Renovation, Repair, and Painting Proposal Points to Consider EPA welcomes comments on all aspects of the Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program; Proposed Rule [ Federal Register ( 71 FR 1588, January 10, 2006)]. To assist in preparation for providing comment EPA prepared this document to highlight issues from the proposal where the Agency asked for specific input.

! Renovation Study. The following questions relate to the study, Lead Exposure Associated with Renovation and Remodeling Activities, conducted by EPA to determine whether renovation activities disturbing lead based paint create lead hazards.

" Do you support the conclusions of EPA's renovation studies   that renovation activities can create significant amounts of leaded dust that can pose hazards to the occupants, and that there is a link between renovation activities and an increased risk of elevated blood lead levels in children?

" Are you aware of peer reviewed studies or data that EPA has not considered that assess lead exposure resulting from renovation activities?

! Applicability. These questions seek input on issues related to the applicability of the rule  how it is determined which renovation activities will be subject to the requirements of the rule.

" Should EPA phase in the applicability of this proposal   applying it initially to rental and owner occupied housing built before 1960 and later to homes built through 1977   to allow time for the development of improved kits that identify lead based paint?

" Should EPA wait to finalize the proposed second phase of this regulation until new paint test kits are commercially available?

" Are there practical alternatives for a firm to confirm that no child under 6 resides in a home when the firm is unable to obtain a signed statement from the homeowner?

" Should firms be able to assume that no child under age 6 resides in owner occupied housing?

" Should this proposal apply to rental housing only where children under age 6 reside?

" In owner occupied housing, should EPA exclude homes where children under 6 do not reside?

" In owner occupied multi unit buildings, should the requirements of the proposal apply to all renovations conducted in the common areas, as well as renovations of the building's exterior, regardless of whether a child under 6 resides in affected units?

" Should this proposal apply only to older homes, like those built prior to 1960, where there is an increased likelihood that lead based paint is present?

" Do you support the conclusion, or are you aware of data to the contrary, that there is a greater likelihood of disturbing lead based paint in a home built before 1960 than in a home built after that date? How should these facts affect the proposed regulatory requirements?

" Should certain activities, like exterior siding projects, HVAC duct work, wallpaper removal, and exterior soil disruption, be excluded from this proposal? Are you aware of lead loading data that would support their exclusion or inclusion?

" Should any category of specialty contractor be excluded from this proposal? If so, are you aware of data that would support such an exclusion? " Should a time limit be placed on the exemption for projects where a lead poisoned child residing in the home has been identified?

" In owner occupied housing, should the proposal apply where an expectant mother resides?

" Is the proposed minor maintenance exemption of 2 ft2 for building interiors and 20 ft2 for exteriors an appropriate surrogate for routine building maintenance activities? If not, do you have data regarding the number of renovations that would be affected by a change in the minor maintenance exception and any data that would support a change in this exception?

" Should the decision whether to employ the lead safe work practices described in this proposal be the homeowner's? In other words, should a homeowner be allowed to choose whether or not the firm they hire employs lead safe work practices during a renovation in their home?

! Training. EPA is seeking input regarding the proposed requirements for the training of renovators and dust sampling technicians.

" Are all of the topics that should be covered in the renovator and dust sampling technician courses included in the proposal, and should hands on activities be required?

" Are the specified training hour requirements for the initial and refresher courses necessary, and if so, are the hours specified appropriate?

" Should renovators and sampling technicians be required to obtain refresher training, and if so, is 3 years an appropriate interval for refresher training?

" Should EPA have a streamlined certification process for renovators and sampling technicians having previously received training?

! Work practices. The following questions relate to the proposal's work practices requirements. The work practices are intended to protect occupants from lead hazards resulting from the disturbance of lead based paint during a renovation project.

" Are you aware of studies showing the effectiveness of the proposed work practices standards individually or in combination?

" Are there any situations where some or all of these proposed lead safe work practices are not necessary ( for example, if a home is not occupied during the renovation process)?

" Are you aware of studies demonstrating that non HEPA equipped vacuums are as efficient at capturing the smallest lead particles as HEPA equipped vacuums?

" Should EPA consider the use of vacuums other than HEPA equipped vacuums, given that OSHA requires their use ( 29 CFR 1926.62( h)( 4))?

" Should some work practices, like open flame burning and machine sanding of painted surfaces, be prohibited? If so, should these practices be prohibited for both interior and exterior renovations?

" Does requiring a certified renovator to be present at the work site, or immediately available by phone, provide firms with needed flexibility without decreasing the protection provided by this proposal?

" Should EPA require firms to notify the Agency prior to conducting all or some subset of renovation activities, and if so, should such requirements be phased in over time to evaluate their effectiveness and feasibility?

" Are the standards proposed for lead based paint chemical test kits achievable and sufficiently protective? Also, is the proposed validation process appropriate or do you have suggestions on how to conduct the kit recognition process? " How should EPA ensure that this workforce understands how to use test kits to test for lead based paint?

" How should EPA ensure that this workforce understands how to perform the postrenovation cleaning verification?

" Is cleaning verification necessary given the proposed cleaning requirements?

" Do you support the conclusions of the disposable cleaning cloth study, and/ or do you have comments on the study itself?

" Should the proposed cleaning verification be performed by an individual not involved in the renovation activity?

" Are you aware of other methods to ensure that leaded dust and debris created by renovations are adequately cleaned?

! Record keeping. The following question relates to the record keeping requirements described in the proposal.

" Are the record keeping requirements adequate to demonstrate compliance with the proposal, and is the sample record keeping form useful and practical?

! Program authorization. This program is delegable, meaning States, Territories, and Tribes will have the opportunity to seek authorization to run the program themselves. These questions refer to that authorization process.

" Following promulgation of a final rule, is one year enough time for States, Territories, and Indian Tribes to develop renovation programs and get them authorized?

" What can EPA do to prevent the need for both Federal and State certification/ accreditation when a jurisdiction is working toward, but unable to complete, the authorization process in one year?

" Is the one year implementation delay of this rule necessary considering EPA certification and accreditation would be valid in any jurisdiction that does not have an authorized program?

! Abatement. The following question refers to the interrelation between the Agency's existing training and certification program for abatement contractors and the proposed renovation requirements.

" Should cleaning verification be permitted, in lieu of clearance testing, following abatement activities? Also, are there other changes that should be considered to the abatement regulations?

! General " Would this proposal cause homeowners to defer maintenance or perform some renovation projects themselves rather than hire a professional due to increased costs associated with the rule?

! Economic analysis. To further improve the analysis for the final rule, the Agency is also specifically interested in comments and supporting information on the following questions related to assumptions used in the Agency's analysis:

" To what extent do renovators/ contractors already conduct any of the individual activities described in the proposed rule?

" To what extent is the whole house or rooms adjacent to the work area contaminated by typical renovation, repair, or painting activities?

" Under what circumstances do renovators/ contractors clean the whole house or adjacent rooms during or after renovation, repair, or painting activities? " Under what circumstances do homeowners or rental management firms clean the work area or adjacent rooms during or after renovation, repair, or painting activities?

" To what extent do renovators/ contractors or homeowners already use vacuums equipped with HEPA filters to clean up debris created during renovation, repair, or painting activities?

" Under what circumstances do renovators/ contractors use plastic sheets or other methods to isolate and collect dust and debris, during or after renovation, repair, or painting activities?

" If dust or debris is generated in preparing the surfaces, to what extent do renovators/ contractors or building owners clean up the dust or debris before painting?

" EPA's economic analysis only looks at ingestion exposures after the renovation, repair, or painting event is completed and the contractor has left. To what extent should the analysis reflect any exposures to owners or occupants ( both inhalation and ingestion) during the renovation, repair, or painting event?

" How many days does a typical renovation, repair, or painting event last? How many days during the renovation, repair, or painting event is dust created? How often and how thoroughly is cleaning performed during or after the renovation, repair, or painting event?

" To what extent should the analysis of adult exposures consider average dust loading on surfaces as compared to the typically higher dust loadings resulting from renovation, repair, or painting events?

" How do cleaning efficiencies of different cleaning methods ( sweeping, regular vacuum, HEPA vacuum) vary with the dust loading level?

" How do lead dust loading levels vary by the age of the home and by home component type ( e. g., indoor trim versus outdoor trim)?


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 109 (Thursday, June 6, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33967-33968]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13105]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1335; Airspace Docket No. 12-ASO-19]

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Captiva, FL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E Airspace at Captiva, FL, to
accommodate a new Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning System
(GPS) special Standard Instrument Approach Procedure (SIAP) serving
Upper Captiva Island Heliport. This action enhances the safety and
airspace management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations within
the National Airspace System. Also, geographic coordinates are
corrected under their proper heading.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, June 27, 2013. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On March 6, 2013, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to establish Class E airspace at
Captiva, FL (78 FR 14474). Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received. Subsequent to
publication the FAA found that the heliport coordinates were
incorrectly listed as point in space coordinates; and point in space
coordinates were inadvertently omitted. This action makes the
correction. Except for editorial changes and the changes listed above,
this rule is the same as published in the NPRM.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.9W dated August 8, 2012, and effective September 15,
2012, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface at Captiva, FL, providing the controlled airspace
required to support the new Copter RNAV (GPS) special standard
instrument approach procedures for Upper Captiva Island Heliport.
Controlled airspace within a 6-mile radius of the point in space
coordinates of the heliport is necessary for the safety and management
of IFR operations at the heliport. Geographic coordinates for the
heliport and point in space are corrected and separately listed.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it establishes controlled airspace at Upper Captiva Island Heliport,
Captiva, FL.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA

Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures,''
paragraph 311a. This airspace action is not expected to cause any
potentially significant environmental impacts, and no extraordinary
circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental
assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 9, 2011, effective September 15, 2011, is amended
as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward from 700
feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ASO FL E5 Captiva, FL [New]

Upper Captiva Island Heliport, FL
    (Lat. 26[deg]36'11'' N., long. 82[deg]13'0'' W.)
Point in Space Coordinates
    (Lat. 26[deg]36'39'' N., long. 82[deg]12'29'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6-mile radius of the Point in Space Coordinates (lat.
26[deg]36'39'' N., long. 82[deg]12'29'' W.) serving Upper Captiva
Island Heliport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on: May 28, 2013.
Jackson D. Allen,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2013-13105 Filed 6-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 19, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58003-58006]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22924]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2006-24785; Directorate Identifier 2006-NE-20-AD;
Amendment 39-17196; AD 2012-19-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Lycoming Engines Reciprocating Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Lycoming Engines (L)O-360, (L)IO-360, AEIO-360, O-540, IO-
540, AEIO-540, (L)TIO-540, IO-580, and IO-720 series reciprocating
engines. That AD currently requires replacing certain crankshafts in
the affected engines. This AD continues to require replacing certain
crankshafts, corrects the start date of affected engine models in
Lycoming Mandatory Service Bulletin (MSB) No. 569A to the start date in
Supplement No. 1 to Lycoming MSB No. 569A, dated May 27, 2009, and

includes additional (formerly experimental) IO-390, AEIO-390, and AEIO-
580 series engine models having affected crankshafts. This AD was
prompted by Lycoming Engines discovering that the start date of
affected engine models in MSB No. 569A is incorrect and the need to
include additional engine models having the affected crankshafts. We
are issuing this AD to prevent failure of the crankshaft, which will
result in total engine power loss, in-flight engine failure, and
possible loss of the aircraft.

DATES: This AD is effective October 24, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of October 24,
2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain other publication listed in the AD as of
November 3, 2006 (71 FR 57407, September 29, 2006).

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Lycoming, 652 Oliver Street, Williamsport, PA 17701; phone: 570 323-
6181; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or on the internet at
www.Lycoming.Textron.com. You may view this service information at the
FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Norm Perenson, Aerospace Engineer, New
York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller
Directorate, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; phone:
516-228-7337; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) to
amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2006-20-09, amendment 39-14778 (71
FR 57407, September 29, 2006). That AD applies to the specified
products. The SNPRM published in the Federal Register on April 6, 2012
(77 FR 20743). The original NPRM (76 FR 50152, August 12, 2011)
proposed to retain the requirements of AD 2006-20-09 to replace certain
crankshafts and to correct the start date of MSB No. 569A from March 1,
1997 to January 1, 1997, which is the start date in Supplement No. 1 to
Lycoming MSB No. 569A, dated May 27, 2009. The SNPRM proposed to add
IO-390, AEIO-390, and AEIO-580 series engine models that have the
affected crankshafts to the applicability of the AD. The SNPRM also
proposed to change Service Instruction No. 1009AS, dated May 25, 2006,
to Service Instruction No. 1009AU, dated November 18, 2009, because
Lycoming updated this service instruction. The changes to Service
Instruction 1009AS do not affect the engine overhaul time.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comment received on the proposal
and the FAA's response to that comment.

Request To Determine if AD Applies to IO-360 Engine

    A commenter asked if the AD applies to the Lycoming Engine IO-360-
A3B6D. We reply that this engine is listed in Lycoming MSB No. 569A, so
if the crankshaft serial number of that engine is also listed in Table
5 of MSB No. 569A, then the AD applies.

Changes to Previous Credit Paragraph

    We reviewed our previous credit paragraph in the SNPRM (77 FR
20743, April 6, 2012) and found that not all the ADs and service
bulletins (SBs) listed in paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of the SNPRM
resolved the unsafe conditions. Accordingly, we changed the Credit for
Previous Actions paragraphs, paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this AD,
retaining only Lycoming MSB No. 569A and AD 2006-20-09 (71 FR 57407,
September 29, 2006) in the AD to resolve the unsafe condition and
deleting all other ADs and SBs referenced in the SNPRM. Paragraphs
(g)(1) and (g)(2) now read: ``(1) If you previously complied with AD
2006-20-09 (71 FR 57407, September 29, 2006), no further action is
required. (2) If you previously accomplished Lycoming MSB No. 569A, no
further action is required.''

Costs of Compliance Paragraph

    We reviewed the cost estimate made in AD 2006-20-09 (71 FR 57407,
September 29, 2006) when we added the new affected engine models to the
SNPRM (77 FR 20743, April 6, 2012). We found that the cost estimate in
AD 2006-20-09 included the number of affected engines worldwide rather
than those installed only on aircraft of U.S. registry. We also found
that the cost estimate in AD 2006-20-09 already included the engine
models that we have now added to the applicability of this AD.
Accordingly, we changed the number of affected engine models from 3,774
to 2,831 and the overall cost estimate from $60,384,000 to $45,288,000.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD as proposed.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 2,831 engines installed on
airplanes of U.S. registry. Because the AD compliance interval
coincides with engine overhaul or other engine maintenance, we estimate
no additional labor hours will be needed to comply with this AD.
Required parts will cost about $16,000 per engine. Based on these
figures, we estimate the total cost of the AD to be $45,288,000. Our
estimate is independent of any possible warranty coverage.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing airworthiness directive (AD)
2006-20-09, Amendment 39-14778 (71 FR 57407), and adding the following
new AD:

2012-19-01 Lycoming Engines: Amendment 39-17196; Docket No. FAA-
2006-24785; Directorate Identifier 2006-NE-20-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective October 24, 2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2006-20-09 (71 FR 57407, September 29,
2006).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Lycoming Engines (L)O-360, (L)IO-360, AEIO-
360, IO-390, AEIO-390, O-540, IO-540, AEIO-540, (L)TIO-540, IO-580,
AEIO-580, and IO-720 series reciprocating engines listed by engine
model number and serial number in Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, or
Table 4 of Lycoming Mandatory Service Bulletin (MSB) 569A, dated
April 11, 2006, and those engines with crankshafts listed by
crankshaft serial number in Table 5 of Lycoming MSB 569A, dated
April 11, 2006. These applicable engines are manufactured new,
rebuilt, overhauled, or had a crankshaft installed after January 1,
1997, according to Supplement No. 1 to Lycoming MSB No. 569A, dated
May 27, 2009.

(d) Unsafe Condition

    This AD results from Lycoming Engines discovering that the March
1, 1997 start date of affected engine models in Lycoming MSB No.
569A, is incorrect. This AD also results from the need to include
the IO-390, AEIO-390, and AEIO-580 series engine models having
affected crankshafts. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of
the crankshaft, which will result in total engine power loss, in-
flight engine failure, and possible loss of the aircraft.

(e) Compliance

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

(f) Engines For Which Action Is Required

    If you did not previously comply with AD 2006-20-09 or with MSB
No. 569A, do the following:
    (1) If Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, or Table 4 of Lycoming MSB No.
569A, dated April 11, 2006, lists your engine serial number (S/N),
and Table 5 of MSB No. 569A, dated April 11, 2006, lists your
crankshaft S/N, replace the affected crankshaft with a crankshaft
that is not listed in Table 5 of MSB No. 569A at the earliest of the
following:
    (i) The time of the next engine overhaul as specified in
Lycoming Service Instruction No. 1009AU, dated November 18, 2009; or
    (ii) The next separation of the crankcase, or
    (iii) No later than 12 years from the time the crankshaft first
entered service or was last overhauled, whichever is later.
    (2) If Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, or Table 4 of Lycoming MSB No.
569A, dated April 11, 2006, does not list your engine S/N, and Table
5 of MSB No. 569A does list your crankshaft S/N (an affected
crankshaft was installed as a replacement), replace the affected
crankshaft with a crankshaft that is not listed in Table 5 of MSB
No. 569A at the earliest of the following:
    (i) The time of the next engine overhaul as specified in
Lycoming Service Instruction No. 1009AU, dated November 18, 2009; or
    (ii) The next separation of the crankcase, or
    (iii) No later than 12 years from the time the crankshaft first
entered service or was last overhauled, whichever is later.

(g) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) If you previously complied with AD 2006-20-09 (71 FR 57407,
September 29, 2006), no further action is required.
    (2) If you previously accomplished Lycoming MSB No. 569A, no
further action is required.
    (3) If Lycoming Engines manufactured new, rebuilt, overhauled,
or repaired your engine, or replaced the crankshaft in your engine
before January 1, 1997, and you have not had the crankshaft
replaced, no further action is required.
    (4) If Table 1, Table 2, Table 3, or Table 4 of Lycoming MSB No.
569A, dated April 11, 2006, lists your engine S/N, and Table 5 of
MSB No. 569A, dated April 11, 2006, does not list your crankshaft S/
N, no further action is required.
    (5) For engine model TIO-540-U2A, S/N L-4641-61A, no action is
required.

(h) Prohibition Against Installing Certain Crankshafts

    After the effective date of this AD, do not install any
crankshaft that has a S/N listed in Table 5 of Lycoming MSB No.
569A, dated April 11, 2006, into any engine.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOC)

    The Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office, may approve
AMOCs to this AD. Use the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your
request. AMOCs approved for AD 2002-19-03 (67 FR 59139, September
20, 2002) and AD 2006-20-09 (71 FR 57407, September 29, 2006) are
approved as AMOCs for this AD.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Norm Perenson,
Aerospace Engineer, New York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA,
Engine & Propeller Directorate, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the following service
information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use the following service information to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
October 24, 2012.
    (i) Lycoming Service Instruction No. 1009AU, dated November 18,
2009.
    (ii) Lycoming Mandatory Service Bulletin, Supplement No. 1 to
Service Bulletin No. 569A, dated May 27, 2009.
    (4) The following service information was approved for IBR on
November 3, 2006 (71 FR 57407, September 29, 2006).
    (i) Lycoming Mandatory Service Bulletin No. 569A, dated April
11, 2006.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (5) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Lycoming, 652 Oliver Street, Williamsport, PA 17701; phone: 570 323-
6181; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or on the Internet at
www.Lycoming.Textron.com.
    (6) You may view this service information at the FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (7) You may view this service information at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to:
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on August 27, 2012.
Colleen M. D'Alessandro,
Assistant Manager, Engine & Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-22924 Filed 9-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


                 PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION WORKSHEET
                    Part II: Information Collection Detail

IMPORTANT:  A separate Part II must be completed for each Information Collection (IC) activity associated with the ICR.  If more than one Part II is required, create a separate Part II document for each IC.  For more information see OEI's ICR website at http://intranet.epa.gov/icrintra/.  There you will find information on completing this form (see OEI's ICRAS instructions under the Prepare an ICR tab) and information on how break your ICR into ICs (see OMB's ROCIS IC Q&A under the Download Guidance tab).
1. Title of Information Collection:  Federal Implementation Plans Under the Clean Air Act for Indian Reservations in ID, OR, and WA
2. Is this a common form?
  Yes
  No

(Select Yes to identify forms that EPA is willing to host for potential use by other Federal Agencies.)

3. Obligation to respond (check one):
       Voluntary
       Required to obtain or retain benefits
        Mandatory

Note: Only one selection may be made.  If multiple categories apply, you must create additional ICs to account for the burden associated with each category.
4. Frequency of reporting (only to be completed if there are reporting requirements, check all that apply):

  Hourly
  Daily
  Weekly
  Monthly
  Yearly
    Every Decade
    Quarterly
    Semi-Annually
  Biennially
  Once
  Occasionally
5.  CFR Citation(s) for the information collection under review (if applicable):

Title  Rule for general open burning permits   Part  40  Section  49.132
Title              Part              Section
Title              Part              Section
Title              Part              Section
6. Information Collection Instruments/Forms (if applicable) :

Form Name:  Burn permit application
Form Number:  7630-3 & 7630-12
URL (required if electronic) :  http://yosemite.epa.gov/R10/tribal.nsf/programs/farr-permits
Is this form available electronically?        Yes        No
If yes, can this form be submitted electronically?        Yes        No

Form Name:
Form Number:
URL (required if electronic) :
Is this form available electronically?        Yes        No
If yes, can this form be submitted electronically?        Yes        No

Form Name:
Form Number:
URL (required if electronic) :
Is this form available electronically?        Yes        No
If yes, can this form be submitted electronically?        Yes        No

Attach additional sheets if necessary.

Note: Instruments/Forms must be submitted/uploaded as a separate attachment.

7.  Federal Enterprise Architecture Business Reference Model:

Line of Business (check one) :                                                                         Subfunction (check one) :
  Environmental Management
  Environmental Monitoring and Forecasting
  Environmental Remediation
  Pollution Prevention and Control
  Health
  Illness Prevention
  Immunization Management
  Public Health Monitoring
  Health Care Services
  Consumer Health and Safety
  Natural Resources
  Water Resource Management
  Conservation, Marine and Land Management
  Recreational Resource Management and Tourism
  Agricultural Innovation and Services
Note: Most EPA ICRs will be aligned with the Environmental Management FEA Line of Business.  Other likely categories are also listed.  For a full listing of the FEA Business Reference Model categories and definitions, see: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/documents/FY07_Ref_Model_Mapping_QuickGuide.pdf.
8. Privacy Act System of Records (if applicable) :

Title:
Federal Register Citation:    Volume                Page Number                Publication Date
9. Respondents

Total Number:  177
Small Entity Number:  150
Percentage of responses collected electronically:  0

Affected Public (check one) :

  Individuals or Households
  Private Sector (if private sector, check all that apply)
                  Business or other for-profit
                  Not-for-profit institutions
                  Farms
  State, Local, or Tribal Governments
  Federal Government

Note:  Only one selection may be made.  If multiple categories apply, you must create additional ICs to account for the burden associated with each category.  Selecting multiple subcategories within "Private Sector" will not affect then number of ICs required.
10. Frequency: How often on average will each respondent respond to the Information Collection?

Calculated Annual Frequency:  1
   (responses per respondent per year)

Calculated Annual Number of Responses:  177
  Year

  Hour
  Business hour
  Day
  Business Day
  Week
  Month
  Decade
  Quarter
  Half-year

Number of Respondents 1  per

11. Hour and Cost Burden: Enter the hours and cost (per response) broken out by reporting, record keeping, and third party disclosure:

                              Hours per Response
                           Total Annual Hour Burden
                               Cost per Response
                           Total Annual Cost Burden
Reporting
                                      0.5
                                      88

Recordkeeping

Third Party Disclosure

Total
                                      0.5
                                      88

IMPORTANT: "Cost per Response" and "Total Annual Cost Burden" should include Capital/Startup and O&M costs only.

12. Annual Responses and Burden Change

                                Total Requested
                       Program Change due to New Statute
                    Program Change due to Agency Discretion
                  Change due to Adjustment in Agency Estimate
                      Change due to Violation of the PRA
                              Currently Approved
Annual Responses
                                      177

                                       0

                                      177
Annual Hour Burden
                                      88

                                       0

                                      88
Annual Cost Burden
                                       0

                                       0

                                       0


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 9 (Thursday, January 14, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1987-1993]
[FR Doc No: 2016-00653]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0341]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes
Mellitus

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA).

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

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 40 individuals
for exemption from the prohibition against persons with insulin-treated
diabetes mellitus (ITDM) operating commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in
interstate commerce. If granted, the exemptions would enable these
individuals with ITDM to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 16, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0341 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 Federal Docket Management System (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: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-113,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., E.T.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. 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.'' The statute also allows the Agency to renew
exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. The 40 individuals listed
in this notice have recently requested such an exemption from the
diabetes prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), which applies to drivers
of CMVs in interstate commerce. Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate
the qualifications of each applicant to determine whether granting the
exemption will achieve the required level of safety mandated by
statute.

II. Qualifications of Applicants

Kevin D. Aaron

    Mr. Aaron, 53, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Aaron understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Aaron meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Juan Acevedo

    Mr. Acevedo, 47, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Acevedo understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Acevedo meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Florida.

Philip K. Allen

    Mr. Allen, 52, has had ITDM since 1997. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Allen understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Allen meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from New York.

Marvin L. Attaway

    Mr. Attaway, 63, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Attaway understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Attaway meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New Mexico.

Lewis M. Belcher

    Mr. Belcher, 48, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Belcher understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Belcher meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from West Virginia.

Walter E. Boles

    Mr. Boles, 47, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Boles understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Boles meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Ohio.

Eugene O. Carr, Jr.

    Mr. Carr, 59, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or
more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years. His
endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Carr understands

diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes
using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Carr meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Delaware.

Tracy R. Clark

    Ms. Clark, 45, has had ITDM since 2009. Her endocrinologist
examined her in 2015 and certified that she has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
Her endocrinologist certifies that Ms. Clark understands diabetes
management and monitoring has stable control of her diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Clark meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her
optometrist examined her in 2015 and certified that she does not have
diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class B CDL from Kentucky.

Jerry L. Coward

    Mr. Coward, 57, has had ITDM since 2004. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Coward understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Coward meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from North Carolina.

Wesley N. Cubby

    Mr. Cubby, 40, has had ITDM since 1982. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Cubby understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Cubby meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from New Jersey.

Robert C. Davis

    Mr. Davis, 74, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Davis understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Davis meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a CDL from Michigan.

Michael G. Deschenes

    Mr. Deschenes, 57, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Deschenes understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Deschenes meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Minnesota.

James C. Detwiler

    Mr. Detwiler, 66, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Detwiler understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Detwiler meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Pennsylvania.

Jay E. Diller

    Mr. Diller, 53, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Diller understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Diller meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Thomas M. Ellis

    Mr. Ellis, 23, has had ITDM since 2003. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Ellis understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Ellis meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Pennsylvania.

Jose N. Escobar

    Mr. Escobar, 61, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the

assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Escobar understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Escobar meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Maryland.

James C. Gilkerson

    Mr. Gilkerson, 28, has had ITDM since 2012. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Gilkerson understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Gilkerson meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Ohio.

Frank J. Gogno

    Mr. Gogno, 55, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Gogno understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Gogno meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Michael D. Hashem

    Mr. Hashem, 58, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hashem understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hashem meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Massachusetts.

George W. Hauck

    Mr. Hauck, 61, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Hauck understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hauck meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Louisiana.

Aseneka K. Igambi

    Mr. Igambi, 35, has had ITDM since 1995. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Igambi understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Igambi meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license
from Texas.

Hayward G. Jinright

    Mr. Jinright, 57, has had ITDM since 1974. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Jinright understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Jinright meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Alabama.

James S. Kauffman

    Mr. Kauffman, 55, has had ITDM since 1994. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Kauffman understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Kauffman meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Pennsylvania.

Kevin M. Kemp

    Mr. Kemp, 46, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or
more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years. His
endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Kemp understands diabetes management
and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using insulin, and
is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Kemp meets the requirements of the
vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him
in 2015 and certified that

he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license
from New Jersey.

Anthony M. Lopez

    Mr. Lopez, 63, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Lopez understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Lopez meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Texas.

Carlos A. Montano

    Mr. Montano, 53, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Montano understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Montano meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from New
York.

Patrick O. Parent

    Mr. Parent, 51, has had ITDM since 1995. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Parent understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Parent meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Delaware.

Michael J. Payne

    Mr. Payne, 54, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Payne understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Payne meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license
from Maryland.

Charles B. Perry

    Mr. Perry, 50, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Perry understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Perry meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C CDL from Oregon.

Christopher M. Seals

    Mr. Seals, 35, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Seals understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Seals meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Mississippi.

Robert Sienkiewicz

    Mr. Sienkiewicz, 66, has had ITDM since 2013. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Sienkiewicz understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Sienkiewicz meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a CDL from Michigan.

Craig A. Sines

    Mr. Sines, 58, has had ITDM since 2014. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Sines understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Sines meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Oregon.

Joel K. Spencer

    Mr. Spencer, 45, has had ITDM since 1987. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in

the last 5 years. His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Spencer
understands diabetes management and monitoring, has stable control of
his diabetes using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr.
Spencer meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified
that he has stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an
operator's license from Alabama.

Michael J. Sweeney

    Mr. Sweeney, 59, has had ITDM since 2015. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Sweeney understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Sweeney meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New York.

Kendall W. Unruh

    Mr. Unruh, 28, has had ITDM since 1996. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Unruh understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Unruh meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Missouri.

Daniel R. Vilart

    Mr. Vilart, 58, has had ITDM since 1976. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Vilart understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Vilart meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license
from Washington.

Billy F. Wallace

    Mr. Wallace, 77, has had ITDM since 2011. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Wallace understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Wallace meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Alabama.

Travis J. Womack

    Mr. Womack, 30, has had ITDM since 1993. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Womack understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Womack meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2015 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license
from North Carolina.

Logan D. Yoder

    Mr. Yoder, 30, has had ITDM since 1995. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Yoder understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Yoder meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Indiana.

Landon L. Zimmerman

    Mr. Zimmerman, 22, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2015 and certified that he has had no severe
hypoglycemic reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring
the assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 12 months and no
recurrent (2 or more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the last 5 years.
His endocrinologist certifies that Mr. Zimmerman understands diabetes
management and monitoring, has stable control of his diabetes using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Zimmerman meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2015 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds an operator's license from Pennsylvania.

III. 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. We will consider all comments received before
the close of business on the closing date indicated in the date section
of the notice.
    FMCSA notes that section 4129 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible
and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users requires
the Secretary to revise its diabetes exemption program established on
September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441).\1\ The revision must provide for
individual assessment of drivers with diabetes mellitus, and be
consistent

with the criteria described in section 4018 of the Transportation
Equity Act for the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 31305).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Section 4129(a) refers to the 2003 notice as a ``final
rule.'' However, the 2003 notice did not issue a ``final rule'' but
did establish the procedures and standards for issuing exemptions
for drivers with ITDM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 4129 requires: (1) Elimination of the requirement for 3
years of experience operating CMVs while being treated with insulin;
and (2) establishment of a specified minimum period of insulin use to
demonstrate stable control of diabetes before being allowed to operate
a CMV.
    In response to section 4129, FMCSA made immediate revisions to the
diabetes exemption program established by the September 3, 2003 notice.
FMCSA discontinued use of the 3-year driving experience and fulfilled
the requirements of section 4129 while continuing to ensure that
operation of CMVs by drivers with ITDM will achieve the requisite level
of safety required of all exemptions granted under 49 U.S.C.. 31136
(e).
    Section 4129(d) also directed FMCSA to ensure that drivers of CMVs
with ITDM are not held to a higher standard than other drivers, with
the exception of limited operating, monitoring and medical requirements
that are deemed medically necessary.
    The FMCSA concluded that all of the operating, monitoring and
medical requirements set out in the September 3, 2003 notice, except as
modified, were in compliance with section 4129(d). Therefore, all of
the requirements set out in the September 3, 2003 notice, except as
modified by the notice in the Federal Register on November 8, 2005 (70
FR 67777), remain in effect.

IV. Submitting Comments

    You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail,
or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA
recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
in the search box insert the docket number FMCSA-2015-0341 and click
the search button. When the new screen appears, click on the blue
``Comment Now!'' button on the right hand side of the page. On the new
page, enter information required including the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\
by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    We will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period and may change this proposed rule based on your
comments. FMCSA may issue a final rule at any time after the close of
the comment period.

V. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble, To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert the docket number
FMCSA-2015-0341 and click ``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket
Folder'' and you will find all documents and comments related to the
proposed rulemaking.

    Issued on: January 6, 2016.
 Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-00653 Filed 1-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 180 (Friday, September 16, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57727-57728]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23799]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project Nos., 13010-002 Mississippi 8 Hydro, LLC and 14272-000 FFP
Project 98, LLC]

Notice of Competing Preliminary Permit Applications Accepted for
Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Competing
Applications

    On September 1, 2011, Mississippi 8 Hydro, LLC (Mississippi 8) and
FFP Project 98, LLC (FFP) filed preliminary permit applications
pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act (FPA) proposing to
study the feasibility of the Mississippi River Lock and Dam No. 8
Hydroelectric Project (Lock and Dam 8 Project or project), to
be located on the Mississippi River, near the town of Vernon, in
Houston County, Wisconsin, at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps)
Mississippi River Lock and Dam No. 8. The sole purpose of a preliminary
permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a
license application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does
not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing
activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others
without the owners' express permission.
    Mississippi 8's proposed Lock and Dam 8 Project No. 13010
would consist of: (1) A new 30-foot-long by 40-foot-wide powerhouse;
(2) 20 very low head (VLH) type hydraulic turbines rated for 500
kilowatts (kW) each to produce a combined total installed capacity of 5
megawatts (MW); (3) a design flow of 706 cubic feet per second (cfs)
and an operating range from a minimum of 300 cfs up to a maximum of 725
cfs, at 4.6 feet of net head; (4) a tailrace, which would include a
submerged dike to redirect flow as it exits the tailrace; (5) a project
storage yard; (6) a concrete intake structure; (7) a substation
containing step-up transformers, circuit breakers, and disconnect
switches; (8) a new power pole to re-route an existing 69-kilovolt (kV)
transmission line to the substation; and (9) a 500-volt (V) power line
to conduct electricity from the turbines to the control house. The
estimated annual generation of the project would be 35.6 gigawatt-hours
(GWh). The project would utilize released flows from Lock and Dam
8 as directed by the Corps.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Brent L. Smith, COO, Symbiotics LLC, 371
Upper Terrace, Suite 2, Bend, OR 97702; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FFP is exploring two concepts for its proposed Lock and Dam
8 Project No. 14272. Concept A would consist of: (1) Four
horizontal bulb turbine generators, with a combined generation capacity
of 14.4 MW, placed in a newly proposed 240-foot by 275-foot powerhouse
located on the west bank of the river; (2) a 40-foot by 55-foot control
building located on the west end of the dam; (3) a 320-foot-long
transmission line extending south from a newly proposed 60-foot by 50-
foot substation located adjacent to the control building, to an
existing transmission line located south of the project; (4) a new 370-
foot by 880-foot tailrace channel connecting the powerhouse to the
river downstream; (5) a new 350-foot by 950-foot approach channel
located upstream of the powerhouse; and (6) use of an existing access
road for access to the project.
    Concept B would integrate 40 inclined access bulb turbine
generators rated at 0.37 MW each into the gate bays of the existing
moveable dam section to produce a combined total installed capacity of
14.8 MW. Concept B would involve construction of the control building,
transmission line, and use of the existing access road, but would not
include the construction of a new powerhouse, approach channel, or
tailrace. The estimated average annual generation of concept A would be
85 GWh, and the estimated average annual generation of concept B would
be 80 GWh.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. Ramya Swaminathan, Free Flow Power
Corporation, 239 Causeway Street, Suite 300, Boston, MA 02114; (978)
283-2822.
    FERC Contact: Lesley Kordella; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and
competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet.
See 18

CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit
brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration,
using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the
end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic filing,
documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an original and
seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-13010-002, or P-14272-000) in the docket
number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.

    Dated: September 12, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-23799 Filed 9-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P