June 21, 2004

The Honorable Michael O. Leavitt, Administrator

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Ariel Rios Building – 1101 A

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.

Washington, DC 20460

Re:  Petition for Reconsideration:  Iron and Steel Foundry MACT
Standards

Dear Administrator Leavitt:

	National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the Iron
and Steel Foundries (“Foundry MACT”) were published in the Federal
Register on April 22, 2004.  See 69 Fed. Reg.21906.  Extensive comments
on the proposed rule (see 67 Fed. Reg. 78273, December 23, 2002) were
filed by trade associations and companies representing the foundry
industry, including the Steel Founders’ Society of America
(“SFSA”).  These comments addressed many facets of the proposed rule
and in some cases asked for revisions or clarifications to the
regulatory language.  Several of these issues were also raised in
communications with EPA staff.  However, in the preamble, background
documents, and the rule itself, EPA has failed adequately to respond to
these concerns, make the necessary clarifications or corrections, or
provide the rationale for its actions or inaction.

	For these reasons, and as explained in more detail below, we believe
the final rule is flawed.  Therefore, on behalf of SFSA, we hereby
petition EPA for reconsideration of the rule in accordance with section
307(d)(7)(B) of the Clean Air Act.  As described below, we believe steel
foundries do not pose a significant environmental risk from hazardous
air pollutants (“HAPs”) and should be exempt from the standards
promulgated or be regulated as a separate subcategory.

	In light of the compliance timetable faced by facilities that are
subject to the Foundry MACT – including a deadline of April 22, 2005,
to comply with specified work practice standards and April 23, 2007, to
meet applicable emissions standards – it is important that the Agency
act with expediency in responding to this petition.  In recognition of
the need for a timely decision, representatives of SFSA stand ready to
meet with you to discuss these issues and answer questions or provide
clarification at your staff’s convenience.

	The comments below make the following requests:

Steel foundries should be evaluated as a separate category or
subcategory of sources under the Foundry MACT with separate
requirements, if justified, specific to the subcategory.

EPA should entertain an industry initiative to make a demonstration that
steel foundries can be exempted from MACT standards as a subcategory
based upon acceptable risks.

EPA should entertain an industry initiative to make a demonstration for
justifying formation of a low-risk subcategory of steel foundries that
would be exempt from Foundry MACT standards and provide a regulatory
basis for other steel foundry facilities to quality for placement in the
low risk subcategory.

Steel Foundries Should Be Placed in a Separate Subcategory

	When EPA first listed source categories as candidates for considering
regulation under section 112 of the Clean Air Act, iron foundries and
steel foundries were listed as separate source categories.  Separation
of ferrous foundries into these two groups was and is appropriate
because of significant differences in the raw materials, processes,
operations, control technologies, and types and quantities of HAP
emissions that are characteristic of the two industry classifications.
During the Foundry MACT rulemaking process, iron and steel foundries
were combined into a single source category, ostensibly for no other
reason than administrative and regulatory convenience and efficiency,
and that action has led to the imposition of regulatory requirements for
steel foundries that are not justified by the magnitude of HAP risks
posed by steel foundries.  Early discussions with the Agency during the
development of the rule suggested an understanding of the need for
separate categorization of steel foundries, but the rule was proposed
without consideration of the distinct differences from iron foundries.

In the background information document (“BID”) produced to respond
to comments on the proposed rule, EPA acknowledges its original intent
to develop separate standards for iron and steel foundries but justifies
its decision for setting a common standard by asserting there are
process similarities and that some foundries produce both iron and steel
castings.  However, neither of these arguments effectively responds to
industry comments or provides justification for the sweeping application
of iron foundry standards to steel foundries.

Steel Foundry Processes Differ from Iron Foundries

While there are some similarities in processes, there are far more
differences.  Following is a summary of factors to substantiate this
conclusion.

Steel foundries produce different products and serve different markets
than iron foundries.  The technical requirements of these products
dictate different processes that have different emissions and controls.

Steel foundries employ either electric induction or electric arc
furnaces to melt steel scrap to produce steel for castings.  Although
some iron foundries also use electric furnaces, they more typically use
cupolas to produce iron castings.  Emissions from both induction and
electric arc furnaces are much lower than cupolas.  Moreover, electric
furnaces are controlled with fabric filters, which characteristically
have higher removal efficiencies than scrubbers, which are used to
control emissions from many iron cupolas.

Most steel foundries also have lower production capacities than iron
foundries.  In fact, the largest iron foundry has a capacity greater
than the entire output of the steel foundry industry.  Most steel
foundries do not qualify as major sources or have achieved synthetic
minor status and would not be subject to the MACT rule as a stand-alone
facility.  However, because some steel foundries are located at larger
production facilities where other HAP sources may make the larger
facility a major source, the steel foundry operations at those
facilities would be subject to Foundry MACT requirements, absent an
exclusion, even if minor of their own accord.

Steel foundries also use significantly different molding methods, binder
formulations, and pouring methods as compared to iron casting
operations.  Steel foundries using green sand molding do not use sea
coal, which has been identified as the largest source of HAPs in
casting.  In fact, four of the six largest steel foundries (based on
steel throughput) use graphite molds instead of sand.  Steel foundries
also use different chemical binders for core making and no-bake molds
because of different requirements for set times.  Pouring practices also
vary significantly.

These fundamental differences in processes result in significant
differences in types and amounts of HAP emissions and require separate
calculation of MACT floors and emission limits.  EPA has failed
adequately to explain its decision not to regulate steel foundries as a
separate subcategory.

With respect to production of both iron and steel castings at the same
facilities, because iron castings require lower temperatures, a few
steel foundries do produce iron castings as well, but the practice is
relatively rare.  In those cases, iron foundry MACT standards would
apply to iron casting operations, but that is no justification for
applying the iron foundry requirements to all steel casting operations.
Just as it would be inappropriate to apply Integrated Iron and Steel
Manufacturing MACT standards to facilities that also have electric arc
furnace steelmaking capability, it is also improper to apply standards
developed for iron foundries to steel foundries.

Finally, EPA notes in the BID that because at least one steel foundry
facility has a permit-based potential to emit greater than 25 tons/year
of HAPs, the Agency is “obligated to develop MACT standards for steel
foundries.”  Section 2.1 of BID.  However, the BID also notes that
some steel foundries with the estimated potential to emit more than 25
tons/year of HAPs have opted to accept limits through a federally
enforceable State operating permit to reduce their potential to emit to
less than major source threshold limits.  The Agency thus acknowledges
that facilities with potential to emit more than 25 tons/year of HAPs
can obtain synthetic minor status and be excluded from MACT
applicability.  Accordingly, EPA should not use a single example of a
facility that has not yet sought that status as justification for
establishing MACT limits for an entire industry, especially since those
emission limits are based primarily upon data from iron foundry
processes.

Based upon these factors, SFSA requests that EPA reconsider the
applicability of the Foundry MACT standard to steel foundries.  At the
very least, the Agency should consider steel foundries as a separate
subcategory and develop and re-propose requirements suited to that
subcategory.  The creation of a separate steel foundry subcategory is an
essential step to allow for consideration of a risk-based delisting as
described below.

EPA Should Consider Deleting Steel Foundries as a Subcategory Based on
Risk

	SFSA also requests that EPA consider a steel foundry subcategory based
on HAP risks associated with steel foundries.  Section 112 (c)(9) of the
Clean Air Act provides authority to EPA to delete sources from the list
of source categories subject to MACT rules if the Agency, in
consideration of a petition, determines that HAP emissions from all
sources in a category or subcategory are below prescribed risk
thresholds.

	SFSA believes the industry can make such a determination and proposes
to meet with EPA staff to determine the scope of work that would
constitute an adequate petition for EPA to delete steel foundries as a
subcategory of the Iron and Steel Foundry source category, based on risk
assessments.  We believe that by modeling appropriate HAPs emissions
data and conducting risk assessments for those steel foundries with the
greatest potential impact on risk we can demonstrate insignificant risk
for the entire steel foundry subcategory, and we wish to work closely
with EPA to be assured that we are addressing all relevant and
appropriate factors as we seek to make that demonstration in accordance
with section 112(c)(9).

EPA Should Establish a Low Risk Subcategory

	SFSA also requests that EPA consider the formation of a low-risk
subcategory for steel foundries, designate facilities that are clearly
within that subcategory, and provide a process for other facilities to
qualify for placement in that subcategory.  As part of the recently
signed (but not yet published) National Emission Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants: Plywood and Composite Wood Products (“Plywood
MACT”), EPA cites authority in section 112(c)(9) to establish a
low-risk subcategory of sources that would not be subject to the
categorical MACT requirements.  In that rule, EPA identified eight
specific facilities that clearly qualified as low-risk facilities
according to specified conservative criteria and established procedures
for other facilities in the Plywood source category to qualify for the
low-risk subcategory if certain criteria are met.

	If SFSA is unsuccessful in demonstrating that all steel foundry sources
have HAP risk levels that justify deletion of a steel foundry
subcategory, we would like to have the opportunity to show that a large
number of steel foundries otherwise subject to the MACT rule could make
a demonstration of low risk and justify the formation of a low-risk
subcategory as was done in the Plywood MACT rule.  This would then
provide the opportunity for other steel foundry facilities that may not
clearly fall into the low-risk subcategory to demonstrate, following
prescribed procedures, that they qualify for the low-risk subcategory.

	Neither of the risk-based delisting alternatives described above was
proposed or commented upon as part of this rule because EPA did not
recognize the extent of its authority under section 112(c)(9).  SFSA
understands that the burden to demonstrate the minimal HAP risks of
steel foundries rests with the industry and is prepared to undertake the
necessary analyses.  We wish to cooperate with EPA in defining the scope
of work and the criteria on which a determination will be based.

---

	We strongly urge EPA to take the necessary administrative action to
make the changes requested.  The foundry industry and EPA were making
significant progress toward the delisting of steel foundries before
numerous changes in EPA’s personnel working on this rule and time
constraints led to a decision to include all foundries in a single rule
simply for sake of convenience.  We believe the steel foundry industry
poses minimal environmental risk as a source of HAPs and should be
exempted altogether from the Foundry MACT rule or be regulated as a
subcategory to reflect the different processes and lower risk from these
facilities.  As a minimum, the Agency should provide a mechanism for
steel foundries that may qualify as major sources of HAPs to make a
demonstration that individual facilities in the source category pose
risks below thresholds set forth in the Clean Air Act and are therefore
not subject to the Foundry MACT regulatory requirements.

	We look forward to a timely response to this petition, and
representatives of SFSA stand ready and willing to meet with EPA staff
at your convenience to clarify our comments or elaborate on their
importance.  Please have your appropriate staff contact Raymond Monroe
(815-455-8240 or   HYPERLINK<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>)
or John Wittenborn<PHONE_NUMBER> or   HYPERLINK
<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>) with questions or to make arrangements for further discussion.

Sincerely,

John L. Wittenborn

Counsel to Steel Founders’ Society of America

cc:	Steve Fruh

	Jeffrey R. Holmstead

	Raymond W. Monroe

 See “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP) for Iron and Steel Foundries – Background Information for
Promulgated Standards,” Docket ID No. OAR-2002-0034-0144, August 2003.

(...continued)

(...continued)

 PAGE

 PAGE   5


[Federal Register: July 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 145)]
[Notices]
[Page 43798-43799]
[DOCID:fr28jy08-113]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-58205; File No. 4-443]

Joint Industry Plan; Order Granting Permanent Approval to
Amendment No. 1 to the Plan for the Purpose of Developing and
Implementing Procedures Designed To Facilitate the Listing and Trading
of Standardized Options

July 22, 2008.

I. Introduction

    On May 15, 2008, May 15, 2008, May 13, 2008, May 6, 2008, May 13,
2008, May 7, 2008, May 13, 2008, and May 8, 2008, the American Stock
Exchange LLC (``Amex''), the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (``BSE''),
Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (``CBOE''), the
International Securities Exchange, LLC (``ISE''), The NASDAQ Stock
Market LLC (``Nasdaq''), NYSE Arca Inc. (``NYSE Arca''), the
Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx''), and the Options Clearing
Corporation (``OCC'') respectively, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 11A of the
Securities Exchange Act \1\ of 1934 (``Act'') and Rule 608
thereunder,\2\ Amendment No. 1 to the Plan for the Purpose of
Developing and Implementing Procedures Designed to Facilitate the
Listing and Trading of Standardized Options (``the Options Listing
Procedures Plan'' or ``OLPP'').\3\ Amendment No. 1 would provide a
uniform time frame for the introduction of new Long-term Equity
AnticiPation (``LEAP'' or ``LEAPS'') series on equity option classes,
options on Exchange Traded Funds (``ETFs''), or options on Trust Issued
Receipts (``TIRs'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \2\ 17 CFR 242.608.
    \3\ On July 6, 2001, the Commission approved the OLPP, which was
originally proposed by the Amex, CBOE, ISE, OCC, Phlx, and Pacific
Exchange, Inc. (k/n/a NYSE Arca). See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 44521, 66 FR 36809 (July 13, 2001). On February 5, 2004,
BSE was added as a sponsor to the OLPP. See Securities Exchange Act
Release No. 49199, 69 FR 7030 (February 12, 2004). On March 21,
2008, Nasdaq was added as a sponsor to the OLPP. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 57546 (March 21, 2008), 73 FR 16393 (March
27, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 22, 2008, the Commission issued notice of and approved
Amendment No. 1 on a temporary basis

not to exceed 120 days, and solicited comment on the proposal.\4\ The
Commission received no comment letters in response to the Temporary
Approval Order. This order approves Amendment No. 1 on a permanent
basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57848 (May 22,
2008), 73 FR 30985 (May 29, 2008) (``Temporary Approval Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    Currently, new January LEAPS are introduced shortly after the
groups of LEAPS with the least time to expiration are converted to a
conventional expiration symbol, generally when they have less than nine
months to expiration. The proposal provides for a uniform time frame
for the introduction of new LEAP series on equity option classes,
options on ETFs, or options on TIRs.
    By agreeing to a uniform time frame for the introduction of new
LEAP series, the Participants to the OLPP intend to mitigate the number
of option series available for trading during certain times of the
year. The Participants to the OLPP intend that this will in turn lessen
the rate of increase in quote traffic, because quotes will not be
generated in the not-yet-available series.
    The Participants to the OLPP represent that, for example, in 2007,
if this proposal had been in effect, the industry would have eliminated
one and a half billion (1,500,000,000) quotes over the three months of
June, July, and August, out of just less than 100 billion quotes over
all, for a savings of 1.5%. The affected series, however, generated
less than three million (3,000,000) contracts traded in the same
period, out of more than seven hundred eighty million (780,000,000)
contracts total industry volume, or approximately .38%. The exchanges
agree that the benefit from reduced quoting levels greatly exceeds the
small cost in missed business.
    In addition, the Participants to the OLPP may coordinate the date
of introduction of new LEAP classes, so as to provide the least
disruption on the options industry by having the flexibility to avoid
holidays, expiration periods, and industry-wide tests which are
scheduled from time to time.

III. Discussion

    After careful review, the Commission finds that Amendment No. 1 is
consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder.\5\ Specifically, the Commission finds that
Amendment No. 1 to the OLPP is consistent with Section 11A of the Act
\6\ and Rule 608 thereunder \7\ in that it is in the public interest
and appropriate for the protection of investors and the maintenance of
fair and orderly markets. Specifically, the Commission believes that by
adopting a uniform time frame for the introduction of new LEAP series
on equity option classes, options on ETFs, and options on TIRs, the
options exchanges should reduce the number of option series available
for trading during certain times of the year, and thus may reduce
increases in the options quote rate because market participants would
not be submitting quotes in the not-yet-available LEAP series.
Accordingly, the Commission believes that it is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors and
the maintenance of fair and orderly markets, to remove impediments to,
and perfect mechanisms of, a national market system to approve
Amendment No. 1 to the OLPP on a permanent basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In approving this proposed OPRA Plan Amendment, the
Commission has considered its impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \7\ 17 CFR 242.608.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 11A of the Act,\8\ and
Rule 608 thereunder,\9\ that proposed Amendment No. 1 to the OLPP be,
and it hereby is, approved on a permanent basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1.
    \9\ 17 CFR 242.608.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(29).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-17213 Filed 7-25-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 7, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34750-34751]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12160]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2014-0214; FMCSA-2017-0180; FMCSA-2019-0033; FMCSA-
2019-0034]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Epilepsy and
Seizure Disorders

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for five
individuals from the requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations (FMCSRs) that interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV)
drivers have ``no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of
epilepsy or any other condition which is likely to cause loss of
consciousness or any loss of ability to control a CMV.'' The exemptions
enable these individuals who have had one or more seizures and are
taking anti-seizure medication to continue to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.

DATES: Each group of renewed exemptions were applicable on the dates
stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates provided
below.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Viewing Comments

    To view comments go to www.regulations.gov. Insert the docket
number, FMCSA-2014-0214, FMCSA-2017-0180, FMCSA-2019-0033, or FMCSA-
2019-0034 in the keyword box, and click ``Search.'' Next, sort the
results by ``Posted (Newer-Older),'' choose the first notice listed,
and click ``Browse Comments.'' If you do not have access to the
internet, you may view the docket online by visiting Dockets Operations
in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building,

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. To be
sure someone is there to help you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> or (202)
366-9826 before visiting Dockets Operations.

B. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(6), DOT solicits comments
from the public on the exemption request. DOT posts these comments,
without edit, including any personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On October 1, 2021, FMCSA published a notice announcing its
decision to renew exemptions for five individuals from the epilepsy and
seizure disorders prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) to operate a CMV
in interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (86 FR
54505). The public comment period ended on November 1, 2021, and no
comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that renewing these exemptions would achieve a level of
safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved
by complying with Sec.  391.41(b)(8).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding epilepsy
found in Sec.  391.41(b)(8) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which
is likely to cause the loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to
control a CMV.
    In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory
criteria \1\ to assist medical examiners in determining whether drivers
with certain medical conditions are qualified to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ These criteria may be found in APPENDIX A TO PART 391--
MEDICAL ADVISORY CRITERIA, section H. Epilepsy: Sec.  391.41(b)(8),
paragraphs 3, 4, and 5, which is available on the internet at
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2015-title49-vol5/pdf/CFR-2015-title49-vol5-part391-appA.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

IV. Conclusion

    Based on its evaluation of the five renewal exemption applications,
FMCSA announces its decision to exempt the following drivers from the
epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in Sec.  391.41(b)(8).
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), the following
groups of drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of October
and are discussed below. As of October 4, 2021, and in accordance with
49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), the following four individuals have
satisfied the renewal conditions for obtaining an exemption from the
epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate
CMV drivers (86 FR 54505):

Daniel Maben (MI)
Michael Miller (TX)
William Swann (MD)
Tyler Tilseth (NM)

    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2014-0214, FMCSA-
2017-0180, or FMCSA-2019-0033. Their exemptions were applicable as of
October 4, 2021 and will expire on October 4, 2023.
    As of October 15, 2021, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315(b), Adam Wilson (MN) has satisfied the renewal conditions for
obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure disorders
prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers. This driver was
included in docket number FMCSA-2019-0034. The exemption was applicable
as of October 15, 2021 and will expire on October 15, 2023.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b), each exemption will be valid
for 2 years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) the person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315(b).

Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-12160 Filed 6-6-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 27 (Friday, February 8, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2720-2723]
[FR Doc No: 2019-01133]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 31234; Amdt. No. 3836]

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

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and

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

DATES: This rule is effective February 8, 2019. The compliance date for
each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of February 8, 2019.

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

For Examination

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

Availability

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedures
and Airspace Group, Flight Technologies and Procedures Division, Flight
Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration. Mailing Address:
FAA Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, Flight Procedures and Airspace
Group, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Registry Bldg. 29 Room 104, Oklahoma
City, OK 73125. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

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

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

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

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as amended in the
transmittal. For safety and timeliness of change considerations, this
amendment incorporates only specific changes contained for each SIAP
and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as modified by FDC permanent NOTAMs.
    The SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, as modified by FDC
permanent NOTAM, and contained in this amendment are based on the
criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument
Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to SIAPs and Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific
conditions existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in
this rule have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an
emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to
published aeronautical charts.
    The circumstances that created the need for these SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP amendments require making them effective in less than
30 days.
    Because of the close and immediate relationship between these
SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find
that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are
impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where
applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making these
SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

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

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 11, 2019.
Rick Domingo,
Executive Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

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

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

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

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

* * * Effective Upon Publication

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        AIRAC date            State             City               Airport          FDC No.      FDC date                      Subject
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
28-Feb-19................  IA           Ames...............  Ames Muni..........       8/0236       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Amdt 1.
28-Feb-19................  IA           Ames...............  Ames Muni..........       8/0248       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Amdt 2.
28-Feb-19................  IA           Ames...............  Ames Muni..........       8/0250       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Amdt 1.
28-Feb-19................  WI           Sheboygan..........  Sheboygan County          8/0455       1/8/19  ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 22, Amdt 5A.
                                                              Memorial.
28-Feb-19................  WI           Sheboygan..........  Sheboygan County          8/0460       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Amdt 3A.
                                                              Memorial.
28-Feb-19................  WI           Sheboygan..........  Sheboygan County          8/0462       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Amdt 3A.
                                                              Memorial.
28-Feb-19................  WI           Sheboygan..........  Sheboygan County          8/0463       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Orig-A.
                                                              Memorial.
28-Feb-19................  IN           Goshen.............  Goshen Muni........       8/0748       1/8/19  ILS OR LOC RWY 27, Amdt 1.
28-Feb-19................  MI           Mason..............  Mason Jewett Field.       8/0979       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 10, Orig-C.
28-Feb-19................  MI           Mason..............  Mason Jewett Field.       8/0981       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 28, Orig-C.
28-Feb-19................  IL           Alton/St Louis.....  St Louis Rgnl......       8/1280       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 1A.
28-Feb-19................  FL           Palatka............  Palatka Muni--Lt          8/1650       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Orig-A.
                                                              Kay Larkin Field.
28-Feb-19................  FL           Palatka............  Palatka Muni--Lt          8/1653       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 9 , Orig-B.
                                                              Kay Larkin Field.
28-Feb-19................  VA           Fredericksburg.....  Shannon............       8/1909       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Orig-A.
28-Feb-19................  PA           Chambersburg.......  Franklin County           8/2099       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Orig-A.
                                                              Rgnl.
28-Feb-19................  NE           Valentine..........  Miller Field.......       8/2262       1/8/19  NDB RWY 32, Amdt 8.
28-Feb-19................  NE           Valentine..........  Miller Field.......       8/2265       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Amdt 1.
28-Feb-19................  TN           Cleveland..........  Cleveland Rgnl            8/2647       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, Amdt 2.
                                                              Jetport.
28-Feb-19................  NY           Weedsport..........  Whitfords..........       8/2807       1/8/19  Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig.
28-Feb-19................  GA           Jekyll Island......  Jekyll Island......       8/2891       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Orig-A.
28-Feb-19................  VA           Charlottesville....  Charlottesville-          8/3070       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) Z RWY 21, Amdt 1A.
                                                              Albemarle.
28-Feb-19................  MS           Tunica.............  Tunica Muni........       8/3448       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 3.
28-Feb-19................  NC           Goldsboro..........  Wayne Executive           8/3790       1/8/19  ILS OR LOC RWY 23, Amdt 2A.
                                                              Jetport.
28-Feb-19................  NC           Goldsboro..........  Wayne Executive           8/3791       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Amdt 1A.
                                                              Jetport.
28-Feb-19................  KY           Louisville.........  Bowman Field.......       8/4188       1/8/19  NDB RWY 33, Amdt 16A.
28-Feb-19................  KY           Louisville.........  Bowman Field.......       8/4190       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Amdt 3.
28-Feb-19................  TX           Corsicana..........  C David Campbell          8/4230       1/8/19  NDB RWY 14, Amdt 4B.
                                                              Field--Corsicana
                                                              Muni.
28-Feb-19................  TX           Corsicana..........  C David Campbell          8/4236       1/8/19  NDB RWY 32, Amdt 3B.
                                                              Field--Corsicana
                                                              Muni.
28-Feb-19................  TX           Corsicana..........  C David Campbell          8/4239       1/8/19  VOR/DME-A, Amdt 1B.
                                                              Field--Corsicana
                                                              Muni.
28-Feb-19................  TX           Corsicana..........  C David Campbell          8/4246       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Orig-B.
                                                              Field--Corsicana
                                                              Muni.
28-Feb-19................  WV           Ravenswood.........  Jackson County.....       8/4456       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Orig-A.
28-Feb-19................  VA           New Market.........  New Market.........       8/4507       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS)-B, Orig.
28-Feb-19................  NM           Albuquerque........  Albuquerque Intl          8/4554       1/8/19  ILS OR LOC RWY 8, Amdt 6.
                                                              Sunport.
28-Feb-19................  NY           Rome...............  Griffiss Intl......       8/5183       1/8/19  ILS OR LOC RWY 33, Amdt 2.
28-Feb-19................  FL           Daytona Beach......  Daytona Beach Intl.       8/6099       1/8/19  ILS OR LOC RWY 7L, Amdt 32.
28-Feb-19................  OR           Redmond............  Roberts Field......       8/6153       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 29, Amdt 2A.
28-Feb-19................  PR           San Juan...........  Fernando Luis Ribas       8/7172       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Orig.
                                                              Dominicci.
28-Feb-19................  AL           Vernon.............  Lamar County.......       8/7374       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig.
28-Feb-19................  NC           Pinehurst/Southern   Moore County.......       8/7378       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Amdt 2A.
                                         Pines.
28-Feb-19................  TN           Cleveland..........  Cleveland Rgnl            8/7395       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Amdt 2.
                                                              Jetport.
28-Feb-19................  ME           Augusta............  Augusta State......       8/7919       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS)-B, Orig-B.
28-Feb-19................  ME           Augusta............  Augusta State......       8/7920       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Orig-A.
28-Feb-19................  FL           Williston..........  Williston Muni.....       8/8015       1/8/19  VOR RWY 23, Amdt 1A.
28-Feb-19................  FL           Williston..........  Williston Muni.....       8/8062       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Orig-A.
28-Feb-19................  FL           Williston..........  Williston Muni.....       8/8063       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Orig-A.
28-Feb-19................  PA           Pottstown..........  Heritage Field.....       8/8126       1/8/19  VOR/DME-A, Amdt 4.
28-Feb-19................  ME           Lincoln............  Lincoln Rgnl.......       8/8127       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Orig-A.
28-Feb-19................  PA           Collegeville.......  Perkiomen Valley...       8/8333       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS)-C, Orig.
28-Feb-19................  PA           Collegeville.......  Perkiomen Valley...       8/8334       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS)-B, Orig.
28-Feb-19................  NY           Olean..............  Cattaraugus County-       8/8420       1/8/19  Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3.
                                                              Olean.
28-Feb-19................  PA           Philadelphia.......  Philadelphia Intl..       8/8689       1/8/19  ILS OR LOC RWY 26, Amdt 4C.
28-Feb-19................  MA           Pittsfield.........  Pittsfield Muni....       8/8690       1/8/19  Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 2.
28-Feb-19................  SC           Georgetown.........  Georgetown County..       8/8983       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Amdt 2A.
28-Feb-19................  SC           Georgetown.........  Georgetown County..       8/9737       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Orig-A.
28-Feb-19................  IN           Rensselaer.........  Jasper County......       8/9844       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Orig-B.

28-Feb-19................  IN           Rensselaer.........  Jasper County......       8/9845       1/8/19  RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Orig-B.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2019-01133 Filed 2-7-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P