108-447,
118 Stat. 2809, 3268, 5 U.S.C. 552a note), requires the Agency to
conduct a privacy impact assessment (PIA) of a regulation that will
affect the privacy of individuals. This rule does not require the
collection of personally identifiable information (PII).

    The Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) applies only to Federal agencies
and any non-Federal agency which receives records contained in a system
of records from a Federal agency for use in a matching program.
    The E-Government Act of 2002, Public Law 107-347, section 208, 116
Stat. 2899, 2921 (Dec. 17, 2002), requires Federal agencies to conduct
a PIA for new or substantially changed technology that collects,
maintains, or disseminates information in an identifiable form. No new
or substantially changed technology will collect, maintain, or
disseminate information as a result of this rule. Therefore, FMCSA has
not conducted a PIA.

L. E.O. 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)

    The regulations implementing E.O. 12372 regarding intergovernmental
consultation on Federal programs and activities do not apply to this
program.

M. E.O. 13211 (Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use)

    FMCSA has analyzed this final rule under E.O. 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. The Agency has determined that it is not a
``significant energy action'' under that order because it is not a
``significant regulatory action'' likely to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, it
does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under E.O. 13211.

N. E.O. 13175 (Indian Tribal Governments)

    This final rule does not have Tribal implications under E.O. 13175,
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because
it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian
Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes.

O. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (Technical
Standards)

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through OMB,
with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) are standards that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. FMCSA does not intend to adopt
its own technical standard, thus there is no need to submit a separate
statement to OMB on this matter. The standard being incorporated in
this final rule is discussed in greater detail in sections IV, V and
VII above, and is reasonably available at FMCSA and through the CVSA
website.

P. Environment (NEPA)

    FMCSA analyzed this rule consistent with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and determined this action
is categorically excluded from further analysis and documentation in an
environmental assessment or environmental impact statement under FMCSA
Order 5610.1 (69 FR 9680, March 1, 2004), Appendix 2, paragraph (6)(b).
The Categorical Exclusion (CE) in paragraph 6.t.(2) includes
regulations to ensure that the States comply with the provisions of the
Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986. The content in this rule
is covered by this CE, there are no extraordinary circumstances
present, and the final action does not have any effect on the quality
of the environment. The CE determination is available for inspection or
copying in the Regulations.gov website listed under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 385

    Administrative practice and procedure, Highway safety,
Incorporation by reference, Mexico, Motor carriers, Motor vehicle
safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    In consideration of the foregoing, FMCSA amends 49 CFR chapter III,
part 385, as set forth below:

PART 385--SAFETY FITNESS PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 385 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 113, 504, 521(b), 5105(d), 5109, 5113,
13901-13905, 13908, 31135, 31136, 31144, 31148, 31151 and 31502;
Sec. 350, Pub. L. 107-87, 115 Stat. 833, 864; and 49 CFR 1.87.

0
2. Revise Sec.  385.4 to read as follows:

Sec.  385.4  Matter incorporated by reference.

    (a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part
with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other than that
specified in this section, FMCSA must publish notification of the
change in the Federal Register and the material must be available to
the public. All approved material is available for inspection at
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Office of Enforcement and
Compliance, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC 20590; Attention:
Chief, Compliance Division at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and is available from the
sources listed in paragraph (b) of this section. It is also available
for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER> or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    (b) Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance, 6303 Ivy Lane, Suite 310,
Greenbelt, MD 20770, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, www.cvsa.org.
    (1) ``North American Standard Out-of-Service Criteria and Level VI
Inspection Procedures and Out-of-Service Criteria for Commercial
Highway Vehicles Transporting Transuranics and Highway Route Controlled
Quantities of Radioactive Materials as defined in 49 CFR part
173.403,'' April 1, 2018, incorporation by reference approved for Sec.
385.415(b).
    (2) [Reserved]

0
3. In Sec.  385.415, remove paragraph (b)(2), redesignate paragraph
(b)(1) as paragraph (b), and add a heading for newly redesignated
paragraph (b) to read as follows:

Sec.  385.415  What operational requirements apply to the
transportation of a hazardous material for which a permit is required?

* * * * *
    (b) Inspection of vehicle transporting Class 7 (radioactive)
materials. * * *
* * * * *

    Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87 on June 27,
2019.
Raymond P. Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019-14226 Filed 7-5-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 58 (Tuesday, March 26, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18334-18335]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06818]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14505-000]

 JAL Hydro, LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit Application
Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and
Competing Applications

    On March 12, 2013, JAL Hydro, LLC, filed an application for a
preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act
(FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the Natick Pond Dam
Hydroelectric Project (Natick Pond Dam Project or project) to be
located on the Pawtuxet River, in the towns of Warwick and West
Warwick, Kent County, Rhode Island. The sole purpose of a preliminary
permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a
license application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does
not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing
activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others
without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would consist of the following: (1) An
existing 22.5-foot-high, 265-foot-long earth embankment dam with a 166-
foot-long granite masonry block spillway; (2) the existing 26.9-acre
Natick Pond with operating elevation of about 48.5 feet above mean sea
level (msl); (3) a new 130-foot-long, 20-foot-wide, 6-foot-deep
concrete intake channel; (4) a new 10-foot-high, 20-foot-wide sluice
gate equipped with a new 10-foot-high, 20-foot-wide trashrack with 6-
inch bar spacing; (5) two new 52-foot-long, 9.75-foot-diameter
Archimedes screw generator units each rated at 148 kilowatts (kW) for a
total installed capacity of 296 kW; (6) a new 10-foot-high, 27-foot-
long, 42-foot-wide concrete powerhouse containing a new gearbox and
electrical controls; (7) a new above ground 145-foot-long, 35.0-
kilovolt transmission line connecting the powerhouse to National Grid's
distribution system; and (8) appurtenant facilities. The estimated
annual generation of the proposed Natick Pond Dam Project would be
about 1500 megawatt-hours. The existing Natick Pond Dam and appurtenant
works are owned by the City of Warwick, Rhode Island.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Michael C. Kerr, New England Hydropower
Company, LLC, P.O. Box 5524, Beverly Farms, Massachusetts 01915; phone:
(978) 360-2547.
    FERC Contact: John Ramer; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's
Web site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and five copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.

    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14505) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: March 19, 2013.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-06818 Filed 3-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


1 Allen County Urban Area Growth Allen County is the largest county in Indiana with approximately 660 square miles of land. The 2000 urbanized area comprises approximately 210 square miles, less than one third of the available land in Allen County. The urbanized area is not anticipated to expand into DeKalb County until sometime after the year 2030. A substantial amount of agriculturally zoned land still exists within Allen County between the current urban area and DeKalb County.

The Allen County Plan Commission and Allen County Commissioners are the primary decisionmakers that control the conversion of agricultural land uses to residential and commercial urban development. The planning policies and philosophies applied to land use decisions in Allen County were designed to ensure orderly and contiguous urban growth. The Allen County Comprehensive Plan includes provisions that support contiguous growth, prohibits uncontrolled sprawl, and preserves prime agricultural land.

The Allen County Comprehensive Plan includes goals and policies that strive to minimize urban sprawl and promote orderly, balanced and efficient urban development. As the policies are implemented, they establish an urban area that exhibits contiguous and homogeneous growth. The goals and policies are expressed in the following statements.

To encourage residential growth in close proximity to work, recreation, and shopping.

To encourage residential development in areas where the full range of community facilities ( sewer, water, fire, schools, etc.) presently exist or will be provided in conjunction with the proposed development.

To encourage a community development pattern which enhances the neighborhood environment.

To insure that all developments have proper facilities and utilities in order to maintain safe and sanitary conditions.

To encourage the preservation of prime agricultural areas which are distinguished by high crop yields and large contiguous blocks of land. 2 To encourage quality agricultural production by protecting agricultural areas from incompatible land uses.

To encourage upgrading and utilization of existing commercial sites before re zoning new real estate.

To encourage the revitalization of the Central Business District as the major activity center in the County for government, finance, offices, cultural activities, and regional commerce.

The implementation of these policies by the Allen County Plan Commission serve to concentrate growth within, and congruent to, the urbanized area of Allen County. The requirement by the Plan Commission that subdivisions and commercial developments have water and sanitary sewer utility services ensures that new development remains contiguous to the existing urban area. The implementation of the Comprehensive Plan also serves to preserve agricultural land and provides a special agricultural preservation zoning classification for that purpose. The application of these policies has created a well established pattern of orderly and contiguous urban growth. These policies will continue to influence the shape and size of future urban development in Allen County.

In accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, the Transportation Plan also incorporates various planning assumptions that reflect land use policies and historical trends regarding urban growth and development. The planning assumptions are utilized to predict how the urban area will grow and change over time. The 2025 Transportation Plan for the Fort Wayne New Haven Allen County Metropolitan Area was developed based on the following assumptions for urban growth.

The persons per dwelling unit ratio will continue to drop and will stabilize at approximately 2.35 for the Metropolitan Planning Area.

Prime agricultural land will be preserved and development will take place in areas with suitable soil types. The majority of all development will occur in the urbanized area or immediately adjacent to the urban area.

Downtown Fort Wayne revitalization efforts will continue to retain and attract business to the central city. Residential development and re development will be encouraged in specific areas of the central business district and central city. These efforts will help minimize urban expansion. 3 The urbanized area will continue to be the focal point for residential, commercial and industrial growth. It is anticipated that the urban area population will continue to grow at a higher rate than the surrounding rural portions of Allen County.

In addition to the land use policies administered in Allen County that control urban development,

environmental and cultural issues exist that serve to curb urban development in the northern portion of Allen County. Cedar Creek is a designated scenic waterway that runs diagonally ( northwest to southeast) through the northern portion of Allen County in Perry and Cedar Creek Townships. Two environmental groups, the Isaac Walton League and Acres Incorporated, hold large tracts of land and actively oppose urban development in the area surrounding Cedar Creek. This environmentally sensitive area serves as a buffer, containing urban development to areas south of the waterway. It will be difficult to provide fresh water and sanitary sewer utilities to the area north of the creek, keeping housing densities relatively low. The area north of the Cedar Creek will remain predominantly agricultural with some sporadic large estate type residential development.

In the northeastern portion of Allen County there is an extensive population of Amish farms. The Amish families hold a significant amount of acreage including some fairly large tracts of land. The Amish have successfully clustered their farmland together to form a cohesive community. The land is primarily used for agricultural purposes but occasionally supports a small business. The Amish held property tends to convert to urban land uses at a slower rate than other agricultural land. The presence of Amish farmland has a tendency to constrain the urban growth in northeast Allen County.

The urban development pattern in Allen County has shifted over the years beginning within the City of Fort Wayne and on adjacent land southeast of the City. Over time, growth shifted to the areas northeast and southwest of Fort Wayne, again expanding in a fairly contiguous manner. Growth expanded to the north for several years when a water/ sewer utility situation invoked a moratorium on development in southwestern Allen County. Utility improvements were made and the moratorium was lifted. Development has resumed in the west southwest and has also begun shifting into the northwestern portion of Allen County. A substantial amount of vacant land is available in the area northwest of Fort Wayne and appears to be the area most attractive for new urban growth. 4 The combination of land use policies, environmentally sensitive areas, agricultural land preservation and recent trends for new growth in northwest Allen County will serve to contain the amount of urban development. These constraints will limit urban growth in the extreme northern portions of Allen County and inhibit the urban area expansion into DeKalb County.


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 14, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33948-33950]
[FR Doc No: E9-16644]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2009-0492; FRL-8930-5]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San
Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing a limited approval and limited disapproval of
revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
(SJVAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP).
These revisions concern volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from
confined animal facilities (CAFs) such as dairies, cattle feedlots,
poultry and swine farms. We are proposing action on a local rule that
regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in
1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan
to follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by August 13, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2009-0492, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region
IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents
in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material),
and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI).
To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment
during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Steckel, EPA Region IX, (415)
947-4115<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. What are the rule deficiencies?
    D. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule
    E. Proposed Action and Public Comment
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the date
that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                             Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Agency                       Rule              Rule title             Adopted        Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJVAPCD...............................            4570  Confined Animal                 06/18/09        06/26/09
                                                         Facilities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This rule submittal meets the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part
51 Appendix V.

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    There are no previous versions of Rule 4570 in the SIP. The rule
was submitted to EPA on October 5, 2006, but we have not acted on this
submittal. Subsequent decisions in California state court \(1)\
concerning the rule resulted in readoption and resubmittal of the rule
as shown above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Association of Irritated Residents v. San Joaquin Valley
Unified Air Polution Control Dist., 168 Cal. Ap. 4th 535 (Cal. App.
5 Dist. 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

    VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human
health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States
to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. Rule 4570 is designed
to decrease VOC emissions from dairies, beef feedlots, poultry and
swine houses, and other CAFs. The rule's requirements apply to large
facilities defined in Table 1 of the rule; for example, dairies with
more than 1000 milk cows, beef feedlots with more than 3000 cattle, and
poultry facilities with more than 650,000 chickens. These CAFs must
obtain a permit from the SJVAPCD codifying the VOC mitigation measures
the owner/operator chooses to implement from the relevant menus in
Tables 2-6 of the rule. Sections 6-8 of the rule describe additional
facility requirements concerning permitting, recordkeeping, compliance
testing and monitoring.
    EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information about
this rule.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How Is EPA evaluating the rule?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for
each category of sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines
(CTG) document as well as each major source in nonattainment areas (see
sections 182(a)(2) and (b)(2)), and must not relax existing
requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The SJVAPCD regulates an
ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81) and has CAFs large enough
to be major sources of VOC emissions, so Rule 4570 must fulfill RACT.

    Guidance and policy documents that we use to help evaluate specific
enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the
following:
    1. Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide
policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 24, 1987.
    2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
    3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    Our TSD lists additional references used in our review.

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    Rule 4570 improves the SIP by establishing requirements that reduce
VOC emissions from CAFs. Since no other version of these requirements
is in the SIP, the rule fulfills our criteria regarding SIP
relaxations. In addition, Rule 4570 requirements are sufficiently
clear, and contain adequate monitoring, recordkeeping and other
provisions to determine compliance; so, the rule fulfills our criteria
regarding enforceability.
    We are postponing a decision on whether the SIP submittal
demonstrates that Rule 4570 implements RACT for dairies, beef feedlots
and other cattle facilities. The $14.8 million National Air Emission
Monitoring Study will be completed by May 2010 and VOC emission
estimating methods for CAFs will be completed by November 2011. Because
we expect this information is likely to help clarify RACT, we believe
that a delay in evaluating SJVAPCD's RACT demonstration for various
cattle operations is appropriate. However, we also believe that we have
sufficient information to conclude that SJVAPCD has not demonstrated
that Rule 4570 fulfills RACT for poultry and swine operations. The
specific deficiencies are identified below. Our TSD provides additional
information on our conclusions regarding RACT for both dairies and
feedlots, and poultry and swine.

C. What are the rule's deficiencies?

    These elements of the rule submittal conflict with section 182 of
the Act and prevent full approval of the SIP revision.
    1. Rule 4570 exempts poultry operations between 400,000 and 650,000
chickens (see section 4.1 of the rule); these operations should be
subject to the rule as major sources of VOC emissions.
    2. The rule submittal did not provide adequate analysis to
demonstrate that the rule's control measure menus implement RACT for
poultry and swine facilities. Such analysis should review the
availability and effectiveness of controls, and may necessitate rule
revisions to ensure that the rule does not allow implementation of
relatively ineffective control measures when more effective measures
are reasonably available to a class of operations. Please see our TSD
for a few examples of the type of concerns that should be addressed by
this analysis.

D. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule

    The TSD describes additional rule revisions that do not affect
EPA's current action but are recommended for the next time the SJVAPCD
modifies the rule.

E. Proposed Action and Public Comment

    As authorized in sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, EPA is
proposing a limited approval of Rule 4570 to improve the SIP. If
finalized, this action would incorporate the submitted rule into the
SIP, including those provisions identified as deficient. This approval
is limited because EPA is simultaneously proposing a limited
disapproval of Rule 4570 under section 110(k)(3). If this disapproval
is finalized, sanctions will be imposed under section 179 of the Act
unless EPA approves subsequent SIP revisions that correct the rule
deficiencies within 18 months. These sanctions would be imposed
according to 40 CFR 52.31. A final disapproval would also trigger the
federal implementation plan (FIP) requirement under section 110(c).
Note that the submitted rule has been adopted by the SJVAPCD, and EPA's
final limited disapproval would not prevent the district from enforcing
the rule.
    We will accept comments from the public on the proposed limited
approval and limited disapproval for the next 30 days.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory
Planning and Review.''

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
    This rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities because SIP approvals under section 110 and
subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create any new
requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is already
imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not create
any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under
the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a) (2).

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    EPA has determined that the approval action proposed does not
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the
aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action proposes to
approve pre-existing

requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new requirements.
Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal
governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces
Executive Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 (Enhancing the
Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications( is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have (substantial direct effects 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA
consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the
Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation.
    This rule will not have substantial direct effects 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132, because it
merely approves a state rule implementing a federal standard, and does
not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. Thus, the
requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this
rule.

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed rule does not
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. It
will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
    EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed rule
from tribal officials.

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045, because it approves a
state rule implementing a Federal standard.

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards''
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical.
    The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's
action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to
the use of VCS.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: June 30, 2009.
Jane Diamond,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. E9-16644 Filed 7-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 216 (Thursday, November 7, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60077-60078]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24317]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:
    Docket Numbers: EG20-19-000.
    Applicants: Sun Streams, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status.
    Filed Date: 10/30/19.
    Accession Number: 20191030-5084.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/20/19.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER17-194-003.
    Applicants: Hartree Partners, LP.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status and Updated Market Power
Analysis of Hartree Partners, LLC.
    Filed Date: 10/31/19.
    Accession Number: 20191031-5296.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/21/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-1418-002.
    Applicants: Evergy Kansas Central, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Filing, Section 28.5,
Loss Adjustments to be effective 6/28/2018.
    Filed Date: 10/31/19.
    Accession Number: 20191031-5265.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/21/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-269-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 3330R1 City of Nixa,
Missouri NITSA NOAs to be effective 10/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/31/19.
    Accession Number: 20191031-5226.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/21/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-270-000.
    Applicants: Dynegy Oakland, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Annual Reliability Must Run
Agreement and Schedule F Informational Filings to be effective 1/1/
2020.
    Filed Date: 10/31/19.
    Accession Number: 20191031-5228.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/21/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-271-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Rev to the OATT and RAA re
Price Responsive Demand Rules to be effective 12/30/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/31/19.
    Accession Number: 20191031-5231.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/21/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-272-000.
    Applicants: AEP Texas Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: AEPTX-Taygete Energy Project
II 1st Amend and Restated GIA to be effective 10/24/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/31/19.
    Accession Number: 20191031-5256.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/21/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-273-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2019-10-31 Southern
California Maximum Gas Constraint Amendment to be effective 12/31/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/31/19.
    Accession Number: 20191031-5258.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/21/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-274-000.
    Applicants: AEP Texas Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: AEPTX-Blackjack Creek Wind
Farm GIA to be effective 10/24/2019.
    Filed Date: 10/31/19.
    Accession Number: 20191031-5260.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/21/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-275-000.
    Applicants: Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: PASNY VDER Tariff 10-2019 to
be effective 11/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5000.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-276-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2019-11-01_Attachment O
Prairie Power, Inc. Filing to be effective 1/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5045.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-277-000.
    Applicants: Southwestern Public Service Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: SPS FERC Production
Depreciation Rates Update to be effective 1/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5075.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-278-000.
    Applicants: Avista Corporation.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Avista Corp Cancellation Rate
Sched CG2 Order 1000 Agreement to be effective 12/31/2019.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5098.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-279-000.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Service Agreement No. 318
Cancellation to be effective 1/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5135.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-280-000.
    Applicants: Skookumchuck Wind Energy Project, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for MBR Authority
and Initial Baseline Tariff Filing to be effective 12/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5141.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-281-000.
    Applicants: DATC Path 15, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised Appendix I 2020 to
be effective 1/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5145.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-282-000.
    Applicants: FPL Energy Illinois Wind, LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Reactive Power Compensation
Filing to be effective 12/31/2019.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5151.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-283-000.
    Applicants: Heartland Generation Ltd.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Notice of Succession to
Market Based Rate Tariff and Notice of Change in Status to be effective
12/30/2019.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5173.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-284-000.
    Applicants: Basin Electric Power Cooperative.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Basin Electric Submission of
Revised Rate Schedule A to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5175.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-285-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of WMPA SA
No.

4372; Queue No. AB1-035 to be effective 11/12/2019.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5196.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-286-000.
    Applicants: Puget Sound Energy, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: ColumbiaGrid Cancellation Filing
to be effective 12/31/2019.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5208.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-287-000.
    Applicants: CPV Fairview, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: CPV Fairview, LLC--Reactive
Power Rate Schedule to be effective 12/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5220.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-288-000.
    Applicants: Florida Power & Light Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: FPL and Landfill Energy
Systems, LLC Service Agreement for Firm P-to-P TS to be effective 11/2/
2019.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5222.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-289-000.
    Applicants: Appalachian Power Company, Ohio Power Company, AEP Ohio
Transmission Company, Inc., PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: AEP submits ILDSAs, SA Nos.
1252, 1336, 1677, 5 Facilities Agreement and an ECSA to be effective
12/31/2019.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5223.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-290-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revisions to Revise
Treatment of Schedule 1 Point-To-Point Revenue to be effective 1/1/
2020.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5246.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-291-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of WMPA/SA
No. 4373; Queue No. AB1-036 to be effective 11/12/2019.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5247.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-292-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Kansas City Board of Public
Utilities Formula Rate to be effective 1/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 11/1/19.
    Accession Number: 20191101-5248.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/22/19.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
securities filings:
    Docket Numbers: ES20-7-000.
    Applicants: Portland General Electric Company.
    Description: Application Under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act
for Authorization to Issue Securities of Portland General Electric
Company.
    Filed Date: 10/31/19.
    Accession Number: 20191031-5291.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/21/19.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following qualifying
facility filings:
    Docket Numbers: QF20-182-000.
    Applicants: Eco Green Generation LLC.
    Description: Form 556 of Eco Green Generation LLC [Clean Power #7].
    Filed Date: 10/31/2019.
    Accession Number: 20191031-5168.
    Comment Date: Non-Applicable.

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

    Dated: November 1, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-24317 Filed 11-6-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


MEMORANDUM

Date:	December 16, 2011
Subject:	Evaluation of Area Source EGUs
From:	Nick Hutson, ESG/SPPD/OAQPS
To:  	EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234

      As explained at proposal, the Agency examined whether it would be appropriate to regulate area source EGUs differently by issuing GACT standards for such units, as opposed to MACT standards.  In response to comments received, we reviewed the "Nationwide Emission Estimates" spreadsheet prepared at proposal and updated that spreadsheet based on comments to confirm the number of area source facilities.  The spreadsheet associated with the proposed rule is posted to the Agency's project website (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/utility/utilitypg.html) and to the docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234-2986). The updated spreadsheet may be found in the docket for this rulemaking.
      Specifically, we examined the available data to identify the number of units that may be considered area sources and the level of emissions and control configuration of such facilities. This information is provided in the attached spreadsheet (`potential area sources 121511.xlsx').
      We have identified 79 facilities (with 141 units) that are potential area sources.   See Response to Comments for a fuller discussion of the area source issue.  The units identified as area sources, based on their potential to emit less than 10 tons per year of a single HAP or less than 25 tons per year of a combination of HAP, include:  112 coal-fired units and 29 oil-fired units.  Our analysis shows that many of the EGUs at these facilities are already meeting at least some of the MACT standards.
      With regard to coal-fired units, many of the units appear to already meet the HCl limit (about 67%) either through existing controls or use of low chlorine coal.  Most of the remaining units have existing controls and should be able to meet the HCl limit with a small increase in the performance of the existing equipment or through the implementation of a small amount of dry sorbent injection (DSI).  Nearly half of the units already have fabric filters installed for PM control.  Several of the potential area sources are also already using activated carbon injection for Hg control.  Other potential area sources have wet scrubbers, and there are likely low cost options to achieve additional Hg control.
      We have, however, identified four units that do not have existing acid gas controls and would require installation of additional controls to meet the final HCl emission limit.  We have calculated the annual costs associated with installation and operation of a DSI system sufficient to allow the units to meet the HCl MACT emission limit, and we have calculated the associated benefits for the co-benefit SO2 reductions.  The annual costs for the four units were estimated to be approximately $2,980,000, while the annual benefits were estimated to be $15,120,000.

      With regard to oil-fired sources, some of the oil-fired units are likely to qualify for the limited-use subcategory and thus would need to employ work practices, which would be neither difficult nor costly.  Some other units are covered by the non-continental emissions standards, which are less stringent than the remaining numerical limits.   As to the remaining units that are neither limited-use nor non-continental units, such units are very similar to the major source oil-fired units both in HAP emissions and control configuration.


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 177 (Thursday, September 14, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43195-43197]
[FR Doc No: 2017-19450]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 177 / Thursday, September 14, 2017 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0874; Product Identifier 2015-SW-082-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation
Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky) Model S-76C helicopters. This
proposed AD would require inspecting the engine collective position
transducer (CPT). This proposed AD is prompted by reports of wear of
the CPT that has resulted in several One Engine Inoperative (OEI)
incidents. The proposed actions are intended to detect and prevent an
unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by November 13,
2017.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Send comments to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to the ``Mail'' address between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
0874; 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 economic 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 service information identified in this proposed rule, contact
Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Customer Service Engineering, 124 Quarry
Road, Trumbull, CT 06611; telephone 1-800-Winged-S or<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You may review the
referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort
Worth, TX 76177.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nick Rediess, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Boston ACO Branch, Compliance and Airworthiness Division,
1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to
the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might
result from adopting the proposals in this document. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain duplicate comments, commenters
should send only one copy of written comments, or if comments are filed
electronically, commenters should submit only one time.
    We will file in the docket all comments that we receive, as well as
a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this proposal, we
will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We will consider comments filed after the comment period has
closed if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay.
We may change this proposal in light of the comments we receive.

Discussion

    We propose to adopt a new AD for Sikorsky Model S-76C helicopters
with a Turbomeca, S.A., Arriel 2S1 or Arriel 2S2 engine and with a CPT
part number (P/N) 76900-01821-104 installed. This proposed AD is
prompted by 20 reports of One Engine Inoperative (OEI) incidents
resulting from wear of a CPT. One of these incidents resulted in a
rejected takeoff to an unprepared site. A CPT provides signals to the
Digital Engine Control Units (DECU) to anticipate power demand. A worn
CPT can send an erroneous signal to the DECU. This condition can cause
a power split between the two engines and a subsequent OEI condition,
which can result in an emergency landing.
    Accordingly, this proposed AD would require initial and recurring
inspections of the CPTs, and depending on the outcome of the
inspections, replacing the CPT. The proposed actions are intended to
detect wear of a CPT prior to it causing an OEI condition and possible
emergency landing.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all known relevant
information and determined that an unsafe condition exists and is
likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type designs.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Sikorsky S-76 Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin (ASB)
76-73-8, Revision A, dated December 4, 2015 (ASB 76-73-8A), which
specifies a one-time inspection of total resistance, linearity
resistant movement, excitation voltage, and differential voltage of the
CPTs using CPT Text Box P/N 76700-40009-042.
    We also reviewed Sikorsky Maintenance Manual, SA 4047-76C-2,
Temporary Revision No. 73-07, dated August 17, 2016 (TR 73-07), which
specifies procedures for removing, installing, and adjusting the CPTs,
and inspections of total resistance, linearity resistant movement,
excitation voltage, and differential voltage of the CPTs. TR 73-07 also
divides the procedures by

CPT Test Box P/N by providing separate procedures for test boxes
modified by Sikorsky Special Service Instructions (SSI) No. 76-96,
dated August 19, 2016, which is not incorporated by reference in this
proposed AD.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

 Other Related Service Information

    We reviewed Sikorsky S-76 Helicopter ASB 76-73-8, Basic Issue,
dated August 21, 2015 (ASB 76-73-8). ASB 76-73-8 contains the same
procedures as ASB 76-73-8A; however, ASB 76-73-8A updates Sikorsky's
contact information for submitting a purchase order.
    We also reviewed Sikorsky SA 4047-76C-2-1, Temporary Revision No.
5-181, dated August 21, 2015 (TR 5-181); Task 5-20-00 of Sikorsky
Airworthiness Limitations and Inspection Requirements, Publication No.
SA 4047-76C-2-1, Revision 24, dated December 15, 2015 (Task 5-20-00);
and Section 73-22-04 of Chapter 73 Engine Fuel and Control, of Sikorsky
Maintenance Manual, SA 4047-76C-2, Revision 31, dated December 15, 2015
(Section 73-22-04). TR 5-181 specifies adding CPT inspections
referenced in Section 73-22-04 to the 300-hour inspection checklist
contained in Task 5-20-00.
    We reviewed Sikorksy Safety Advisory No. SSA-S76-11-0002, dated May
17, 2011. This service information provides precautionary instructions
to minimize hazardous situations that might result from an unreliable
CPT.
    We reviewed Sikorsky SSI No. 76-96, dated August 19, 2016, which
specifies procedures to modify CPT Test Box P/N 76700-40009-042 and re-
identify it as P/N 76700-40009-043. This one-time modification reduces
the instructions to inspect the CPT and improves the inspection
accuracy.
    We also reviewed Sikorsky SSI No. 76-87, dated July 24, 2015, and
SSI No. 76-87A, Revision A, dated August 21, 2015. These SSIs specify a
one-time inspection of total resistance, linearity resistant movement,
excitation voltage, and differential voltage of the CPTs using CPT Text
Box P/N 76700-40009-042.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require initial and recurring inspections of
each CPT by measuring resistance, linearity resistance movement, and
differential voltage, and depending on the outcome of the inspections,
replacing the CPT.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the Service Information

    Sikorsky ASB 76-73-8A and TR 73-07 specify using and returning
Sikorsky's CPT data sheet to Sikorsky. This proposed AD would not
require using Sikorsky's CPT data sheet or returning a data sheet to
Sikorsky. TR 73-07 specifies adjusting the CPT transducers. This
proposed AD would not require adjusting the CPT transducers. TR 73-07
specifies returning a failed CPT to Sikorsky. This proposed AD would
not require returning a failed CPT to Sikorsky.

Interim Action

    We consider this proposed AD to be an interim action. The design
approval holder is currently developing a modification that will
address the unsafe condition identified in this proposed AD. Once this
modification is developed, approved, and available, we might consider
additional rulemaking.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 90 helicopters of
U.S. Registry. We estimate that operators may incur the following costs
in order to comply with this AD. Labor costs are estimated at $85 per
work-hour. The inspections would take about 3.75 work-hours for an
estimated cost of $319 per helicopter and $28,710 for the U.S. fleet
per inspection cycle. Replacing a CPT would take about 6 work-hours and
parts would cost $3,072 for an estimated replacement cost of $3,582.

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, 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);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent that
it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic 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

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation: Docket No. FAA-2017-0874; Product
Identifier 2015-SW-082-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation Model S-76C
helicopters, certificated in any category, with a Turbomeca, S.A.,
Arriel 2S1 or Arriel 2S2 engine with an engine collective position
transducer (CPT) part number 76900-01821-104 installed.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as failure of a CPT. This
condition could result in a reduction in power to one engine
resulting in an annunciated One Engine Inoperative (OEI) condition
and subsequent emergency landing.

(c) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by November 13, 2017.

(d) Compliance

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

(e) Required Actions

    (1) Within 130 hours time-in-service (TIS):
    (i) Measure resistance of each engine CPT and replace the CPT if
the measured resistance is not within tolerance by following the
Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.C.(1) through 3.C.(8)(b),
of Sikorsky S-76 Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin ASB 76-73-8,
Revision A, dated December 4, 2015 (ASB 76-73-8A), except you are
not required to use Sikorsky's CPT data sheet or submit a data sheet
to Sikorsky.
    (ii) Measure the linearity resistance movement of each engine
CPT and replace the CPT if there is a linear abnormality or change
in resistance that is not within tolerance by following the
Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.D.(1) through D.(14)(b),
of ASB 76-73-8A, except you are not required to use Sikorsky's CPT
data sheet or submit a data sheet to Sikorsky. Examples of linear
abnormalities are depicted in Figure 3 of ASB 76-73-8A.
    (iii) Measure the differential voltage of each engine CPT and
replace the CPT if the measured voltage is not within tolerance by
following the Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 3.E. through
3.G.(1) of ASB 76-73-8A, except you are not required to use
Sikorsky's CPT data sheet or submit a data sheet to Sikorsky.
    (2) Thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 300 hours TIS:
    (i) For helicopters using Test Box P/N 76700-40009-042:
    (A) Measure resistance of each engine CPT and replace the CPT if
the resistance is not within tolerance by following paragraphs
4.B.(11) of Sikorsky Maintenance Manual, SA 4047-76C-2, Temporary
Revision No. 73-07, dated August 17, 2016 (TR 73-07), except you are
not required to use Sikorsky's CPT data sheet or return a failed CPT
to Sikorsky.
    (B) Measure the linearity resistance movement of each engine CPT
and replace the CPT if the movement exceeds tolerance by following
paragraphs 4.B.(12)(a) through 4.B.(13)(f) of TR 73-07, except you
are not required to use Sikorsky's CPT data sheet or return a failed
CPT to Sikorsky.
    (C) Measure the differential voltage of each CPT by following
paragraphs 4.B.(14) through 4.B.(15)(h) of TR 73-07, except you are
not required to use Sikorsky's CPT data sheet. If the maximum
voltage is greater than 100 millivolts or the minimum voltage is
less than -100 millivolts, replace the CPT.
    (ii) For helicopters using Test Box P/N 76700-40009-043:
    (A) Measure resistance of each engine CPT and replace the CPT if
the resistance is not within tolerance by following paragraph
5.B.(11) of TR 73-07, except you are not required to use Sikorsky's
CPT data sheet or return a failed CPT to Sikorsky.
    (B) Measure the resistance linearity of each engine CPT and
replace the CPT if the resistance is not within tolerance by
following paragraph 5.B.(12) of TR 73-07, except you are not
required to use Sikorsky's CPT data sheet or return a failed CPT to
Sikorsky.
    (C) Measure the differential voltage of each engine CPT and
replace the CPT if the resistance is not within tolerance by
following paragraphs 5.B.(13)(a) through B.(13)(k) of TR 73-07,
except you are not required to use Sikorsky's CPT data sheet or
return a failed CPT to Sikorsky.

(f) Credit for Previous Actions

    Actions accomplished before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the procedures specified in Sikorsky S-76 Helicopter
Alert Service Bulletin ASB 76-73-8, Basic Issue, dated August 21,
2015; Sikorsky Special Service Instruction SSI No. 76-87, dated July
24, 2015; or Sikorsky Special Service Instruction SSI No. 76-87,
Revision A, dated August 21, 2015, are considered acceptable for
compliance with the corresponding actions specified in paragraph
(e)(1) of this AD.

(g) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOC)

    (1) The Manager, Boston ACO Branch, FAA, may approve AMOCs for
this AD. Send your proposal to: Nick Rediess, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Boston ACO Branch, Compliance and Airworthiness Division,
1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; telephone (781) 238-
7159; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(h) Additional Information

    Sikorsky S-76 Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin ASB 76-73-8,
Basic Issue, dated August 21, 2015; Sikorsky SA 4047-76C-2-1,
Temporary Revision No. 5-181, dated August 21, 2015; Task 5-20-00 of
Sikorsky Airworthiness Limitations and Inspection Requirements,
Publication No. SA 4047-76C-2-1, Revision 24, dated December 15,
2015; Section 73-22-04 of Chapter 73 Engine Fuel and Control, of
Sikorsky Maintenance Manual, SA 4047-76C-2, Revision 31, dated
December 15, 2015; Sikorksy Safety Advisory No. SSA-S76-11-0002,
dated May 17, 2011; Sikorsky Special Service Instruction (SSI) No.
76-96, dated August 19, 2016; Sikorsky SSI No. 76-87, dated July 24,
2015; and Sikorsky SSI No. 76-87, Revision A, dated August 21, 2015,
which are not incorporated by reference, contain additional
information about the subject of this AD. For service information
identified in this AD, contact Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation,
Customer Service Engineering, 124 Quarry Road, Trumbull, CT 06611;
telephone 1-800-Winged-S or<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You may review a copy of
information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest
Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

(i) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 7600, Engine
Controls.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September 6, 2017.
Scott A. Horn,
Deputy Director for Regulatory Operations, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-19450 Filed 9-13-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


John Silvasi/ RTP/ USEPA/ US 08/ 22/ 2005 12: 05 PM T o Amy Flynn, Art Fraas c c Rich Damberg/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Joe Paisie/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EP A, Amy Vasu/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EP A, Sara Schneeberg, Geoffrey Wilcox/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EP A, Mark Simons S u b j e c t RACM text in 8 hr O3 proposal and in final phase 2 rule ( draft)

I've also included the RACM text in the draft phase 2 final rule in its current form.

John J. Silvasi Environmental Engineer Ozone Policy and Strategies Group ( C539 02) Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 919 541 5666 ( v); 919 541 0824 ( fax) silvasi. john@ epa. gov