[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 67 (Friday, April 6, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20879-20881]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8384]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2012-0039]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

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

ACTION: Notice of applications for exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 13 individuals
for exemption from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations. If granted, the exemptions would enable these
individuals to qualify as drivers of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs)
in interstate commerce without meeting the Federal vision requirement.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 7, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2012-0039 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket numbers for this notice. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below
for further information.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the FDMS published in
the Federal Register on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-785.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical

Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for a 2-year period
if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety
that is equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved
absent such exemption.'' FMCSA can renew exemptions at the end of each
2-year period. The 13 individuals listed in this notice have each
requested such an exemption from the vision requirement in 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10), which applies to drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce.
Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate the qualifications of each
applicant to determine whether granting an exemption will achieve the
required level of safety mandated by statute.

Qualifications of Applicants

Juan Castanon

    Mr. Castanon, age 46, has complete loss of vision in his right due
to a traumatic injury sustained at age 9. The visual acuity in his left
eye is 20/20. Following an examination in 2011, his optometrist noted,
``I feel that Mr. Castanon is able to drive a commercial vehicle
without glasses safely.'' Mr. Castanon reported that he has driven
straight trucks for 6 years, accumulating 2,304 miles. He holds a Class
D operator's license from New Mexico. His driving record for the last 3
years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
Commercial Motor Vehicle (CMV).

Donald F. Erke

    Mr. Erke, 70, has had amblyopia in his right eye since childhood.
The best corrected visual acuity in his right eye is 20/200, and in his
left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2011, his optometrist
noted, ``It is my medical opinion that Mr. Erke has sufficient vision
to perform any and all driving tasks required to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Erke reported that he has driven straight trucks for 17
years, accumulating 1.5 million miles and tractor-trailer combinations
for 25 years, accumulating 2.3 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL
from Michigan. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes
and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Ronald D. Flanery

    Mr. Flanery, 44, has had amblyopia in his left eye since childhood.
The best corrected visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his
left eye, 20/100. Following an examination in 2011, his ophthalmologist
noted, ``Based upon my findings and medical expertise, I Daniel Ewen,
MD hereby certify Ronald Flanery to be visually able to safely operate
a commercial motor vehicle.'' Mr. Flanery reported that he has driven
straight trucks for 15 years, accumulating 465,000 miles and tractor-
trailer combinations for 5 years, accumulating 1,250 miles. He holds a
Class A CDL from Kentucky. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows one crash, for which he was not cited and no convictions for
moving violations in a CMV.

Mark G. Kleinheider

    Mr. Kleinheider, 48, has a detached retina in his left due to a
traumatic injury sustained in 1989. The best corrected visual acuity in
his right eye is 20/20. Following an examination in 2011, his
ophthalmologist noted, ``It is my medical opinion that Mark has
sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a
commercial motor vehicle.'' Mr. Kleinheider reported that he has driven
straight trucks for 3 years, accumulating 60,000 miles and tractor-
trailer combinations for 3 years, accumulating 15,000 miles. He holds a
Class A CDL from Missouri. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a CMV.

Joseph C. Powell

    Mr. Powell, 57, has complete loss of vision in his right due to a
traumatic injury sustained 10 years ago. The visual acuity in his left
eye is 20/20. Following an examination in 2011, his optometrist noted,
``I certify that, in my medical opinion, Mr. Powell has sufficient
vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a commercial
vehicle.'' Mr. Powell reported that he has driven straight trucks for
15 years, accumulating 150,000 miles and tractor-trailer combinations
for 35 years, accumulating 1.12 million miles. He holds a Class A CDL
from Virginia. His driving record for the last 3 years shows no crashes
but one conviction for speeding in a CMV; he exceeded the speed limit
by 12 mph.

David L. Schachle

    Mr. Schachle, 40, has a prosthetic right eye due to a traumatic
injury sustained at 8 months old. The best corrected visual acuity in
his left eye is 20/20. Mr. Schachle reported that he has driven
straight trucks for 4 years, accumulating 120,000 miles. He holds a
Class A CDL from Pennsylvania. His driving record for the last 3 years
shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
Commercial Motor Vehicle (CMV).

Michael E. See

    Mr. See, 55, has complete loss of vision in his right due to a
traumatic injury sustained at age 3. The best corrected visual acuity
in his left eye is 20/15. Following an examination in 2011, his
optometrist noted, ``I believe you have sufficient vision to perform
the driving tasks required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. See
reported that he has driven straight trucks for 30 years, accumulating
1.2 million miles. He holds a Class B CDL from New York. His driving
record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for
moving violations in a CMV.

James A. Settlemyre

    Mr. Settlemyre, 59, has had esotropia in his left eye since
childhood. The best corrected visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20,
and in his left eye, 20/60. Following an examination in 2011, his
optometrist noted, ``In my medical opinion, I feel James Settlemyre has
sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required to operate a
commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Settlemyre reported that he has driven
straight trucks for 8 years, accumulating 1 million miles. He holds a
chauffeur's license from Indiana. His driving record for the last 3
years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
CMV.

Steven K. Simone

    Mr. Simone, 61, has had keratoconus in his left eye for 30 years.
The best corrected visual acuity in his right eye is 20/40, and in his
left eye 20/400. Following an examination in 2011, his optometrist
noted, ``I feel Steve is sufficient to perform the driving tasks
required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Simone reported that he
has driven straight trucks for 42 years, accumulating 3.4 million
miles. He holds a Class C operator's license from Kansas. His driving
record for the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for
moving violations in a CMV.

Mark J. Sobczyk

    Mr. Sobczyk, 25, has had amblyopia in his left eye since childhood.
The best corrected visual acuity in his right eye is 20/20, and in his
left eye, 20/200.

Following an examination in 2011, his ophthalmologist noted, ``I
certify that Mark Sobczyk's ocular condition is satisfactory for
operating commercial vehicles.'' Mr. Sobczyk reported that he has
driven straight trucks for 5\1/2\ years, accumulating 206,000 miles. He
holds a Class A CDL from Wisconsin. His driving record for the last 3
years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
CMV.

Richard D. Sparkman

    Mr. Sparkman, 62, has complete loss of vision in his right due to a
traumatic injury sustained as a child. The best corrected visual acuity
in his left eye is 20/20. Following an examination in 2011, his
ophthalmologist noted, ``Based on the above information, I believe the
patient has sufficient vision to perform the driving tasks required by
his current commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Sparkman reported that he has
driven straight trucks for 10 years, accumulating 520,000 miles. He
holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania. His driving record for the last
3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations in a
CMV.

Joshua A. Wheaton

    Mr. Wheaton, 30, has a detached retina in his left due to a
traumatic injury sustained in 1997. The visual acuity in his right eye
is 20/20, and in his left eye, no light perception. Following an
examination in 2011, his optometrist noted, ``I feel that Joshua has
more than adequate vision to perform any driving tasks required to
operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Wheaton reported that he has driven
straight trucks for 5 years, accumulating 225,000 miles. He holds a
Class C operator's license from Pennsylvania. His driving record for
the last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving
violations in a CMV.

John K. Wright

    Mr. Wright, 47, has had amblyopia in his right eye since birth. The
best corrected visual acuity in his right eye is 20/400, and in his
left eye, 20/20. Following an examination in 2011, his optometrist
noted, ``This meets the vision requirement to perform the driving tasks
required to operate a commercial vehicle.'' Mr. Wright reported that he
has driven straight trucks for 3\1/2\ years, accumulating 105,000 miles
and tractor-trailer combinations for 6 months, accumulating 30,000
miles. He holds a Class A CDL from Montana. His driving record for the
last 3 years shows no crashes and no convictions for moving violations
in a CMV.

Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA requests
public comment from all interested persons on the exemption petitions
described in this notice. The Agency will consider all comments
received before the close of business May 7, 2012. Comments will be
available for examination in the docket at the location listed under
the ADDRESSES section of this notice. The Agency will file comments
received after the comment closing date in the public docket, and will
consider them to the extent practicable.
    In addition to late comments, FMCSA will also continue to file, in
the public docket, relevant information that becomes available after
the comment closing date. Interested persons should monitor the public
docket for new material.

    Issued on: April 2, 2012.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-8384 Filed 4-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 67 (Thursday, April 7, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20264-20265]
[FR Doc No: 2016-07943]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 23

[Docket No. FAA-2015-1621]

Revision of Airworthiness Standards for Normal, Utility,
Acrobatic, and Commuter Category Airplanes; Notice of Public Meeting

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA announces public meeting on its proposal to revise
Part 23 Airworthiness Standards for Normal, Utility, Acrobatic, and
Commuter Category Airplanes. The purpose of the public meeting is for
the FAA to explain and answer questions concerning the language related
to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) (81 FR 13452, March 14,
2016).

DATES: The public meetings will be held on the following dates: (Note
that the meetings may be adjourned early if the agenda is completed in
less time than is scheduled for the meetings.)
     May 3, 2016 from 8:00 a.m. until no later than 5:00 p.m.
     May 4, 2016 from 8:00 a.m. until no later than 5:00 p.m.
    The NPRM written comment period will close on May 13, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The May 3 and 4, 2016, public meeting will be held at the
Georgia International Convention Center, 2000 Convention Center
Concourse, College Park, GA 30294.
    Written comments (identified by docket number FAA-2015-1621) may be
submitted using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending comments
electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Hand Delivery: Docket Operations 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.
    Written comments to the docket will receive the same consideration
as statements made at the public meeting. For more information on the
rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided by the commenter. Using the search function of the
FAA's docket Web site, anyone can find and read the comments received
into any of the agency's dockets, including the name of the individual
sending the comment (or signing the comment for an association,
business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement may
be reviewed in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19476) or at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time or in Docket Operations 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: Mr. Lowell Foster, Small Airplane
Directorate, ACE-111, Federal Aviation Administration, 901 Locust
Street,

Kansas City, MO 64106; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile (816) 329-
4090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On March 14, 2016, the FAA published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) titled ``Revision of Airworthiness Standards for
Normal, Utility, Acrobatic, and Commuter Category Airplanes''. The FAA
proposes in this NPRM to amend its airworthiness standards for normal,
utility, acrobatic, and commuter category airplanes by removing current
prescriptive design requirements and replacing them with performance-
based airworthiness standards. The proposed standards would also
replace the current weight and propulsion divisions in part 23 with
performance- and risk-based divisions for airplanes with a maximum
seating capacity of 19 passengers or less and a maximum takeoff weight
of 19,000 pounds or less. The proposed airworthiness standards are
based on, and would maintain, the level of safety of the current part
23. Finally, the FAA proposes to adopt additional airworthiness
standards to address certification for flight in icing conditions,
enhanced stall characteristics, and minimum control speed to prevent
departure from controlled flight for multiengine airplanes. The NPRM
addresses the Congressional mandate set forth in the Small Airplane
Revitalization Act of 2013 \1\ (Pub. L. 113-53, 49 U.S.C. 44704 note).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/1848/text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Purpose of the Public Meetings

    The purpose of the public meetings is for the FAA to discuss the
NPRM, hear the public's questions, address any confusion, and obtain
information relevant to the final rule under consideration. The FAA
will consider comments made at the public meetings before making a
final decision on issuance of the final rule.

Public Meeting Procedures

    A panel of representatives from the FAA will be present. An FAA
representative will facilitate the meetings in accordance with the
following procedures:
    (1) There will be no admission fees or other charges to attend or
to participate in the public meetings. The meetings will be open to all
persons, subject to availability of space in the meeting room. The FAA
will make every effort to accommodate all persons wishing to attend.
The FAA asks that participants sign in between 7:00-8:00 a.m. on the
day of the meeting being attended. The meetings may adjourn early if
the agenda items are completed in less time than is scheduled for the
meetings.
    (2) The meetings will be recorded by a court reporter. A transcript
of the meetings and all material accepted by the panel during the
meetings will be included in the public docket, unless protected from
disclosure. Each person interested in purchasing a copy of a transcript
should contact the court reporter directly. Information on how to
purchase a transcript will be available at the meetings.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 1, 2016.
James M. Crotty,
Acting Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2016-07943 Filed 4-6-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 59 (Wednesday, March 29, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15474-15476]
[FR Doc No: 2017-06174]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0961; Directorate Identifier 2011-NE-22-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce Corporation Turboshaft
Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2015-02-
22, which applies to certain Rolls-Royce Corporation (RRC) model 250
turboprop and turboshaft engines. AD 2015-02-22 currently requires
repetitive visual inspections and fluorescent-penetrant inspection
(FPIs) on certain 3rd-stage and 4th-stage turbine wheels for cracks in
the turbine wheel blades. Since we issued AD 2015-02-22, we determined
that it is necessary to remove the 4th-stage wheels at the next
inspection. We are also proposing to revise the applicability to remove
all RRC turboprop engines and add additional turboshaft engines. This
proposed AD would require repetitive visual inspections and FPIs of
3rd-stage turbine wheels while removing from service 4th-stage turbine
wheels. We are proposing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on
these products.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 15, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above 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-2011-
0961; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The street address for the Docket
Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Tallarovic, Aerospace Engineer,
Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 2300 E. Devon Ave., Des
Plaines, IL 60018; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this NPRM. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2011-0961;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NE-22-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this NPRM. We will
consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this
NPRM because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this NPRM.

Discussion

    On January 20, 2015, we issued AD 2015-02-22, Amendment 39-18090
(80 FR 5452, February 2, 2015), (``AD 2015-02-22''), for certain RRC
250-B17, -B17B, -B17C, -B17D, -B17E, -B17F, -B17F/1, -B17F/2, turboprop
engines; and 250-C20, -C20B, -C20F, -C20J, -C20R, -C20R/1, -C20R/2, -
C20R/4, -C20S, and -C20W turboshaft engines. Note that, for the
purposes of this proposed AD, we now consider the RRC 250-C20S engine a
turboprop engine. RRC engine type certificate data sheet No. E4CE,
Revision 42, dated June 29, 2010, classifies it as a turboshaft engine,
but then clarifies in Note 11 that it functions as a turboprop engine.
    AD 2015-02-22 requires repetitive visual inspections and FPIs on
certain

3rd-stage and 4th-stage turbine wheels. AD 2015-02-22 resulted from the
determination that the one-time inspections required by AD 2012-14-06
(77 FR 40479, July 10, 2012) should be changed to repetitive
inspections. We issued AD 2015-02-22 to prevent failure of 3rd-stage
and 4th-stage turbine wheel blades, damage to the engine, and damage to
the aircraft.

Actions Since AD 2015-02-22 Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2015-02-22, we determined that it is necessary
to remove the 4th-stage wheels at the next inspection, before the
scheduled life limit for these wheels. We also determined that the RRC
turboprop engines are not susceptible to the unsafe condition and
therefore do not require inspection or removal. We are, therefore, not
including RRC turboprop engines in the applicability of this proposed
AD. Additionally, we determined two additional part number turbine
wheels are susceptible to the unsafe condition and are being included
in this proposed AD.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would retain certain requirements of AD 2015-02-
22. This proposed AD would revise the requirement for the initial
inspection from 1,750 hours since last inspection (HSLI) to 1,775 hours
since last visual inspection and FPI or before the next flight after
the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later. Based on
discussions with the manufacturer, we found that 1,775 hours since last
visual inspection and FPI is an appropriate interval. We are also
requiring inspections for additional part number wheels: (P/N)
RR30000236 for the 3rd-stage turbine wheel and P/N RR30000240 for the
4th-stage turbine wheel.
    This proposed AD would continue to require repetitive inspections
of 3rd-stage turbine wheels. This proposed AD would also require
removing from service 4th-stage turbine wheels at a reduced life limit.
In addition, this proposed AD would add RRC 250-C300/A1 and 250-C300/B1
turboshaft engines in the applicability.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 3,769 engines installed
on airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
              Action                      Labor cost             Parts cost           product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspect 3rd-stage wheels, part      1 work-hour x $85 per  $0...................             $85        $320,365
 number (P/N) 23065818 or            hour = $85.
 RR30000236.
Replace 4th-stage wheel, P/N        0 work-hours x $85     $5,653 (pro-rated              $5,653     $21,306,157
 23055944 or RR30000240.             per hour = $0.         cost of part).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the 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.

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 removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2015-02-22, Amendment 39-18090 (80 FR 5452, February 2, 2015), and
adding the following new AD:

Rolls-Royce Corporation: Docket No. FAA-2011-0961; Directorate
Identifier 2011-NE-22-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by May 15, 2017.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2015-02-22,
Amendment 39-18090 (80 FR 5452, February 2, 2015).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Rolls-Royce Corporation (RRC) 250-C20, -C20B,
-C20F, -C20J, -C20R, -C20R/1, -C20R/2, -C20R/4, -C20W, -C300/A1, and
-C300/B1 turboshaft engines with either a 3rd-stage turbine wheel,
part number (P/N) 23065818 or RR30000236, or a 4th-stage turbine
wheel, P/N 23055944 or RR30000240, installed.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 7250, Turbine
Section.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by in-service turbine wheel blade failures
that revealed the need for changes to the inspections of certain
3rd-stage turbine wheels and removal from service of certain 4th-
stage turbine wheels. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of
the 3rd-stage and 4th-stage turbine wheel blades, damage to the
engine, and damage to the aircraft.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.
    (1) Within 1,775 hours since last visual inspection and
fluorescent-penetrant inspection (FPI) or before the next flight
after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later:
    (i) Remove 3rd-stage turbine wheels, P/N 23065818, and perform a
visual inspection and an FPI on the removed turbine wheels for
cracks at the trailing edge of the turbine blades, near the fillet
at the rim.
    (ii) Thereafter, re-inspect the affected turbine wheels every
1,775 hours since last inspection (HSLI).
    (2) Within 2,025 hours after the effective date of this AD:
    (i) Remove 3rd-stage turbine wheels, P/N RR30000236, and perform
a visual inspection and an FPI on the removed turbine wheels for
cracks at the trailing edge of the turbine blades, near the fillet
at the rim.
    (ii) Thereafter, re-inspect the turbine wheels every 2,025 HSLI.
    (3) Any time the power turbine is disassembled, perform a visual
inspection and an FPI on 3rd-stage turbine wheels, P/N 23065818 or
P/N RR30000236, for cracks at the trailing edge of the turbine
blades, near the fillet at the rim.
    (4) Do not return to service any turbine wheels found to have
cracks.
    (5) Within 1,775 HSLI, or at the next engine shop visit,
whichever occurs later, remove 4th-stage turbine wheels, P/N
23055944, from service.
    (6) Within 2,025 HSLI, or at the next engine shop visit,
whichever occurs later, remove 4th-stage turbine wheels, P/N
RR30000240, from service.

(g) Definition

    For the purpose of this AD, ``engine shop visit'' is the
induction of an engine into the shop for maintenance involving the
separation of pairs of major mating engine flanges, except that the
separation of engine flanges solely for the purposes of
transportation without subsequent engine maintenance does not
constitute an engine shop visit.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, may
approve AMOCs for this AD. Use the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19
to make your request.

(i) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact John Tallarovic,
Aerospace Engineer, Chicago Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, 2300
E. Devon Ave., Des Plaines, IL 60018; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 847-
294-7834; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on March 17, 2017.
Thomas A. Boudreau,
Acting Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-06174 Filed 3-28-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


From:	Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US
To<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc:	Beth Hassett-Sipple/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, <EMAIL_ADDRESS>Scott Jenkins/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, <EMAIL_ADDRESS>Date:	06/05/2012 09:52 AM
Subject:	Fw: Final PM Policy Assessment - transmittal to CASAC PM Panel

Nathan,

Here are the documents that were sent to CASAC when we issued the final Policy Assessment.  They include the final policy assessment and my transmittal memo to CASAC.  Please let me know if you have any questions.

                                April 20, 2011
MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:  Transmittal of Policy Assessment for the Review of the Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards  -  Final Document

FROM: 	Lydia N. Wegman, Director 	/s/
           Health and Environmental Impacts Division
           Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

TO: 	         Holly Stallworth
               Designated Federal Officer
               Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee
               EPA Science Advisory Board Staff Office

      Attached is the final document, Policy Assessment for the Review of the Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards  (Policy Assessment, April 2011), prepared by the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) staff as part of EPA's ongoing review of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM).  The Policy Assessment presents considerations and conclusions relevant for EPA's review of the current primary (health-based) standards and secondary (welfare-based) standards for both fine and coarse particles.  This final document draws upon the evidence and information assessed and presented in the Integrated Science Assessment for Particulate Matter (ISA) prepared by EPA's National Center for Environmental Assessment and two risk and exposure assessment documents (REAs) prepared by OAQPS, the Quantitative Health Risk Assessment for Particulate Matter (Risk Assessment) and the Urban-Focused Visibility Assessment for Particulate Matter (Visibility Assessment).  These three final documents reflect consideration of comments from the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) Particular Matter Review Panel (the Panel) and the public on earlier drafts.

      The Policy Assessment reflects consideration of comments from the Panel, as well as public comments, on the second draft Policy Assessment, which was reviewed by the Panel at a meeting on July 26-27, 2010.  Comments from the Panel on the second draft Policy Assessment were provided to us in a September 10, 2010 letter (Samet, 2010a).  These comments, and the changes made in the final Policy Assessment in response to them, are summarized in the Attachment.

Availability of Final Document

      The Policy Assessment is being made available to the Panel in the form of the attached electronic file, which we request that you forward to members of the Panel.  This document is also available on the EPA website:  http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pm/s_pm_2007_pa.html.

	Please accept my gratitude for the advice the Panel has provided throughout our review of the Particulate Matter NAAQS.  I look forward to continuing our productive relationship.
Should you have any questions regarding the final Policy Assessment, please contact Ms. Beth Hassett-Sipple<PHONE_NUMBER>; email - hassett-sipple.beth@epa.gov).

cc: 	Vanessa Vu, SAB, OA
      Rosalina Rodriguez, OAQPS/HEID
      Karen Martin, OAQPS/HEID
      John Vandenberg, ORD/NCEA-RTP
      Debra Walsh, ORD/NCEA-RTP
      Mary Ross, ORD/NCEA-RTP
      Doug Johns, ORD/NCEA-RTP
      Lindsay Stanek, ORD/NCEA-RTP
      Beth Hassett-Sipple, OAQPS/HEID
      Zachary Pekar, OAQPS/HEID
      Pradeep Rajan, OAQPS/HEID
      Scott Jenkins, OAQPS/HEID
      Vicki Sandiford, OAQPS/HEID
      Meredith Lassiter, OAQPS/HEID
      Marc Pitchford, NOAA
      Chet Wayland, OAQPS/AQAD
      Phil Lorang, OAQPS/AQPD
      Lewis Weinstock, OAQPS/AQAD
      Patrick Dolwick, OAQPS/AQAD
      James Hemby, OAQPS/AQAD
                                  Attachment
CASAC Comments on Second Draft PM Policy Assessment and Responses to those Comments
      The CASAC PM Panel's comments and recommendations on the second draft of the PM Policy Assessment, as well as changes made in the final document in response to those comments for chapters 2 through 4, are summarized below.
Chapter 2 (Primary Standards for Fine Particles)
The Panel expressed agreement with a number of staff conclusions in the second draft Policy Assessment, and supported the following:
            *          The general approach for translating the available epidemiological evidence, risk information, and air quality information into the basis for reaching conclusions on the adequacy of the current standards and on alternative standards that are appropriate for consideration;
            *          Considering revisions to the current PM2.5 primary standard to provide increased public health protection;
            *          Returning to the strategy used in 1997 that considers a suite of standard levels in which the annual standard would be the "generally controlling" standard to provide primary protection for health effects associated with both long- and short-term PM2.5 exposures, in conjunction with a 24-hour standard set to provide supplemental protection;
            *          Revising the form of the annual standard to eliminate spatial averaging; and
            *          Revising the annual standard level within the range of 13 to 11 ug/m[3] in conjunction with retaining or revising the level of the 24-hour standard within a range of 35 to 30 ug/m[3].  The Panel stated that these ranges were "supported by the epidemiological and toxicological evidence, as well as by the risk and air quality information..."  However, the Panel requested further clarification on the rationale for the combinations of annual and 24-hour standards most strongly supported by the currently available information, as well the rationale for excluding other combinations within the ranges considered.
            *          In addition, the Panel encouraged staff to focus on information related to the concentrations that were most influential in generating the health effect estimates in individual studies to inform alternative annual standard levels (Samet, 2010a, p. 2).
            *          The Panel also commented that the approach presented in the second draft Policy Assessment to identify alternative 24-hour standard levels which focused on peak-to-mean ratios was not relevant for informing the actual level (Samet 2010a, p. 4)
Changes made in chapter 2 in the final Policy Assessment were primarily focused on improving and clarifying the approach for translating the epidemiological evidence into a basis for staff conclusions on potential alternative standard levels and more clearly articulating the basis for staff's conclusions related to alternative standard levels that are appropriate for consideration.  Specifically, we have updated and streamlined the discussion of the general approach used in the current review (section 2.1.3).  We have modified or added a number of figures that summarize the available epidemiological evidence, air quality information, and risk-based considerations (Figures 2-4 to 2-12).

In our discussion of evidence-based considerations to inform alternative annual standard levels (section <IP_ADDRESS>), we expanded and clarified the different approaches for characterizing the range of PM2.5 concentrations over which we have the most confidence in the associations observed in the epidemiological studies.  Consistent with the Panel's comments to consider more information from epidemiological studies related to the concentrations that were most influential in generating the health effect estimates in individual studies to inform staff conclusions on alternative annual standard levels that would provide appropriate protection for both long- and short-term exposures, we contacted several study investigators to obtain additional information on population-level data (i.e., health events, number of study participants).  In new analyses using distributional statistics, we considered these data in conjunction with air quality data to identify the broader range of PM2.5 concentrations that were most influential in generating health effect estimates in epidemiological studies, and, specifically, the range of PM2.5 concentrations below the long-term means over which we continue to have confidence in the associations observed in these epidemiological studies (Figures 2-7 and 2-8 and associated text).

In our discussion of evidence-based considerations to inform potential alternative 24-hour standards, consistent with the Panel's comments we focused on the epidemiological evidence from multi- and single-city short-term exposure studies to inform staff conclusions on alternative 24-hour standard levels appropriate to consider (section <IP_ADDRESS>, Figures 2-6 and 2-9).  In addition to the epidemiological evidence, we also considered air quality information to understand the implications of different combinations of alternative annual and 24-hour standards that would support the policy goal of focusing on a generally controlling annual standard in conjunction with a 24-hour standard that would provide supplementation protection (Figure 2-10).

In the second draft Policy Assessment, staff reached the preliminary conclusion that consideration should be given to alternative annual PM2.5 standard levels in the range of 13 to 11 ug/m[3], in conjunction with retaining the current 24-hour PM2.5 standard level of 35 ug/m[3], and that consideration could also be given to an alternative 24-hour PM2.5 standard level of 30 ug/m[3] particularly in conjunction with an annual standard of 11 ug/m[3].  As noted in section <IP_ADDRESS>, staff conclusions in the final Policy Assessment regarding alternative pairings of annual and 24-hour standards that are appropriate to consider differ somewhat from the pairings of annual and 24-hour standards discussed in the second draft Policy Assessment upon which the Panel based its advice.  In the final Policy Assessment, staff again concludes that consideration should be given to revising the current annual PM2.5 standard level to a level within the range of 13 to 11 ug/m[3].  Staff further concludes that the evidence most strongly supports consideration of an alternative annual standard level in the range of 12 to 11 ug/m[3].  In conjunction with consideration of an annual standard in the range of 12 to 11 ug/m[3], staff concludes it is appropriate to consider retaining the current 24-hour PM2.5 standard level at 35 ug/m[3].  In conjunction with consideration of an annual standard level of 13 ug/m[3], staff concludes there is limited support to consider revising the 24-hour PM2.5 standard level to somewhat below 35 ug/m[3], such as down to 30 ug/m[3].
These final staff conclusions reflect consideration of the Panel's comments as well as public comments on the second draft Policy Assessment and additional analyses, as described above.
Chapter 3 (Primary Standard for Coarse Particles)
In their review of the second draft Policy Assessment, the Panel recommended the following:
            *          Revising the current PM10 primary standard to provide increased public health protection against effects associated with exposures to PM10-2.5;
            *          Retaining PM10 as the indicator for thoracic coarse particles, while also encouraging research to provide information for future NAAQS reviews to inform consideration of alternative sizes (e.g., PM10-2.5) as well as components and sources;
            *          Retaining the 24-hour averaging time;
            *          Revising the form to the 98[th] percentile, while also noting that additional characterization is needed regarding the potential implications of such a change in form; and
            *          Setting the level of the revised standard within the range of 75 to 65 g/m[3].
Changes made to chapter 3 since the second draft Policy Assessment have been focused largely on improving and expanding the discussion of potential alternative standards in section 3.3.  In sections 3.3.3 and 3.3.4, we have included additional analysis and discussion of the potential public health impacts of revising the form and level of the current PM10 standard.  Specifically, section 3.3.3 discusses a new analysis of PM10 and PM10-2.5 air quality concentrations in U.S. locations and section 3.3.4 now includes an expanded discussion of PM10 air quality concentrations in U.S. study locations.  Section 3.3.4 also includes an expanded discussion of the relationship between the current standard level and 98[th] percentile PM10 concentrations.  Figure 3-8 presents a regional breakdown of this relationship, and the integration discussion in section 3.3.4 now includes more extensive consideration of different approaches to characterizing this relationship.  In addition, section 3.3.4 includes an expanded discussion of potential alternative standard levels, more clearly articulating the basis for staff's conclusions related to alternative levels that are appropriate for consideration.
Chapter 4 (Secondary Standard for PM-related Visibility)
The Panel expressed agreement with a number of staff conclusions included in the second draft Policy Assessment, including:
         *          Considering revisions to the current PM2.5 standards to provide increased protection against PM-related visibility impairment;
         *          Considering a PM2.5 light extinction indicator in preference to a PM2.5 mass indicator; and
         *          Considering secondary standards for a PM2.5 light extinction indicator in a range of 20 to 30 deciviews.
The Panel expressed its strong preference for directly measuring light extinction over using estimates based on mass measurements and recommended a fuller discussion of the reasons EPA staff believes this is not a feasible approach for this review.  We have expanded the discussion of this issue and added a citation to the recommendations of the advice we received from the Panel's Ambient Air Monitoring and Methods Subcommittee (Russell and Samet, 2010).

In its review of the first draft Policy Assessment, the Panel agreed with the staff conclusion that PM effects on visibility can vary widely and rapidly over the course of a day and such changes are almost instantaneously perceptible to human observers.  Based in part on this consideration, the Panel agreed that a 1-hour averaging time would be appropriate to consider in conjunction with a directly measured PM light extinction indicator, noting that a 1-hour averaging time is well within the instrument response times of the various currently available and developing optical monitoring methods that directly measure light extinction.  At that time, the Panel also advised that if a PM2.5 mass indicator were to be used, it would be appropriate to consider "somewhat longer averaging times  -  2 to 4 hours  -  to assure a more stable instrumental response" (Samet, 2010b, p. 19).  Thus, the Panel's views on averaging times that would be appropriate for consideration were predicated in part on the capabilities of monitoring methods that were available for the alternative indicators discussed in the draft PA.  We have interpreted the Panel's views on a multi-hour averaging time as extending to a sub-daily calculated PM2.5 light extinction indicator since PM2.5 mass measurements are also required for this indicator.

In preparing the final Policy Assessment, EPA staff conducted analyses to better understand data quality issues associated with the use of continuous Federal Equivalent Methods (FEMs) that were considered as the basis for hourly PM2.5 mass measurements (section <IP_ADDRESS>).  Based in part on these analyses, EPA staff concludes that it is appropriate to consider a 24-hour averaging time, in conjunction with a calculated PM2.5 light extinction indicator and appropriately specified standard level (sections <IP_ADDRESS> and <IP_ADDRESS>).  This conclusion reflects the judgment that PM2.5 light extinction calculated on a 24-hour basis is a reasonable and appropriate surrogate for sub-daily PM2.5 light extinction calculated on a 4-hour average basis.  This conclusion is also predicated on consideration of a 24-hour average standard level which we have interpreted as providing information on the acceptability of daytime visual air quality over an hourly or multi-hour exposure period (section 4.3.4).

Other changes included in the final Policy Assessment include an analysis of the performance of two somewhat differently defined calculated PM2.5 light extinction indicators using 2007-2009 data (revised Appendix F), removal of detailed material from Chapter 4 regarding a PM2.5 mass indicator (this material is still provided in Appendix E and several technical memos), and the addition of two new appendices, Appendix G and Appendix H.  Appendix G discusses the use of calculated 24-hour average PM2.5 light extinction as the indicator and averaging period for a secondary PM2.5 NAAQS that would be aimed at controlling daily maximum daylight 4-hour average light extinction conditions.  Appendix H provides information on the number and percentage of counties that likely would not meet the current and alternative secondary standards, similar to Appendices C and D which provides information related to the current and alternative primary standards.

We note that since earlier drafts of this Policy Assessment did not include discussion of a calculated PM2.5 indicator based on a 24-hour averaging time, CASAC did not have a basis to express any views regarding a 24-hour averaging time.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 56 (Friday, March 22, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 17598]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06587]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0006]

Special Local Regulation; Southern California Annual Marine
Events for the San Diego Captain of the Port Zone

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the 2013 San Diego Crew Classic
Special Local Regulation located in the regulated area encompasses that
portion of Mission Bay, San Diego, California bounded by Enchanted
Cove, Fiesta Island, Pacific Passage and DeAnza Point, from 7 a.m. to 7
p.m. on April 6, 2013 and 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on April 7, 2013. This
action is necessary to provide to provide for the safety of the
participants, crew, spectators, sponsor vessels of the event, and
general users of the waterway. During the enforcement period, no
spectators shall anchor, block, loiter in, or impede the transit of
participants or official patrol vessels in the regulated area during
the effective dates and times, unless cleared for such entry by Coast
Guard Patrol Commander or through an official supporting vessel.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 100.1101 will be enforced from 7 a.m.
to 7 p.m. on April 6, 2013 and 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on April 7, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email Petty Officer Bryan Gollogly, Waterways Management, U.S.
Coast Guard Sector San Diego, CA; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the Special
Local Regulation for the 2013 San Diego Crew Classic in 33 CFR 100.1101
from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on April 6, 2013 and from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on
April 7, 2013.
    Under provisions of 33 CFR 100.1101, a vessel may not enter the
regulated area, unless it receives permission from the COTP. Spectator
vessels may safely transit outside the regulated area but may not
anchor, block, loiter, or impede the transit of participants or
official patrol vessels. The Coast Guard may be assisted by other
Federal, State, or Local law enforcement agencies in enforcing this
regulation.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 100.1101 and 5
U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the
Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with extensive advance
notification of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to
Mariners. If the Captain of the Port or his designated representative
determines that the regulated area need not be enforced for the full
duration stated on this notice, he or she may use a Broadcast Notice to
Mariners to grant general permission to enter the regulated area.

    Dated: March 6, 2013.
S.M. Mahoney,
Captain, US Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2013-06587 Filed 3-21-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 50 (Thursday, March 14, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 16261]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05858]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER13-1033-000.
    Applicants: Linden VFT, LLC, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Linden VFT submits revisions to PJM OATT Schedule 16
to be effective 7/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 3/5/13.
    Accession Number: 20130305-5061.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/26/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1034-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: 2013-03-05 Concurrence with Blue Sky Ranch SGIA to be
effective 7/6/2012.
    Filed Date: 3/5/13.
    Accession Number: 20130305-5076.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/26/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1035-000.
    Applicants: Palmco Power CA, LLC.
    Description: Palmco Power CA FERC Electric Tariff to be effective
3/5/2013.
    Filed Date: 3/5/13.
    Accession Number: 20130305-5077.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/26/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1036-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: 2013-03-05--Concurrence with Dry Ranch SGIA to be
effective 7/6/2012.
    Filed Date: 3/5/13.
    Accession Number: 20130305-5078.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/26/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1037-000.
    Applicants: Southwestern Public Service Company.
    Description: 2013-3-5-GSEC-E&P-Mustang VI-0.1.0-NOC-Filing to be
effective 3/6/2013.
    Filed Date: 3/5/13.
    Accession Number: 20130305-5083.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/26/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1038-000.
    Applicants: Pennsylvania Electric Company.
    Description: Pennsylvania Electric Company submits Notice of
Cancellation of Rate Schedule No. 74 with American Municipal Power,
Inc.
    Filed Date: 3/5/13.
    Accession Number: 20130305-5100.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/26/13.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1039-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Original Service Agreement No. 3512; Queue No. X2-038
to be effective 2/7/2013.
    Filed Date: 3/5/13.
    Accession Number: 20130305-5104.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/26/13.
    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: March 5, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-05858 Filed 3-13-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: May 17, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 94)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 27403-27406]
[DOCID:fr17my10-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0714; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-041-AD;
Amendment 39-16290; AD 2010-10-11]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model EMB-135 and -145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -
145MP, and -145EP Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

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

    It was reported that after commanding the landing gear lever to
down the three green landing gear positioning indication was
displayed followed by the LG/LEVER DISAGREE EICAS [engine indicating
and crew alerting system] message. The crew decided to continue the
approach and landing procedure. As soon as the crew identified that
the landing gear was not extended properly, a go-around procedure
was successfully performed. During maneuver, the airplane settled
momentarily onto the flaps and belly.
* * * * *

The unsafe condition is the landing gear remaining in the up and locked
position during approach and landing. This condition could be
accompanied by an invalid EICAS landing gear position indication, which
could result in landing with gear in the up position and eliminate
controllability of the airplane on the ground. This may consequently
result in structural damage to the airplane. We are issuing this AD to
require actions to correct the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective June 21, 2010.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of June 21,
2010.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to
amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified
products. That supplemental NPRM was published in the Federal Register
on February 23, 2010 (75 FR 7998). That supplemental NPRM proposed to
correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI
states:

    It was reported that after commanding the landing gear lever to
down the three green landing gear positioning indication was
displayed followed by the LG/LEVER DISAGREE EICAS [engine indicating
and crew alerting system] message. The crew decided to continue the
approach and landing procedure. As soon as the crew identified that
the landing gear was not extended properly, a go-around procedure
was successfully performed. During maneuver, the airplane settled
momentarily onto the flaps and belly.
* * * * *

The unsafe condition is the landing gear remaining in the up and locked
position during approach and landing. This condition could be
accompanied by an invalid EICAS landing gear position indication, which
could result in landing with gear in the up position and eliminate
controllability of the airplane on ground. This may consequently result
in structural damage to the airplane. Required actions include
replacing the landing gear electronic unit with a new one having a new
part number. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI
in the AD docket.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the supplemental NPRM or on the
determination of the cost to the public.

Clarification of Credit Paragraph

    We have revised paragraph (g)(5) of this AD to clarify that doing
replacements in accordance with one of the service bulletins identified
in Table 1 of this AD, if done before the effective date of this AD, is
acceptable for compliance with the corresponding replacement required
by paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(3) of this AD.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD with the change described
previously. We determined that this change will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of the AD.

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI or Service Information

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

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 711 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 2 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate
is $85 per work-hour. Required parts will cost about $0 per product.
Where the service information lists required parts costs that are
covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge
for these parts. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected
parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based
on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators
to be $120,870, or $170 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The street address for
the Docket Operations office (telephone

(800) 647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available
in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2010-10-11 Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER):
Amendment 39-16290. Docket No. FAA-2009-0714; Directorate Identifier
2009-NM-041-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective June 21,
2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model EMB-135BJ, -135ER, -135KE, -135KL, -135LR, -145, -
145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -145MP, and -145EP airplanes;
certificated in any category; equipped with landing gear electronic
unit (LGEU) having part number (P/N) 355-022-002.

Subject

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

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:
    It was reported that after commanding the landing gear lever to
down the three green landing gear positioning indication was
displayed followed by the LG/LEVER DISAGREE EICAS [engine indicating
and crew alerting system] message. The crew decided to continue the
approach and landing procedure. As soon as the crew identified that
the landing gear was not extended properly, a go-around procedure
was successfully performed. During maneuver, the airplane settled
momentarily onto the flaps and belly.
* * * * *
The unsafe condition is the landing gear remaining in the up and
locked position during approach and landing. This condition could be
accompanied by an invalid EICAS landing gear position indication,
which could result in landing with gear in the up position and
eliminate controllability of the airplane on the ground. This may
consequently result in structural damage to the airplane. Required
actions include replacing the LGEU with a new one having a new part
number.

Compliance

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

Actions

    (g) Unless already done, do the following actions:
    (1) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD,
replace any LGEU having P/N 355-022-002 having a serial number (S/N)
1000 through 1999 inclusive with a new LGEU having P/N 355-022-003,
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of EMBRAER
Service Bulletin 145-32-0120, Revision 02, dated February 17, 2009;
or 145LEG-32-0032, Revision 02, dated February 17, 2009; as
applicable.
    (2) As of 12 months after the effective date of this AD, no
person may install on any airplane an LGEU having a P/N 355-022-002
having a S/N 1000 through 1999 inclusive.
    (3) Within 30 months after the effective date of this AD,
replace any LGEU having P/N 355-022-002 having a serial number not
identified in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, with a new LGEU having P/
N 355-022-003, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145-32-0120, Revision 02, dated February
17, 2009; or 145LEG-32-0032, Revision 02, dated February 17, 2009;
as applicable.
    (4) As of 30 months after the effective date of this AD, no
person may install on any airplane an LGEU having a P/N 355-022-002
and a serial number not identified in paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.
    (5) Replacing the LGEU is also acceptable for compliance with
the corresponding requirement of paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(3) of this
AD if done before the effective date of this AD in accordance with
one of the service bulletins identified in Table 1 of this AD.

                                        Table 1--Credit Service Bulletins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        EMBRAER Service Bulletin--                  Revision--                           Dated--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
145LEG-32-0032...........................  Original....................  October 8, 2008.
145LEG-32-0032...........................  01..........................  November 4, 2008.
145-32-0120..............................  Original....................  September 15, 2008.
145-32-0120..............................  01..........................  November 4, 2008.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FAA AD Differences

    Note 1: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows:
    Although EMBRAER Service Bulletins 145LEG-32-0032, Revision 02,
dated February 17, 2009; and 145-32-0120, Revision 02, dated
February 17, 2009; specify that no person may install on any
airplane an LGEU having P/N 355-022-002 as of 30 months after the
effective date of this AD, we have determined that no LGEU having P/
N 355-022-002 with a S/N 1000 through 1999 inclusive may be
installed as of 12 months after the effective date of this AD.
Allowing installation of those serial numbers beyond 12 months would
not address the identified unsafe condition and ensure an adequate
level of safety. This difference has been coordinated with the
Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil (ANAC).

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (h) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Todd
Thompson, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Related Information

    (i) Refer to MCAI Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2009-01-01,
effective January 8, 2009, as corrected by Brazilian Airworthiness
Directive Errata, effective January 20, 2009; EMBRAER Service
Bulletin 145-32-0120, Revision 02, dated February 17, 2009; and
EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145LEG-32-0032, Revision 02, dated February
17, 2009; for related information.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (j) You must use EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145-32-0120, Revision
02, dated February 17, 2009; and EMBRAER Service Bulletin 145LEG-32-
0032, Revision 02, dated February 17, 2009; as applicable; to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), Technical
Publications Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170--
Putim--12227-901 S[atilde]o Jose dos Campos--SP--BRASIL; telephone:
+55 12 3927-5852 or +55 12 3309-0732; fax: +55 12 3927-7546; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet: http://www.flyembraer.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington on April 29, 2010.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-10872 Filed 5-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Conversation Notes between oilfield personnel and ERG personnel regarding activities of hydraulic fracturing personnel.

		MEMORANDUM

To:	Robert Burt, Robert Stone, Bob Blicksilver OSHA
From:	John Eyraud and Chet Fenton, ERG
Date:	May 30, 2014
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject:	Conversation Notes Regarding Investigations of Small Hydraulic Fracturing Firm Activities

Discussion with Leslie Savage, Chief Geologist, Oil and Gas Division, Texas Railroad Commission, and John Eyraud, ERG, May 6, 2014.

Yes, there are 1-day frac jobs. Yes, there are operations that can set up in morning, frac for an hour, and leave. This would not likely happen in Eagle Ford and Barnett oil fields but in West Texas, Permian Basin. There are lots of `mom and pop' oil companies, with shallow vertical wells. She, however, does not have a chance to see these operations personally.

Rick Henderson, Field Supervisor, Michigan Div of Oil and Gas and Minerals.
5/8/14

Yes, some frac jobs can be done in a day. It depends. These are shallow wells, most have already been drilled and completed, 12,000 wells in Michigan. A few wells still get drilled and fracked, this still occurs. We had 2,000 (wells and fracking as a completion activity) done in 1 year. Now only 50 a year, all in Antrim production zone primarily; these are vertical wells and are hydraulically fractured. Antrim
There is also the Lachine production zone, which is the thicker one. There had two zones fracked.

Companies first had 40 acre spacing and then 80 acre spacing and then to 125 acre spacing. The rule of 5 wells per 640 acres worked well for the field. Where the Antrim is involved, they drilled it up basically. So there is little new drilling now going on.

No refracks of older wells are done here. Only time is when new geologic info is generated that would cause them to produce more and or do something different.

Not always 1 well on the pad; there's a supervisor's twinning order. There is a zone in upper Antrim, it doesn't occur over as wide an area, and because of pressure difference, sometimes they just drill a new well rather than repair the first well. In those instances, the order by supervisor allows new well drilling as close as 25 feet apart from previous well. So sometimes two wells are on a location. Or there's a stray hole and an offsetting well.

The frac crews will move sand on these sites, using sand movers. They don't use all those chemicals; these are simpler fracs, but case by case situation. They will bring a big pump. There could be more than 5 or 6 companies on site. There are different service companies on site. They usually don't do test frac. Usually fracking here is a completion activity.

Takes an hour or few hours to actually frac? Well could be more. Lot of variables. If it's a multistage frack, they often do Lachine on one day and Norwood the next day. They set packers at 60 ft, and then do the Norwood, but have to isolate the zones, so run packers, run in and out. All that tripping takes time but these are still shallow wells. These run 800 to 2200 feet wells.

Tim Baker, Field Supervisor, Oklahoma Oil and Gas Commission. May 13, 2014

Many frac jobs are done in a day. We have many shallow wells in Oklahoma. There is a lot of shallow production. He could not estimate exactly how much frac work could be completed in a day.


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 105 (Wednesday, June 1, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33189-33192]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11681]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2022-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2239]

Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice lists communities where the addition or
modification of Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths,
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, or
the regulatory floodway (hereinafter referred to as flood hazard
determinations), as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and

where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS)
reports, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for
each community, is appropriate because of new scientific or technical
data. The FIRM, and where applicable, portions of the FIS report, have
been revised to reflect these flood hazard determinations through
issuance of a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR), in accordance with Federal
Regulations. The currently effective community number is shown in the
table below and must be used for all new policies and renewals.

DATES: These flood hazard determinations will be finalized on the dates
listed in the table below and revise the FIRM panels and FIS report in
effect prior to this determination for the listed communities.
    From the date of the second publication of notification of these
changes in a newspaper of local circulation, any person has 90 days in
which to request through the community that the Deputy Associate
Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation reconsider the changes. The
flood hazard determination information may be changed during the 90-day
period.

ADDRESSES: The affected communities are listed in the table below.
Revised flood hazard information for each community is available for
inspection at both the online location and the respective community map
repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current
effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for
comparison.
    Submit comments and/or appeals to the Chief Executive Officer of
the community as listed in the table below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The specific flood hazard determinations are
not described for each community in this notice. However, the online
location and local community map repository address where the flood
hazard determination information is available for inspection is
provided.
    Any request for reconsideration of flood hazard determinations must
be submitted to the Chief Executive Officer of the community as listed
in the table below.
    The modifications are made pursuant to section 201 of the Flood
Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance
with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.,
and with 44 CFR part 65.
    The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management
measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show
evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified
for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
    These flood hazard determinations, together with the floodplain
management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are
required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must
change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their
floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact
stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by
other Federal, State, or regional entities. The flood hazard
determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
    The affected communities are listed in the following table. Flood
hazard determination information for each community is available for
inspection at both the online location and the respective community map
repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current
effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for
comparison.

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

Michael M. Grimm,
Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Chief executive officer of                                   Online location of letter of map                           Community
        State and county            Location and case No.             community               Community map repository                 revision                Date of modification      No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colorado:
    Arapahoe....................  City of Centennial        The Honorable Stephanie Piko,  Southeast Metro Stormwater     https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Sep. 2, 2022.........       080315
                                   (21[dash]08[dash]0915P)   Mayor, City of Centennial,     Authority, 7437 South          advanceSearch.
                                   .                         13113 East Arapahoe Road,      Fairplay Street, Centennial,
                                                             Centennial, CO 80112.          CO 80112.
    Arapahoe....................  City of Centennial        The Honorable Stephanie Piko,  Southeast Metro Stormwater     https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Sep. 2, 2022.........       080315
                                   (22[dash]08[dash]0055P)   Mayor, City of Centennial,     Authority, 7437 South          advanceSearch.
                                   .                         13113 East Arapahoe Road,      Fairplay Street, Centennial,
                                                             Centennial, CO 80112.          CO 80112.
    Arapahoe....................  Unincorporated areas of   The Honorable Nancy Jackson,   Arapahoe County Public Works   https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Sep. 2, 2022.........       080011
                                   Arapahoe County           Chair, Arapahoe County Board   and Development Department,    advanceSearch.
                                   (21[dash]08[dash]0915P)   of Commissioners, 5334 South   6924 South Lima Street,
                                   .                         Prince Street, Littleton, CO   Centennial, CO 80112.
                                                             80120.
    Douglas.....................  Town of Castle Rock       The Honorable Jason Gray,      Stormwater Department, 175     https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 26, 2022........       080050
                                   (21[dash]08[dash]0797P)   Mayor, Town of Castle Rock,    Kellogg Court, Castle Rock,    advanceSearch.
                                   .                         100 North Wilcox Street,       CO 80109.
                                                             Castle Rock, CO 80104.
    Douglas.....................  Town of Parker            The Honorable Jeff Toborg,     Public Works and Engineering   https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Sep. 2, 2022.........       080310
                                   (21[dash]08[dash]0915P)   Mayor, Town of Parker, 20120   Department, 20120 East Main    advanceSearch.
                                   .                         East Main Street, Parker, CO   Street, Parker, CO 80138.
                                                             80138.

    Douglas.....................  Unincorporated areas of   The Honorable Lora A. Thomas,  Douglas County Public Works    https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Sep. 2, 2022.........       080049
                                   Douglas County            Chair, Douglas County Board    Department, Engineering        advanceSearch.
                                   (21[dash]08[dash]0545P)   of Commissioners, 100 3rd      Division, 100 3rd Street,
                                   .                         Street, Castle Rock, CO        Castle Rock, CO 80104.
                                                             80104.
Florida:
    Orange......................  City of Orlando           The Honorable Buddy W. Dyer,   Public Works Department, 400   https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 29, 2022........       120186
                                   (20[dash]04[dash]1937P)   Mayor, City of Orlando, 400    South Orange Avenue, 8th       advanceSearch.
                                   .                         South Orange Avenue,           Floor, Orlando, FL 32801.
                                                             Orlando, FL 32801.
    Orange......................  Unincorporated areas of   The Honorable Jerry L.         Orange County Public Works     https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 29, 2022........       120179
                                   Orange County             Demings, Mayor, Orange         Department, Stormwater         advanceSearch.
                                   (20[dash]04[dash]1937P)   County, 201 South Rosalind     Management Division, 4200
                                   .                         Avenue, 5th Floor, Orlando,    South John Young Parkway,
                                                             FL 32801.                      Orlando, FL 32839.
    Osceola.....................  City of St. Cloud         Mr. William Sturgeon, City of  Building Department, 1300 9th  https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 19, 2022........       120191
                                   (21[dash]04[dash]5676P)   St. Cloud Manager, 1300 9th    Street, St. Cloud, FL 34769.   advanceSearch.
                                   .                         Street, St. Cloud, FL 34769.
    Osceola.....................  Unincorporated areas of   Mr. Don Fisher, Osceola        Osceola County Public Works    https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 19, 2022........       120189
                                   Osceola County            County Manager, 1 Courthouse   Department, 1 Courthouse       advanceSearch.
                                   (21[dash]04[dash]5676P)   Square, Suite 4700,            Square, Suite 3100,
                                   .                         Kissimmee, FL 34741.           Kissimmee, FL 34741.
    Pinellas....................  City of Madeira Beach     The Honorable John Hendricks,  Community Development          https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 18, 2022........       125127
                                   (22[dash]04[dash]1911P)   Mayor, City of Madeira         Department, 300 Municipal      advanceSearch.
                                   .                         Beach, 300 Municipal Drive,    Drive, Madeira Beach, FL
                                                             Madeira Beach, FL 33708.       33708.
    Sarasota....................  Unincorporated areas of   The Honorable Alan Maio,       Sarasota County Planning and   https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 1, 2022.........       125144
                                   Sarasota County           Chairman, Sarasota County      Development Services           advanceSearch.
                                   (21[dash]04[dash]5591P)   Board of Commissioners, 1660   Department, 1001 Sarasota
                                   .                         Ringling Boulevard,            Center Boulevard, Sarasota,
                                                             Sarasota, FL 34236.            FL 34240.
Georgia: Columbia...............  Unincorporated areas of   The Honorable Douglas R.       Columbia County Engineering    https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 18, 2022........       130059
                                   Columbia County           Duncan, Jr., Chairman,         Services Department, 630       advanceSearch.
                                   (22[dash]04[dash]0098P)   Columbia County Board of       Ronald Reagan Drive,
                                   .                         Commissioners, P.O. Box 498,   Building A, Evans, GA 30809.
                                                             Evans, GA 30809.
Maryland: Montgomery............  Unincorporated areas of   The Honorable Marc Elrich,     Montgomery County Permitting   https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 23, 2022........       240049
                                   Montgomery County         Montgomery County Executive,   Services Department, 2425      advanceSearch.
                                   (21[dash]03[dash]1260P)   101 Monroe Street, 2nd         Reedie Drive, 7th Floor,
                                   .                         Floor, Rockville, MD 20850.    Wheaton, MD 20902.
Pennsylvania: Centre............  Township of Ferguson      Ms. Centrice Martin, Interim   Planning and Zoning            https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 2, 2022.........       420260
                                   (22[dash]03[dash]0002P)   Manager, Township of           Department, 3147 Research      advanceSearch.
                                   .                         Ferguson, 3147 Research        Drive, State College, PA
                                                             Drive, State College, PA       16801.
                                                             16801.
Tennessee: Hamblen..............  City of Morristown        The Honorable Gary Chesney,    Geographic Information         https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 10, 2022........       470070
                                   (21[dash]04[dash]1266P)   Mayor, City of Morristown,     Systems                        advanceSearch.
                                   .                         100 West 1st North Street,    (GIS) Department, 100 West
                                                             Morristown, TN 37814.          1st North Street,
                                                                                Morristown, TN 37814.
Texas:
    Caldwell....................  City of Lockhart          The Honorable Lew White,       City Hall, 308 West San        https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 12, 2022........       480095
                                   (21[dash]06[dash]2405P)   Mayor, City of Lockhart,       Antonio Street, Lockhart, TX   advanceSearch.
                                   .                         P.O. Box 239, Lockhart, TX     78644.
                                                             78644.
    Collin......................  City of Plano             The Honorable John B. Muns,    City Hall, 1520 K Avenue,      https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 15, 2022........       480140
                                   (21[dash]06[dash]3103P)   Mayor, City of Plano, 1520 K   Plano, TX 75074.               advanceSearch.
                                   .                         Avenue, Plano, TX 75074.
    Fort Bend...................  Unincorporated areas of   The Honorable K.P. George,     Fort Bend County Engineering   https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 10, 2022........       480228
                                   Fort Bend County          Fort Bend County Judge, 401    Department, 301 Jackson        advanceSearch.
                                   (21[dash]06[dash]1165P)   Jackson Street, Richmond, TX   Street, 4th Floor, Richmond,
                                   .                         77469.                         TX 77469.
    Harris......................  City of Houston           The Honorable Sylvester        Floodplain Management          https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 8, 2022.........       480296
                                   (21[dash]06[dash]0193P)   Turner, Mayor, City of         Department, 1002 Washington    advanceSearch.
                                   .                         Houston, P.O. Box 1562,        Avenue, Houston, TX 77251.
                                                             Houston, TX 77251.

    Harris......................  Unincorporated areas of   The Honorable Lina Hidalgo,    Harris County Permit Office,   https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 8, 2022.........       480287
                                   Harris County             Harris County Judge, 1001      10555 Northwest Freeway,       advanceSearch.
                                   (21[dash]06[dash]0193P)   Preston Street, Suite 911,     Suite 120, Houston, TX
                                   .                         Houston, TX 77002.             77092.
    Kerr........................  Unincorporated areas of   The Honorable Rob Kelly, Kerr  Kerr County Engineering        https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 5, 2022.........       480419
                                   Kerr County               County Judge, 700 East Main    Department, 3766 State         advanceSearch.
                                   (21[dash]06[dash]3101P)   Street, Kerrville, TX 78028.   Highway 27, Kerrville, TX
                                   .                                                        78028.
    Smith.......................  City of Tyler             The Honorable Don Warren,      Development Department, 423    https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 31, 2022........       480571
                                   (21[dash]06[dash]2507P)   Mayor, City of Tyler, P.O.     West Ferguson Street, Tyler,   advanceSearch.
                                   .                         Box 2039, Tyler, TX 75710.     TX 75702.
    Tarrant.....................  City of Fort Worth        The Honorable Mattie Parker,   Department of Transportation   https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 29, 2022........       480596
                                   (21[dash]06[dash]1993P)   Mayor, City of Fort Worth,     and Public Works,              advanceSearch.
                                   .                         200 Texas Street, Fort         Engineering Vault and Map
                                                             Worth, TX 76102.               Repository, 200 Texas
                                                                                Street, Fort Worth, TX
                                                                                76102.
    Tarrant.....................  City of Fort Worth        The Honorable Mattie Parker,   Department of Transportation   https://msc.fema.gov/portal/        Aug. 25, 2022........       480596
                                   (21[dash]06[dash]2476P)   Mayor, City of Fort Worth,     and Public Works,              advanceSearch.
                                   .                         200 Texas Street, Fort         Engineering Vault and Map
                                                             Worth, TX 76102.               Repository, 200 Texas
                                                                                Street, Fort Worth, TX
                                                                                76102.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-11681 Filed 5-31-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P