[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 142 (Wednesday, July 26, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 48247]
[FR Doc No: 2023-15830]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2082-071]

PacifiCorp; Notice of Application for Non-Capacity Amendment of
License Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene,
and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Non-Capacity Amendment of License.
    b. Project No: P-2082-071.
    c. Date Filed: July 5, 2023.
    d. Applicant: PacifiCorp.
    e. Name of Project: Klamath Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the Klamath River and on
Fall Creek The project includes Federal lands managed by the U.S.
Department of Interior's Bureau of Reclamation.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Tim Hemstreet, Vice President, Renewable
Energy Development, PacifiCorp, 825 NE Multnomah St., Suite 1800,
Portland, Oregon 97232,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].
    i. FERC Contact: Diana Shannon,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests: August 21, 2023.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, and protests using the Commission's
eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without
prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact
information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact
FERC Online Support at [email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll
free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, you may
submit a paper copy. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must
be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.
Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly
D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The first page of any filing should
include the docket number P-2082-071. Comments emailed to Commission
staff are not considered part of the Commission record.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person whose name appears on the official service
list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or
documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that
may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they
must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    k. Description of Request: The applicant proposes to remove the
Keno development from the project license to facilitate its conveyance
to the U.S. Department of Interior (Interior) consistent with the
Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement. The applicant states that
the Keno development has no power-generating equipment, is not part of
the project's complete unit of development, and therefore no longer
serves any project function. The applicant proposes to modify the
project description, exhibits K, L, M, and R, and delete and/or modify
license articles 35, 38, 55, 56, 57, 60, 66, and 67, consistent with
removal of the Keno development from the authorized project. The
applicant requests that the amendment become effective upon Interior's
taking title to the Keno development, anticipated in January 2024. The
applicant provided documentation of consultation with resource agencies
and Tribes.
    l. Locations of the Application: This filing may be viewed on the
Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. You may also register
online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be
notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
[email protected], for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. Agencies may
obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214, respectively. In determining the appropriate action to take, the
Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only
those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments,
protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the
specified comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Documents: Any filing must (1) bear in all
capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or ``MOTION TO
INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the
applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing
responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the
person commenting, protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply
with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis. Any filing made by an intervenor must be accompanied
by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared
by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR
385.2010.
    p. The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: July 20, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-15830 Filed 7-25-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 233 (Monday, December 5, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 87426-87427]
[FR Doc No: 2016-29057]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

15 CFR Part 748

[Docket No. 161005927-6927-01]
RIN 0694-AH16

Amendment to the Export Administration Regulations: Removal of
Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation From the List of
Validated End-Users in the People's Republic of China

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this rule, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) amends
the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to remove one end-user from
the list of validated end-users in the People's Republic of China
(PRC). Specifically, BIS amends Supplement Number 7 to part 748 of the
EAR to remove the Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation
(SMIC) as a validated end-user in the PRC. BIS makes this change at the
company's request, and not in response to activities of concern.

DATES: This rule is effective December 5, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chair, End-User Review Committee,
Office of the Assistant Secretary, Export Administration, Bureau of
Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, Phone: 202-482-
5991; Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Authorization Validated End-User

    Validated end-users (VEUs) are designated entities located in
eligible destinations to which eligible items may be exported,
reexported, or transferred (in-country) under a general authorization
instead of a license. The names of the VEUs, as well as the dates they
were so designated, and their respective eligible destinations
(facilities) and items are identified in Supplement No. 7 to part 748
of the EAR (15 CFR part 748). Under the terms described in that
supplement, and in conformity with section 748.15 of the EAR, VEUs may
obtain eligible items without an export license from BIS. Eligible
items vary between VEUs, and may include commodities, software, and
technology, except items controlled for missile technology or crime
control reasons on the Commerce Control List (CCL) (part 774 of the
EAR).
    VEUs are reviewed and approved by the U.S. Government in accordance
with the provisions of section 748.15 and Supplement Nos. 8 and 9 to
part 748 of the EAR. The End-User Review Committee (ERC), composed of
representatives from the Departments of State, Defense, Energy,
Commerce, and other agencies, as appropriate, is responsible for
administering the VEU program. BIS amended the EAR in a final rule
published on June 19, 2007 (72 FR 33646), to create Authorization VEU.

Amendment to the List of Validated End Users (VEU) in the People's
Republic of China (PRC)

Removal of the Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation
(SMIC) From the List of VEUs in the PRC

    In this final rule, BIS amends Supplement No. 7 to part 748 of the
EAR (Supplement No. 7) to remove the VEU SMIC from the list of VEUs in
the PRC. Specifically, BIS removes information for SMIC from Supplement
No. 7. BIS takes this action at SMIC's request. BIS makes this change
to Supplement No. 7 at the company's request and not in response to
activities of concern.

Export Administration Act

    Although the Export Administration Act expired on August 20, 2001,
the President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001, 3 CFR,
2001 Comp., p. 783 (2002), as amended by Executive Order 13637 of March
8, 2013, 78 FR 16129 (March 13, 2013), and as extended by the Notice of
August 4, 2016, 81 FR 52587 (August 8, 2016), has continued the EAR in
effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. BIS
continues to carry out the provisions of the Export Administration Act,
as appropriate and to the extent permitted by law, pursuant to
Executive Order 13222 as amended by Executive Order 13637.

Rulemaking Requirements

    1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility.
This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
    2. This rule involves collections previously approved by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) under Control Number 0694-0088, ``Multi-
Purpose Application,'' which carries a burden hour estimate of 43.8
minutes to prepare and submit form BIS-748; and for recordkeeping,
reporting and review requirements in connection with Authorization VEU,
which carries an estimated burden of 30 minutes per submission. Total
burden hours associated with the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA) and OMB Control
Number 0694-0088 are not expected to increase significantly as a result
of this rule. Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person is
required to respond to, nor be subject to a penalty for failure to
comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of
the PRA, unless that collection of information displays a currently
valid OMB Control Number.
    3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications
as that term is defined under Executive Order 13132.
    4. Pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B), BIS finds good cause to waive requirements that this rule be
subject to notice and the opportunity for public comment because they
are unnecessary. In determining whether to grant or remove VEU
designations, a committee of U.S. Government agencies evaluates
information about and commitments made by candidate companies, the
nature and terms of which are set forth in 15 CFR part 748, Supplement
Nos. 8 and 9. The criteria for evaluation by the committee are set
forth in 15 CFR 748.15(a)(2) and the authority to remove VEU
designations is contained in 15 CFR 748.15(a)(3). The information,
commitments, and criteria for this extensive review were all
established through the notice of proposed rulemaking and public
comment process (71 FR 38313 (July 6, 2006) (proposed rule), and 72 FR
33646 (June 19, 2007) (final rule)). In publishing this final rule, BIS
removes a VEU from the list of VEUs in the PRC, at the request of the
VEU, similar to past requests by other VEUs, approved by the End-User
Review Committee. This change has been made within the established
regulatory framework of the VEU program. Further, this rule does not
abridge the rights of the public or eliminate the public's option to
export under any of the forms of authorization set forth in the EAR.
    Publication of this rule in other than final form is unnecessary
because the procedure for revocation of a VEU or facility from the
Authorized VEU list is similar to the license revocation procedure,
which does not undergo public review. During the VEU revocation
procedure, the U.S. Government analyzes confidential business
information according to set criteria to determine whether a given
authorized VEU entity remains eligible for VEU status. Revocation may
be the result of a material change in circumstance at the VEU or the
VEU's authorized facility. Such changes may be the result of a VEU or
VEU facility no longer meeting the eligibility criteria for
Authorization VEU, and may thus lead the U.S. Government to modify or
revoke VEU authorization. VEUs or VEU facilities that undergo material
changes that result in their no longer meeting the criteria to be
eligible VEUs must, according to the VEU program, have their VEU status
revoked. Here, however, SMIC requested removal from the VEU program.
Consequently, BIS is removing SMIC from the list of VEUs. Public
comment on whether to make the removal is unnecessary.
    Section 553(d) of the APA generally provides that rules may not
take effect earlier than thirty (30) days after they are published in
the Federal Register. However, BIS finds good cause to waive the 30-day
delay in effectiveness for this rule pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)
because the delay would be contrary to the public interest. BIS is
simply removing SMIC as a VEU. In this rule, BIS amends the EAR
consistent with established objectives and parameters administered and
enforced by the responsible designated departmental representatives to
the End-User Review Committee. Delaying this action's effectiveness
would likely cause confusion regarding which items are authorized by
the U.S. government, and in turn stifle the purpose of the VEU program.
Accordingly, it would be contrary to the public interest to delay this
rule's effectiveness.
    No other law requires that a notice of proposed rulemaking and an
opportunity for public comment be given for this final rule. Because a
notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for public comment are
not required under the APA or by any other law, the analytical
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601et seq.)
are not applicable. As a result, no final regulatory flexibility
analysis is required and none has been prepared.

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 748

    Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Accordingly, part 748 of the EAR (15 CFR parts 730-774) is amended
as follows:

PART 748--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 748 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O.
13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR
44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 4, 2016, 81 FR
52587 (August 8, 2016).

Supplement No. 7 to Part 748--[AMENDED]

0
2. Amend Supplement No. 7 to Part 748 by removing the entire entry for
``Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation,'' in ``China
(People's Republic of)''.

    Dated: November 23, 2016.
Kevin J. Wolf,
Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016-29057 Filed 12-2-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-33-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27081-27083]
[FR Doc No: 2021-10511]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-10023-10-Region 9]

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List: Explanation of Significant Differences for
the Del Norte County Pesticide Storage Area Superfund Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of explanation of significant differences.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 9 is
issuing an explanation of significant differences (ESD) for the Del
Norte County Pesticide Storage Area Superfund Site (the Site), located
at 2650 West Washington Boulevard in Crescent City, Del Norte County,
California, and is notifying the public of

this undertaking. When significant but not fundamental changes are made
to the scope, performance, or cost of a remedy after a final remedy has
been adopted, Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), require that the lead agency prepare
an ESD. Because the Site's remaining contaminant of concern (COC) has
reached drinking water standards, this ESD was issued to modify the
remedy at the Site to remove the technical impracticability (TI) waiver
for 1,2-dichloropropane (1,2-DCP) and reinstate the applicable or
relevant and appropriate requirement (ARAR) for 1,2-DCP. In accordance
with CERCLA, the EPA consulted with the support agency, the California
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). DTSC provided written
concurrence on the ESD. The Site was delisted from EPA's National
Priorities List (NPL) in 2002, and this remedy modification does not
impact EPA's determination that the Site remedy remains protective of
human health and the environment, complies with federal and state
requirements that were identified as applicable or relevant and
appropriate to this remedial action, and is cost-effective.

DATES: The Final ESD became effective on April 14, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cynthia Ruelas, Superfund Remedial
Project Manager, EPA, Region 9 (SFD-7-1), 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    Region 9 of the EPA announces the issuance of an ESD at the Del
Norte County Pesticide Storage Area Superfund Site (Site). When
significant, but not fundamental, changes are made to the scope,
performance, or cost of a remedy after a final remedy has been adopted,
CERCLA and the NCP require that the lead agency prepare an ESD pursuant
to the NCP, 40 CFR 300.435(c)(2) and 300.825(a).
    Section II of this notice explains the purpose of an ESD. Section
III discusses the process that the EPA has undertaken for this action.
Section IV discusses the site and describes the basis for issuance of
an ESD.

II. ESD Purpose

    EPA adopted this ESD to document a change to the selected remedy to
remove a TI waiver for 1,2-DCP, adopt the maximum contaminant level
(MCL) as the cleanup level, and describe how the Site has met that ARAR
standard. Changes to a Selected Remedy described in a Record of
Decision (ROD) are documented using one of the following documents,
depending on the nature of the change: (1) A technical memorandum in
the Administrative Record for an insignificant or minor change; (2) an
ESD for a significant change; or (3) a ROD Amendment for a fundamental
change. A significant change is defined as a change to a component of a
remedy that does not fundamentally alter the overall cleanup approach.
Because this remedy change updates the status of the Site TI Waiver and
ARAR requirements and does not change the remedy approach, an ESD was
deemed to be the appropriate document to record the changes to the ROD.
An ESD provides a description of the nature of the significant change,
summarizes the information that led to making the change, and affirms
that the revised remedy complies with the NCP and the statutory
requirements of CERCLA. In accordance with the ROD for the Site, the
overall cleanup goal of the remediation, which is to protect public
health from exposure to COCs, remains in place. The ROD for the Site is
being modified so that remedy implementation can be refined and
improved to reflect achievement of health protective cleanup levels.

III. ESD Process

    The following describes the general process that the EPA followed
to prepare and issue the ESD.
    (1) The ESD identifies and discusses the significant differences
between the remedy as presented in the ROD and subsequent decision
documents and the change now proposed. It identifies the remedial
action objectives (RAOs) of the remedy, which include a reinstated
objective from the ROD to clean up contaminated groundwater to meet
drinking water standards and enable beneficial use of the Site. The ESD
also summarizes the scope and performance of the current and previous
Site decision documents (the 1985 ROD, 1989 ESD, 2000 ROD Amendment,
and 2021 ESD).
    (2) The ESD confirms that the Site remedy continues to meet ARARs
(in compliance with the NCP, 40 CFR 300.430(f)(1)(ii)(B)(1) and (2)),
satisfies Section 121 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9621, and remains protective
of human health and the environment.
    (3) Before issuance of the ESD, the EPA as lead agency consulted
with DTSC, the support agency, in accordance with the NCP, 40 CFR
300.435(c)(2). The EPA provided DTSC the opportunity to comment on the
ESD. DTSC concurred with the issuance of the ESD for the Site, and
DTSC's concurrence memo is included as an attachment to the ESD.
    (4) The EPA Regional Administrator's designee approved and signed
the ESD.
    (5) Concurrent with the publication of this notice of issuance of
this ESD in the Federal Register, the EPA published a notice of
availability and a brief description of the ESD in a major local
newspaper of general circulation (as required by the NCP at 40 CFR
300.435(c)(2)(i)(B)). A formal public comment period is not required
for issuance of an ESD.
    (6) The ESD and supporting documents are available for public
review in the Administrative Record file and information repository,
pursuant to the NCP, 40 CFR 300.435(c)(2)(i)(A) and 300.825(a)(2).

IV. Basis for Issuance of an ESD

    The following information provides the EPA's basis for issuing the
ESD for the Site.

Site Background and History

    The Site (CERCLIS ID #CAD000626176) is located at 2650 West
Washington Boulevard in Crescent City, Del Norte County, California,
and is an approximately 1-acre property consisting of 2 parcels. From
1970 to 1981, the site served as a collection facility for pesticide
storage containers used in local agricultural and forestry operations
in Del Norte County. The facility was operated by the County, with
approval from the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board
(NCRWQCB), and was intended to serve as a county-wide collection point
for interim or emergency storage of pesticide containers generated by
local agricultural and forestry-related industries. Inspections
conducted by the EPA and NCRWQCB in 1981 revealed violations of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and a failure to operate
under the conditions previously agreed upon with the NCRWQCB. Shortly
after receiving a Cleanup and Abatement Order from NCRWQCB, the County
decided to close the facility. State and County sampling efforts
revealed a variety of contaminants in the soil and groundwater at the
Site. Due to lack of County funding to investigate the extent of
contamination and develop a cleanup plan, the EPA placed the Site on
the NPL in 1984.

Basis for Taking Action

    NCRWQCB conducted initial investigations at the Site and found that
both the soil and groundwater were contaminated with various
herbicides, pesticides, and volatile and semi-volatile organic
compounds and chromium. The specific COCs identified were 1,2-DCP and
2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D). Soil contamination was detected
to a depth of 15 feet but was contained to an on-site sump of 15 feet
by 20 feet. At the time, the groundwater contaminant plume was
estimated to extend approximately 170 feet to the southeast of the
sump, in the direction of groundwater movement. If the contaminated
aquifer were to be used as a drinking water supply, it would pose a
significant health risk. Ingestion of these contaminants has been
linked to increased cancer risk. Investigations indicated that elevated
levels of chromium were also present at the Site.

Original Remedy Selection

    In 1985, the EPA selected a remedy in a ROD to address the soil and
groundwater contamination at the Site. The major components of the
Selected Remedy included: Excavation and off-site disposal of
contaminated soils; extraction and treatment of groundwater through
carbon adsorption and coagulation/filtration treatment; disposal of
treated groundwater to the Crescent City Wastewater Treatment Plant;
and groundwater monitoring.

Actions Taken Following ROD Issuance

    The 1989 ESD explained that because the chromium at the Site was
determined to be naturally-occuring, it could not be remedied under
CERCLA, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 104(a)(3)(A). The ESD also documented and
justified a change in the groundwater treatment method from carbon
adsorption and coagulation/filtration to air sparging.
    The EPA issued a ROD Amendment in 2000 that revised the remedy,
because the Site RAO of restoring the contaminated groundwater to the
drinking water standard for 1,2-DCP could not be met, because no
technology existed that was capable of reaching the 10 micrograms per
liter ([micro]g/L) level set out in the ROD. Notably, this applied as
well to the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 5 [micro]g/L that had
since been adopted since the cleanup level had been selected for the
Site. In light of the inability to reach these cleanup levels, the ROD
Amendment's revised remedy instead sought to contain the groundwater
contamination through natural attenuation and monitoring and prevent
its use as drinking water for as long as contaminant concentrations
exceeded drinking water quality standards. The ROD Amendment identified
the new ARAR for 1,2-DCP (equivalent to the new MCL of 5 [micro]g/L);
adopted a TI waiver of the newly identified ARAR for groundwater within
the existing contaminated area where 1,2-DCP exceeded 5 [micro]g/L; and
required semi-annual groundwater monitoring and the enactment of
institutional controls (ICs) to prevent exposure to contaminated
groundwater.
    In 2002, the EPA, DTSC, and Del Norte County entered into a Consent
Decree, and in doing so, Del Norte County agreed to carry out and
finance continued remediation efforts at the Site, including monitoring
groundwater and implementing ICs in accordance with Site decision
documents and plans. Also, in that same year, because all response
actions required under CERCLA had been completed, except for ongoing
operation and maintenance and Five-Year Reviews, following a 30-day
public comment period, the EPA deleted the Site from the NPL.

Basis for ESD

    Nearly 20 years after issuance of the TI waiver for 1,2-DCP,
groundwater data from the Site consistently demonstrate that
concentrations of 1,2-DCP have significantly decreased and are now
below the drinking water standard of 5 [micro]g/L. Given the
effectiveness of natural attenuation in lowering concentrations of 1,2-
DCP in Site groundwater to meet the MCL, the TI waiver adopted in the
2000 ROD Amendment is no longer necessary. Through this ESD, the EPA is
removing the TI waiver for 1,2-DCP and reinstating the 1,2-DCP ARAR.
The ESD also reinstates the original RAO that sought to clean up
contaminated groundwater to meet drinking water standards. Cleanup
under CERCLA is considered complete, although groundwater monitoring is
currently ongoing at the Site under state oversight, and EPA plans to
continue the Five-Year Review process as required until such time that
groundwater attainment is formally achieved.

Enrique Manzanilla,
Director, Superfund Division, U.S. EPA, Region 9.
[FR Doc. 2021-10511 Filed 5-18-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 150 (Tuesday, August 4, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47203-47204]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16946]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER20-2512-000]

SR Baxley, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced SR Baxley,
LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying
rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for
blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of
securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is August 18, 2020.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all

interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the contents of
this document via the internet through the Commission's Home Page
(http://ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. At this time, the Commission has suspended access to the
Commission's Public Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a
National Emergency concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19),
issued by the President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 29, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-16946 Filed 8-3-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 231 (Monday, December 6, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68884-68886]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26332]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0653; Project Identifier AD-2021-00170-R;
Amendment 39-21784; AD 2021-22-11]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; MD Helicopters Inc. (MDHI) Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain MD Helicopters Inc. (MDHI), Model 369D, 369E, 369F, 369FF,
369H, 369HE, 369HM, 369HS, 500N, and 600N helicopters. This AD was
prompted by a report of a spiral crack in the pilot-to-copilot tail
rotor torque tube (torque tube). This AD requires a one-time visual and
recurring borescope inspections of the torque tube and depending on the
results, removing the torque tube from service. The FAA is issuing this
AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective January 10, 2022.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain documents listed in this AD as of January 10,
2022.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact MD Helicopters, Inc., Attn: Customer Support Division, 4555 E.
McDowell Rd., Mail Stop M615, Mesa, AZ 85215-9734; telephone (800) 388-
3378; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at https://www.mdhelicopters.com. You may
view this service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room 6N-321, Fort
Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of this material
at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. Service Information that is
incorporated by reference is also available at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-
0653.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket at https://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2021-0653; or in person at
Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this final rule, any
comments received, and other information. The street address for Docket
Operations is U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Payman Soltani, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Section, Los Angeles ACO Branch, Compliance & Airworthiness
Division, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 90712; telephone
(562) 627-5313; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to MDHI Model 369D, 369E,
369F,

369FF, 369H, 369HE, 369HM, 369HS, 500N, and 600N helicopters, with
torque tube part number 369H7531-9/-11/-13, installed. The NPRM
published in the Federal Register on August 13, 2021 (86 FR 44652). In
the NPRM, the FAA proposed to initially require visually inspecting the
torque tube exterior using a flashlight and mirror and borescope
inspecting the interface of the torque tube and bushing segments for a
crack, elongation, and other damage, which may be indicated by any
corrosion, pitting, crazing, dents, dings, displacement of material at
the bolt hole edge, or fretting of the hole. Thereafter, the NPRM
proposed to require repeating the borescope inspection. If there is a
crack, elongation, or other damage, the NPRM proposed to require
removing the torque tube from service. The NPRM was prompted by a
report of a spiral crack in the torque tube that appears to have
originated from a hole where the tail rotor torque tube control fitting
attaches to the torque tube on a Model 369FF helicopter. This crack
resulted in increased left pedal movement and subsequent reduced
directional control pedal authority. Other model helicopters are
affected due to design similarity. This condition, if not addressed,
could result in failure of the torque tube, loss of tail rotor control,
and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

    The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the costs.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety
requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing
this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products. Except for
minor editorial changes, this AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.
The minor editorial changes include updating the cross reference in
Note 2 from ``paragraph (g)(1)(ii)'' to ``paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this
AD,'' and deleting paragraph ``(i) No Reporting Requirement'' of the
published NPRM because it is unnecessary. As a result of deleting that
paragraph, some paragraph identifiers have changed.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    The FAA reviewed MD Helicopters Service Bulletin SB369D-229R2 for
Model 369D helicopters, SB369E-129R2 for Model 369E helicopters,
SB369F-119R2 for Model 369F and 369FF helicopters, SB369H-263R2 for
Model 369H, 369HE, 369HM, and 369HS helicopters, SB500N-066R2 for Model
500N helicopters, and SB600N-080R2 for Model 600N helicopters, each
dated March 24, 2021 (co-published as one document and collectively
referred to as ``Revision 2''). This service information specifies
procedures for a one-time visual inspection and recurring borescope
inspections, completing a Service Operation Report, and returning a
removed torque tube to an authorized service center or MDHI.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in ADDRESSES.

Other Related Service Information

    The FAA also reviewed MD Helicopters Service Bulletin SB369H-263,
SB369D-229, SB369E-129, SB369F-119, SB500N-066, and SB600N-080, each
dated January 30, 2020 (co-published as one document and collectively
referred to as ``initial issuance''), and MD Helicopters Service
Bulletin SB369H-263R1, SB369D-229R1, SB369E-129R1, SB369F-119R1,
SB500N-066R1, and SB600N-080R1, each dated May, 15 2020 (co-published
as one document and collectively referred to as ``Revision 1''). The
initial issuance and Revision 1 of this service information specify the
same procedures as Revision 2 of this service information, except
Revision 1 clarified the torque value to apply to the nut and Revision
2 deletes Method 2 of the Accomplishment Instructions and adds a
recurring 300-hour borescope inspection of the torque tube.

Differences Between This AD and the Service Information

    For helicopters that have accumulated 600 or less total hours time-
in-service (TIS), Revision 2 of the service information specifies an
initial compliance time of during the next 100-hour inspection, whereas
this AD requires initial actions within 100 hours TIS after the
effective date of this AD instead. For helicopters that have
accumulated more than 600 total hours TIS, Revision 2 of the service
information specifies an initial compliance time of within 5 hours of
flight time, whereas this AD requires initial actions within 5 hours
TIS or 30 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs
later, instead.
    Revision 2 of the service information specifies returning a removed
torque tube, whereas this AD requires removing the torque tube from
service instead. Revision 2 of the service information specifies
completing a Service Operation Report, whereas this AD does not include
that requirement.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 58 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. Labor rates are estimated at $85 per work-hour. Based on
these numbers, the FAA estimates the following costs to comply with
this AD.
    Visually inspecting the torque tube takes a minimal amount of time.
Borescope inspecting the torque tube takes about 1 work-hour for an
estimated cost of $85 per helicopter and $4,930 for the U.S. fleet, per
inspection cycle.
    If required, replacing the torque tube takes about 5 work-hours and
parts cost about $983 for an estimated cost of $1,408 per helicopter.
    The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate.
According to the manufacturer, however, some of the costs of this AD
may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on
affected operators.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

2021-22-11 MD Helicopters Inc. (MDHI): Amendment 39-21784; Docket
No. FAA-2021-0653; Project Identifier AD-2021-00170-R.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective January 10, 2022.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to MD Helicopters Inc. (MDHI) Model 369D, 369E,
369F, 369FF, 369H, 369HE, 369HM, 369HS, 500N, and 600N helicopters,
certificated in any category, with pilot-to-copilot tail rotor
torque tube (torque tube) part number 369H7531-9/-11/-13, installed.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 6720, Tail Rotor
Control System.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of a spiral crack in the torque
tube. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent failure of a torque
tube. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in loss
of tail rotor control and subsequent loss of control of the
helicopter.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Actions

    (1) Using a flashlight and mirror, visually inspect the exterior
of the torque tube at the interface of the torque tube and bushing
segments, and borescope inspect the interior of the torque tube at
the interface of the torque tube and bushing segments for a crack,
elongation, and other damage, which may be indicated by any
corrosion, pitting, crazing, dents, dings, displacement of material
at the bolt hole edge, or fretting of the hole by following the
Accomplishment Instructions, paragraphs 2.A.(1). through (3).(a).,
of MD Helicopters Service Bulletin SB369H-263R2, SB369D-229R2,
SB369E-129R2, SB369F-119R2, SB500N-066R2, or SB600N-080R2, each
dated March 24, 2021, as applicable to your model helicopter, as
follows:
    Note 1 to the introductory text of paragraph (g)(1): Scaling of
the inner diameter primer or paint may be an indication of a crack.
    (i) For helicopters that have accumulated 600 or less total
hours time-in-service (TIS), within 100 hours TIS after the
effective date of this AD.
    (ii) For helicopters that have accumulated more than 600 total
hours TIS, within 5 hours TIS or 30 days after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs later. Note 2 to paragraph (g)(1)(ii): It
is advised to limit flights with increased, excessive, or rapid
pedal movements before the first instance of the actions required by
paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this AD are accomplished.
    (iii) If there is a crack, elongation, or other damage, before
further flight, remove the torque tube from service.
    (2) Thereafter following paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, at
intervals not to exceed 300 hours TIS, borescope inspect the
interior of the torque tube at the interface of the torque tube and
bushing segments as required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD. If
there is a crack, elongation, or other damage, before further
flight, remove the torque tube from service.

(h) Credit for Previous Actions

    You may take credit for the instance of the actions required by
paragraphs (g)(1)(i) or (ii) of this AD if you performed
corresponding actions before the effective date of this AD using MD
Helicopters Service Bulletin SB369H-263, SB369D-229, SB369E-129,
SB369F-119, SB500N-066, or SB600N-080, each dated January 30, 2020,
as applicable to your model helicopter, or MD Helicopters Service
Bulletin SB369H-263R1, SB369D-229R1, SB369E-129R1, SB369F-119R1,
SB500N-066R1, or SB600N-080R1, each dated May, 15 2020, as
applicable to your model helicopter.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

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

(j) Related Information

    (1) For more information about this AD, contact Payman Soltani,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Section, Los Angeles ACO Branch,
Compliance & Airworthiness Division, FAA, 3960 Paramount Blvd.,
Lakewood, CA 90712; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
[email protected].
    (2) MD Helicopters Service Bulletin SB369H-263, SB369D-229,
SB369E-129, SB369F-119, SB500N-066, and SB600N-080, each dated
January 30, 2020 (co-published as one document and collectively
referred to as ``initial issuance''), and MD Helicopters Service
Bulletin SB369H-263R1, SB369D-229R1, SB369E-129R1, SB369F-119R1,
SB500N-066R1, and SB600N-080R1, each dated May, 15, 2020 (co-
published as one document and collectively referred to as ``Revision
1''), which are not incorporated by reference, contain additional
information about the subject of this AD. This service information
is available at the contact information specified in paragraphs
(k)(3) and (4) of this AD.

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of the service information listed in this
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) MD Helicopters Service Bulletin SB369D-229R2, dated March
24, 2021.
    (ii) MD Helicopters Service Bulletin SB369E-129R2, dated March
24, 2021.
    (iii) MD Helicopters Service Bulletin SB369F-119R2, dated March
24, 2021.
    (iv) MD Helicopters Service Bulletin SB369H-263R2, dated March
24, 2021.
    (v) MD Helicopters Service Bulletin SB500N-066R2, dated March
24, 2021.
    (vi) MD Helicopters Service Bulletin SB600N-080R2, dated March
24, 2021.
    Note 3 to paragraph (k)(2): The service bulletins listed in
paragraphs (k)(2)(i) through (vi) of this AD are co-published as one
document.
    (3) For MD Helicopters service information identified in this
AD, contact MD Helicopters, Inc., Attn: Customer Support Division,
4555 E. McDowell Rd., Mail Stop M615, Mesa, AZ 85215-9734; telephone
(800) 388-3378; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at https://www.mdhelicopters.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Office of
the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Pkwy., Room
6N-321, Fort Worth, TX 76177. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this 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, email: [email protected], or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on October 14, 2021.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-26332 Filed 12-3-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P