 Signature: Project No.: 0<IP_ADDRESS> DISTRIBUTION Page __ 1_ of _ 2_

Project Name: 304m Petroleum Refinery Detailed Investigation TELEPHONE CALL RECORD Incoming Call Date: Nov 18, 2003 Time: 11 AM EST Company Name: Washington Department of Ecology Contact Name: Nancy Kmet Phone No.: ( 360) 407 6941 nkme461@ ecy. wa. gov Name: Betsy Bicknell Eastern Research Group, Inc.

GENERAL SUBJECT : Background on Water Pollution Prevention Opportunities in Petroleum Refineries TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN Background information about refinery wastewater generation includes the Washington Ecology Publication No. 02 07 017," Water Pollution Prevention Opportunities in Petroleum Refineries," November 2002.

Nancy Kmet, Industrial Section, Washington Dept. of Ecology, responded to my e mail request for additional information about this report.

Who at Jacobs Consultancy was the main author of the report? Ms. Kmet remembered that Lloyd Posey and another man whose name she didn't recall were the main staff responsible for the report.

* How did the report come to be written and what has been done with the findings? Washington initiated a NPDES permit requirement for the refineries to prepare pollution prevention plans. Ecology was not entirely satisfied with the refineries' first attempts  they were too facility specific. Stan Springer ( now retired from Ecology) obtained a Federal " PPIS" grant to hire a petroleum industry consultant to prepare the industry report. Jacobs Consultancy was selected because of their experience in the industry. Ms. Kmet reported that Ecology was happy with their product. The refineries are now working on their next generation P2 plans, and will have the opportunity to include practices described in the report in their own facility plans.

* What are the biggest wastewater pollution problems associated with refinery wastewaters? Ms. Kmet reported that in general, the biggest problem is keeping oil & grease out of stormwater. Stormwater that does not originate in the immediate process area is not routed to the activated sludge treatment system, though it may contain excessive amounts of oil and grease.

In terms of toxic releases, the biggest problem is dioxins. For this permit cycle, Ecology required refineries to conduct a dioxin study. Dioxins were detected in samples collected by all refineries that had submitted data to Signature: date. At least one refinery had detected dioxins in its final effluent. She thinks it is different than the other refineries because of its catalytic reformer regeneration practices ( continuous regeneration?). Dioxins were also detected in reformer wastewaters and in API separator sludges.

To obtain the dioxin data, Ms. Kmet suggested that I contact Kathy Vermillion ( 360) 407 6919. I called Ms. Vermillion and requested the data. Ms Vermillion thought it would be shipped to me by Nov. 21.

* Do you have any concerns about the existing petroleum refining effluent limitations guidelines ( 40 CFR Part 419)? Ms. Kmet mentioned that Ecology had previously commented to EPA that the regulations for conventional pollutants should be updated. Refineries presently discharge far below their permit limits ( which are based on the existing guidelines). I discussed issues related to the BCT cost test and lack of precedent for revising BPT. Ms. Kmet said she didn't understand all the Clean Water Act issues, but that when Ecology sets permit limits that are far higher than refinery discharges, they receive adverse comments. Ecology was disappointed that the proposed revised conventional limits for the pulp and paper category were not promulgated.

Ms. Kmet also suggested that it wouldn't hurt to have limitations guidelines for dioxins. Ecology may push inplant dioxin controls for reformer regenerant wastewaters. In plant limits analogous to the pulp mill bleach plant limits would be useful.

* What factors would influence whether a refinery discharges dioxins? Do you know why Washington state refineries do not report dioxin releases while other refineries do? Ms. Kmet suggested that refineries that had not monitored for and/ or detected dioxins in their effluents would not report dioxin releases to TRI.

* The report describes some process modifications ( diversion of flue gasses to fireboxes) that could be implemented at refineries to reduce the generation of dioxins ( p. 53). Have the Washington refineries made these kinds of modifications? Ms. Kmet was not aware that any of the refineries had yet made any adjustments to their operations to control dioxins. They may need to do so to meet potential new permit requirements.

* What equipment vendors are experienced in solving refinery wastewater problems? Ms. Kmet suggested that I talk to Jacobs about this.

* Are wastewater discharges of polycyclic aromatic compounds ( PACs) typical of the industry? What factors would influence whether a refinery discharges PACs? In 2000, none of the Washington state refineries reported wastewater releases of PACs, but nationwide, in 2000, 19 refineries reported surface water and POTW releases of PACs while 164 refineries did not report releases. Ms. Kmet was not familiar with the term PAC. She uses the term PAHs ( polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons). She was not familiar with any issues related to their discharge.

* Do you think discharges of toxic metals are a problem for the Washington refineries? Ms. Kmet said that the only metal that is sometimes a problem is mercury. She recalled that one refinery had turned back a shipment of crude oil with a mercury concentration that was too high. She mentioned that because Washington allows a dilution zone for compliance with water quality standards, their metals limits may not be as low as some other states.

* What toxic chemicals are released from refineries, but not reported to TRI or PCS? Ms. Kmet was not aware of any un reported releases.


[Federal Register: December 7, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 235)]
[Notices]
[Page 69205-69206]
[DOCID:fr07de07-45]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12918-000]

FFP Project 29, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing
and Soliciting Motions To Intervene, Protests, and Comments

November 30, 2007.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Preliminary Permit.
    b. Project No.: 12918-000.
    c. Date filed: August 6, 2007.
    d. Applicant: FFP Project 29, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: Sara Bend Project.
    f. Location: The project would be located in a section of the
Mississippi River in West Feliciana Parish and Pointe Coupee Parish,
Louisiana. The project uses no dam or impoundment.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contacts: Mr. Daniel Irvin, FFP Project 29, LLC, 69
Bridge Street, Manchester, MA 01944, phone<PHONE_NUMBER>, and Ms.
Maureen Winters, Project Manager, Devine Tarbell & Associates, 970
Baxter Boulevard, Portland, ME 04103, phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Kelly Houff,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    j. Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to
intervene: 60 days from the issuance date of this notice.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and
interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of
paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the
Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission
strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project
number (P-12918-000) on any comments or motions filed.
    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 in 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 Project: The proposed project consists of: (1)
2,000 proposed 20 kilowatt Free Flow generating units having a total
installed capacity of 40 megawatts, (2) a proposed transmission line,
(3) a mooring system comprised of either free standing pilings or
existing infrastructure which will anchor the units, and (4)
appurtenant facilities. The FFP Project 29, LLC, project would have an
average annual generation of 175.200 gigawatt-hours and be sold to a
local utility.
    l. Locations of Applications: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission in the
Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A,
Washington DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also
be viewed on the Commission's Web site 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. For
assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is

also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h
above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Competing Preliminary Permit--Anyone desiring to file a
competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project
must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to
file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36).
Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to
file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days
after the specified comment date for the particular application. A
competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30
and 4.36.
    o. Competing Development Application--Any qualified development
applicant desiring to file a competing development application must
submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the
particular application, either a competing development application or a
notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely
notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested
person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after
the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing
license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36.
    p. Notice of Intent--A notice of intent must specify the exact
name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective
applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to
submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary
permit application or a development application (specify which type of
application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s)
named in this public notice.
    q. Proposed Scope of Studies under Permit--A preliminary permit, if
issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed
preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the
preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of
preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts.
Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide
whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to
construct and operate the project.
    r. 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. 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.
    Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper; See 18 CFR 385.2001 (a)(1)(iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site under ``e-filing'' link.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing.
    s. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents--Any filings must
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS'', ``PROTEST'', ``COMPETING APPLICATION'' OR
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', as applicable, and the Project Number of the
particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-
named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number
of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be
served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the
particular application.
    t. Agency Comments--Federal, state, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing
comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.

Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-23777 Filed 12-6-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: July 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 143)]
[Notices]
[Page 43969-43970]
[DOCID:fr27jy10-80]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0152; FRL-9180-7]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; Compliance Assurance Monitoring
Program (Renewal); EPA ICR No. 1663.07, OMB Control No. 2060-0376

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that an Information
Collection Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an
existing approved collection. The ICR, which is abstracted below,
describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated
burden and cost.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before August 26, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2003-0152, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation
Docket, Mailcode 22821T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20460, and (2) OMB by mail to: Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer
for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter Westlin, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D243-
05), Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On February 24, 2010 (75 FR 8333), EPA sought comments on this
ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any
additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB
within 30 days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0152, which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or person viewing at the Air and Radiation
Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading
Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is
202-566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket
is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://
www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once
in the system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID
number identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov, as EPA
receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, confidential business information (CBI), or other
information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For
further information about the electronic docket, go to http://
www.regulations.gov.
    Title: Compliance Assurance Monitoring Program (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR No. 1663.07, OMB Control No. 2060-0376.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on July 31, 2010. Under
OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the
collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. An
Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: The Clean Air Act (the Act) contains several provisions
directing EPA to require source owners to conduct monitoring to support
certification as to their status of compliance with applicable
requirements. These provisions are set forth in Section 504 (operating
permits provisions) and Section 114 (enforcement provisions) of the
Act. Section 504(b) directs EPA to implement monitoring and
certification requirements through the operating permits program. This
section allows EPA to prescribe by rule, methods and procedures for
determining compliance recognizing that continuous emissions monitoring
systems need not be required if other procedures or methods provide
sufficiently reliable and timely information for determining
compliance. Under section 504(c), each operating permit must ``set
forth inspection, entry, monitoring, compliance, certification, and
reporting requirements to assure compliance with the permit terms and
conditions.'' Section 114(a)(3) requires EPA to promulgate rules for
enhanced monitoring and compliance certifications. Section 114(a)(1) of
the Act provides additional authority concerning monitoring, reporting,
and recordkeeping requirements. This section provides the Administrator
with the authority to require any owner or operator of a source to
install and operate monitoring systems and to record the resulting
monitoring data. EPA promulgated the Compliance Assurance Monitoring
(CAM) rule, 40 CFR part 64, on October 22, 1997 (62 FR 54900) to
implement these authorities.
    In accordance with these provisions, the monitoring information
source owners must submit must also be available to the public, except
as entitled to protection from disclosure as allowed in section 114(c)
of the Act.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 134
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing

and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and requirements which have
subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a
collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the
collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Owners and operators of title V
sources with controlled pollutant specific emissions units that have a
pre-control potential to emit major amounts of regulated air pollutants
and permitting authorities
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 3,174 owner/operators and 112
permitting authorities.
    Frequency of Response: Incremental semi-annual and annual reports,
plus every 5 years at permit renewal.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 7,453,581.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $263,729,972, which includes annual
labor costs for sources and permitting authorities and no capital or
O&M costs.
    Changes in the Estimate: There is an increase of 4,331,838 hours in
the total estimated respondent annual burden currently identified in
the OMB Inventory of Approved ICR Burdens. This increase reflects the
significant increase in number of respondents resulting from the
implementation of the rule through operating permit renewals.

    Dated: July 21, 2010.
John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2010-18366 Filed 7-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on October 6, 2003

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKETS OST-2001-10603, OST-98-3901,

OST-99-5443, OST-00-6806, OST-00-6819, OST-00-6909, OST-01-10172,

& OST-02-11808

_____________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Joint Application of Northwest Airlines, Inc. and Air China
International Corp. filed 9/10/2001, as amended 7/18/2003 to:

XX  Consolidate into Docket OST-01-10603 the statements of authorization
granted to Air China in Docket OST-98-3901, issued October 16, 1998 and
in Docket OST-99-5443, issued March 6, 2001 so as to permit Air China to
display the “NW” code on Air China flights, for purposes of carriage
of mail only: (i) between San Francisco and Los Angeles, on the one
hand, and Beijing and Shanghai on the other hand; and between Chicago
and New York, on the one hand, and Beijing and Shanghai, on the other
hand.

XX  Dismiss, upon approval of consolidation request, the remaining
exemptions and statements of authorization issued to Northwest and Air
China in Dockets OST-98-3901, 99-5443, 00-6806, 00-6819,

00-6909, 01-10172, and 02-11808.

Applicant rep.:  Megan Rae Rosia<PHONE_NUMBER>  DOT analyst:   Linda
Senese<PHONE_NUMBER>

DISPOSITION

XX  Granted Request for Consolidation (see Remarks below)

XX  Granted Request for Dismissal

The above actions were effective when taken:  October 6, 2003.

XX  Action taken by:	Paul L. Gretch, Director

			Office of International Aviation

(See Reverse Side)

2

XX  The authority is consistent with the Air Transport Agreement and the
1999 Protocol between the United States and the People’s Republic of
China.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  XX Holder’s
certificates of public convenience and necessity

	   XX Holder’s Foreign Air Carrier Permit

	   XX Statements of Authorization dated October 16, 1998 (Docket
OST-98-3901) and

          April 8, 1999 (Docket OST-99-5443) and conditions therein

Remarks:  The consolidated statements of authorization are limited to
the carriage of mail only.

________________________________________________________________________
_____________

Under the authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14
CFR Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with
Department policy; and (2) grant of the authority was consistent with
the public interest.  To the extent not granted or dismissed, we denied
all requests in the referenced Dockets.  We may amend, modify, or revoke
the action taken in this Notice at any time without hearing at our
discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

 The original application requested renewal and consolidation of their
applicants’ exemptions and statements of authorization to permit the
Joint Applicants to continue to provide scheduled air transportation of
persons, property, and mail.  Subsequently, the carriers amended their
application to seek only continuation of mail code sharing.  Their
amendment stated that, effective June 30, 2003, the carriers
discontinued their code sharing with the exception of displaying
Northwest’s designator code on Air China flights, for the carriage of
mail only, in the following markets:  San Francisco/Los
Angeles/Chicago/New York-Beijing/Shanghai.

 Both of the statements of authorization being consolidated here were
granted for indefinite duration and will continue to apply indefinitely,
albeit now limited to carriage of mail only.


                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

            DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                    OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

                             WASHINGTON, DC

Issued by the Department of Transportation on May 31, 2000

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-95-557

________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of   Amerijet International, Inc.    filed   12/1/99  to:

XX  Renew exemption for two years under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide the
following service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of property and mail between
Miami/Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, on the one hand, and Caracas, Maracaibo,
and Valencia, Venezuela, on the other, via intermediate and beyond
points named in the U.S.-Venezuela aviation agreement, and to integrate
this authority with its existing exemption and certificate authority and
any authority it may acquire in the future.1

Applicant rep:  John L. Richardson<PHONE_NUMBER>  DOT Analyst:
Sylvia Moore<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted in part (subject to conditions, see below)

XX  Balance dismissed (see below)

The above action was effective when taken:   May 31, 2000,  through  May
31, 2002

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		    Office of International Aviation

XX  The authority granted is consistent with the aviation agreement
between the United States and Venezuela.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  XX  Holder’s
certificate of public convenience and necessity

	   XX  Standard Exemption Conditions (attached)

(See Reverse Side)

2

Conditions:  The authority granted to serve intermediate and beyond
points is limited to countries with which the United States has signed
open-skies agreements and/or countries for which Amerijet holds
authority to serve under certificates and exemptions issued by the
Department, and for which it holds route integration authority by virtue
of either the present action or other action of the Department.

The route integration authority granted is subject to the condition that
any service provided

under this exemption shall be consistent with all applicable agreements
between the United States and the foreign countries involved.
Furthermore, (a) nothing in the award of the route integration authority
requested should be construed as conferring upon Amerijet rights
(including fifth-freedom intermediate and/or beyond rights) to serve
markets where U.S. carrier entry is limited unless Amerijet notifies the
Department of its intent to serve such a market and unless and until the
Department has completed any necessary carrier selection procedures to
determine which carrier(s) should be authorized to exercise such rights;
and (b) should there be a request by any carrier to use the
limited-entry route rights that are included in Amerijet’s authority
by virtue of the route integration exemption granted here, but that are
not then being used by Amerijet, the holding of such authority by route
integration will not be considered as providing any preference for
Amerijet in a competitive carrier selection proceeding to determine
which carrier(s) should be entitled to use the authority at issue.

Dismissal:  We dismissed the carrier’s request for route integration
authority with respect to future certificate/exemption authority.  When
faced previously with comparable requests, we decided not to grant open
route integration authority on a prospective basis (see, for example,
Notices of Action Taken dated August 19, 1999 (Docket OST-99-6044) and
November 25, 1998 (Docket OST-98-4788)).

We also dismissed Amerijet’s request to serve Cuba and Brazil as
intermediate points.  With respect to Cuba, U.S. Government regulations
currently preclude U.S. carriers from operating scheduled services
between the United States and Cuba.  (See 31 CFR Part 515.)  Therefore,
it is not the Department’s policy to award new scheduled authority to
serve this market.  With respect to Brazil, there are currently no
all-cargo opportunities available for scheduled service in the
U.S.-Brazil market.

Remarks:  The U.S.-Venezuela aviation agreement does not provide for
coterminalization of Caracas and Maracaibo.  These points may only be
served as separate terminal points.

The authority for which Amerijet requested renewal expired January 30,
2000, but had been kept in force pursuant to the provisions of the
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 558(c), as implemented by 14 CFR
Part 377, pending action on its timely filed renewal application.

________________________________________________________________________
______________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department’s regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) immediate action was required and was
consistent with Department policy; (2) grant of the exemption was
consistent with the public interest; and (3) grant of the authority
would not constitute a major regulatory action under the Energy Policy
and Conservation Act of 1975.  To the extent not granted or dismissed,
we denied all requests in the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify,
or revoke the authority granted in this Notice at any time without
hearing at our discretion.

(See Next Page)

3

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR §
385.30, may file their petitions within ten (10) days after the date of
issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and the
filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

1 For service applicable to Amerijet’s request here, the
U.S.-Venezuela agreement provides for service

(1) from the Eastern zone of the United States via the Netherlands West
Indies to Caracas and beyond to Trinidad and Tobago, Brazil, Uruguay and
Argentina, and beyond to points beyond South America (except Europe);
(2) from the Eastern zone of the United States, except New York, via
Cuba, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, and the Netherlands West Indies to
Caracas; (3) from the Eastern zone of the United States, except New
York, via Cuba, Jamaica, and points on the Atlantic Coast of Colombia to
Maracaibo.  Amerijet currently holds authority on Route 597 to serve the
Netherlands West Indies, Trinidad and Tobago, Haiti, the Dominican
Republic, Jamaica, and Colombia.  The remaining intermediate points
“authorized” in the bilateral agreement but not now held by Amerijet
are Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, and Cuba.  We, therefore have treated
this part of Amerijet’s application as a request for intermediate
authority to serve those points.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 57 (Monday, March 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17932-17933]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06727]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0033]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Recordkeeping
Requirements for Microbiological Testing and Corrective Measures for
Bottled Water

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by April
24, 2013.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0658.
Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Domini Bean, Office of Information
Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., PI50-400T,
Rockville, MD 20850,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Recordkeeping Requirements for Microbiological Testing and Corrective
Measures for Bottled Water--21 CFR 129.35(a)(3)(i), 129.80(g), and
129.80(h) (OMB Control Number 0910-0658)--Extension

    The bottled water regulations in parts 129 and 165 (21 CFR parts
129 and 165) require that if any coliform organisms are detected in
weekly total coliform testing of finished bottled water, followup
testing must be conducted to determine whether any of the coliform
organisms are Escherichia coli. The adulteration provision of the
bottled water standard (Sec.  165.110(d)) provides that a finished
product that tests positive for E. coli will be deemed adulterated
under section 402(a)(3) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21
U.S.C. 342(a)(3)). In addition, the current good manufacturing practice
(CGMP) regulations for bottled water in part 129 require that source
water from other than a public water system (PWS) be tested at least
weekly for total coliform. If any coliform organisms are detected in
the source water, the bottled water manufacturers are required to
determine whether any of the coliform organisms are E. coli. Source
water found to contain E. coli is not considered water of a safe,
sanitary quality and would be unsuitable for bottled water production.
Before a bottler may use source water from a source that has tested
positive for E. coli, a bottler must take appropriate measures to
rectify or otherwise eliminate the cause of the contamination. A source
previously found to contain E. coli will be considered negative for E.
coli after five samples collected over a 24-hour period from the same
sampling site are tested and found to be E. coli negative.
    Description of Respondents: The respondents to this information
collection are domestic and foreign bottled water manufacturers that
sell bottled water in the United States.
    In the Federal Register of January 18, 2013 (78 FR 4152), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
extension of this collection of information. FDA received two letters
in response to the notice, which contained multiple comments.
    One comment suggested that laboratory quality assurance practices
should be required for the testing of bottled water. FDA's CGMP
regulations for bottled water in 21 CFR 129 do not specifically require
laboratory quality assurance practices, and FDA does not have the
specific statutory authority to require bottlers to use certified
laboratories for water quality tests.\1\ However, the CGMP regulations
for source water testing do require that ``[t]est and sample methods
shall be those recognized and approved by the government agency or
agencies having jurisdiction over the approval of the water source, and
shall be consistent with the minimum [standard of quality] requirements
set forth in Sec.  165.110(b) of this chapter'' (Sec.
129.35(a)(3)(ii)). The CGMP regulations also state that

``[a]nalysis of the sample may be performed for the plant by competent
commercial laboratories (e.g., Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
and State-certified laboratories)'' (Sec.  129.35(a)(3)(iii)). For
product water, the regulations also state that bottled water
manufacturers will ``[a]nalyze such samples by methods approved by the
government agency or agencies having jurisdiction'' (Sec.
129.80(g)(3)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), 2009. Bottled
Water: FDA Safety and Consumer Protections Are Often Less Stringent
Than Comparable EPA Protections for Tap Water.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One comment noted that the EPA issued a final rule on February 13,
2013, that established a maximum contaminant level for E. coli and
stated that E. coli is a more specific indicator of fecal contamination
and the potential presence of associated pathogen occurrence than fecal
coliforms. FDA agrees that E. coli is an appropriate indicator of fecal
contamination and that the presence of fecal indicators demonstrates
the potential for the presence of fecal pathogens. FDA requires bottled
water manufacturers to sample and analyze source water obtained from
other than a public water system for total coliform at least once each
week. If any coliform organisms are detected, manufacturers must
conduct followup testing to determine whether any of the coliform
organisms are E. coli. Source water found to contain E. coli is not
considered water of a safe, sanitary quality as required for use in
bottled water. Manufacturers must also analyze product water samples at
least once a week for total coliform, and, if any coliform organisms
are detected, they must conduct followup testing to determine whether
any of the coliform organisms are E. coli. Product water containing E.
coli is considered adulterated. Thus, the presence of the fecal
indicator E. coli is the key factor for determining whether source
water is of a safe, sanitary quality, and whether product water is
adulterated. FDA is reviewing the EPA final rule referenced in the
comment (National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Revisions to the
Total Coliform Rule, 78 FR 10269; February 13, 2013) to determine what
actions, if any, FDA needs to take to respond to the rule.
    To the extent that the comments recommended changes to FDA's
bottled water regulations, which can only be accomplished by
rulemaking, the comments were outside the scope of the four collection
of information topics on which the notice requested comments and will
not be discussed in this document.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                    Table 1--Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden\1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            Number of
              21 CFR Section                  Number of recordkeepers      records per    Total annual    Average burden per recordkeeping   Total hours
                                                                          recordkeeper       records
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.  Sec.   129.35(a)(3)(i) and           319 (bottlers subject to                   6           1,914  0.08 (5 minutes)                            153
 129.80(h).                                 source water and finished
                                            product testing).
Sec.   129.80(g) and 129.80(h)...........  95 (bottlers testing                       3             285  0.08 (5 minutes)                             23
                                            finished product only).
Sec.  Sec.   129.35(a)(3)(i) and           3 (bottlers conducting                     5              15  0.08 (5 minutes)                              1
 129.80(h).                                 secondary testing of source
                                            water).
Sec.  Sec.   129.35(a)(3)(i) and           3 (bottlers rectifying                     3               9  0.25 (15 minutes)                             2
 129.80(h).                                 contamination).
                                          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total................................  ............................  ..............  ..............  ..................................          179
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    The current CGMP regulations already reflect the time and
associated recordkeeping costs for those bottlers that are required to
conduct microbiological testing of their source water, as well as total
coliform testing of their finished bottled water products. We therefore
conclude that any additional burden and costs in recordkeeping based on
followup testing that is required if any coliform organisms detected in
the source water test positive for E.coli are negligible. We estimate
that the labor burden of keeping records of each test is about 5
minutes per test. We also require followup testing of source water and
finished bottled water products for E. coli when total coliform
positives occur. We expect that 319 bottlers that use sources other
than PWSs may find a total coliform positive sample about 3 times per
year in source testing and about 3 times in finished product testing,
for a total of 153 hours of recordkeeping. In addition to the 319
bottlers, about 95 bottlers that use PWSs may find a total coliform
positive sample about 3 times per year in finished product testing, for
a total of 23 hours of recordkeeping. Upon finding a total coliform
sample, bottlers will then have to conduct a followup test for E. coli.
    We expect that recordkeeping for the followup test for E. coli will
also take about 5 minutes per test. As shown in table 1 of this
document, we expect that 3 bottlers per year will have to carry out the
additional E. coli testing, with a burden of 1 hour. These bottlers
will also have to keep records about rectifying the source
contamination, for a burden of 2 hours. For all expected total coliform
testing, E. coli testing, and source rectification, we estimate a total
burden of 179 hours. We base our estimate on our experience with the
current CGMP regulations.

    Dated: March 20, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-06727 Filed 3-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 7 (Wednesday, January 11, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 3310]
[FR Doc No: 2017-00391]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Effectiveness of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Docket Nos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESS Lewes Project, LLC..................  EG17-1-000
Comanche Peak Power Company LLC.........  EG17-2-000
Clinton Battery Utility, LLC............  EG17-3-000
CXA Sundevil Power I, Inc...............  EG17-4-000
CXA Sundevil Power II, Inc..............  EG17-5-000
Broadview Energy JN, LLC................  EG17-6-000
Broadview Energy KW, LLC................  EG17-7-000
Moapa Southern Paiute Solar, LLC........  EG17-8-000
Ocean State Power LLC...................  EG17-9-000
Applied Energy LLC......................  EG17-10-000
Applied Energy LLC......................  EG17-11-000
Javelina Wind Energy II, LLC............  EG17-12-000
ESS Snook Project, LLC..................  EG17-13-000
ESS Rabbit Hill Project, LLC............  EG17-14-000
Bluestem Wind Energy, LLC...............  EG17-15-000
96WI 8me LLC............................  EG17-16-000
TransCanada Maine Wind Development Inc..  EG17-17-000
Innovative Solar 47, LLC................  EG17-18-000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Take notice that during the month of December 2016, the status of
the above-captioned entities as Exempt Wholesale Generators became
effective by operation of the Commission's regulations. 18 CFR 366.7(a)
(2017)

    Dated: January 5, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-00391 Filed 1-10-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 131 (Tuesday, July 9, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41072-41073]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16467]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: FEMA-2013-0025; OMB No. 1660-New]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request.

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites
the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity
to comment on a new information collection. In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice seeks comments concerning
applications for the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response
(SAFER) Grants program. The SAFER program provides funding for the
hiring of new firefighters and the recruitment and retention of
volunteer firefighters.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before September 9, 2013.

ADDRESSES: To avoid duplicate submissions to the docket, please use
only one of the following means to submit comments:
    (1) Online. Submit comments at http://www.regulations.gov under
Docket ID FEMA-2013-0025. Follow the instructions for submitting
comments.
    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to Docket Manager, Office of
Chief Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Room 840, Washington, DC
20472-3100.
    All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket
ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material,
all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any
personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this
information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act
notice, which is available by clicking on the Privacy Notice link on
the homepage of www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Dunham, Fire Program
Specialist, Grant Program Directorate,<PHONE_NUMBER>. You may contact
the Records Management Division for copies of the proposed collection
of information at facsimile number<PHONE_NUMBER> or email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act
of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.), as amended authorizes FEMA to
comprise the submission of applications for the Staffing for Adequate
Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) grants. The information collected
is grant application information that is necessary to assess the needs
of the applicants as well as the benefits to be obtained from the use
of funds. The information collected through the program's application
is the minimum necessary to evaluate grant applications and is
necessary for FEMA to comply with mandates delineated in the law. SAFER
applications were previously collected under ICR No. 1660-0054. It is
now necessary for SAFER to have its own, new collection.

Collection of Information

    Title: Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER)
Grants.
    Type of Information Collection: New collection.
    FEMA Forms: FEMA Form 080-4, Staffing for Adequate Fire and
Emergency Response (SAFER) (General Questions All Applicants); FEMA
Form 080-4a, Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response Hiring
of Firefighters Application (Questions and Narrative); FEMA Form 080-
4b, Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response Recruitment and
Retention of Volunteer Firefighters Application (Questions and
Narrative)
    Abstract: FEMA uses this information to ensure that FEMA's
responsibilities under the legislation can be fulfilled accurately and
efficiently. The information will be used to objectively evaluate each
of the anticipated applicants to determine which of the applicants'
proposals in each of the activities are the closest to the established
program priorities.
    Affected Public: State, Local or Tribal Government, and Not-for-
Profit Institutions.
    Number of Respondents: 3,200.
    Number of Responses: 3,200.

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 26,190.
    Estimated Cost: There are no record keeping, capital, start-up, or
maintenance costs associated with this information collection.

Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption.
Comments are solicited to: (a) Evaluate whether the proposed data
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b)
evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Dated: June 21, 2013.
Loretta Cassatt,
Records Management Branch, Mission Support Bureau, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2013-16467 Filed 7-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-78-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 77 (Friday, April 20, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17481-17483]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08140]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 31188; Amdt. No. 3795]

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

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or removes Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures (ODPs) for operations at certain
airports. These regulatory actions are needed because of the

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

DATES: This rule is effective April 20, 2018. The compliance date for
each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of April 20, 2018.

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

For Examination

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

Availability

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedure
Standards Branch (AFS-420), Flight Technologies and Programs Divisions,
Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125),
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97), by establishing,
amending, suspending, or removes SIAPS, Takeoff Minimums and/or ODPS.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP and its associated
Takeoff Minimums or ODP for an identified airport is listed on FAA form
documents which are incorporated by reference in this amendment under 5
U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR part 97.20. The applicable FAA
forms are FAA Forms 8260-3, 8260-4, 8260-5, 8260-15A, and 8260-15B when
required by an entry on 8260-15A.
    The large number of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, their complex
nature, and the need for a special format make publication in the
Federal Register expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use
the regulatory text of the SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums or ODPs, but instead
refer to their graphic depiction on charts printed by publishers of
aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages of incorporation by
reference are realized and publication of the complete description of
each SIAP, Takeoff Minimums and ODP listed on FAA form documents is
unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections and
specifies the types of SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their
applicable effective dates. This amendment also identifies the airport
and its location, the procedure, and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

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

The Rule

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on April 6, 2018.
John S. Duncan,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 97 (14 CFR part 97) is amended by
establishing, amending, suspending, or removing Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures and/or Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure
Procedures effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

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

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

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

Effective 24 May 2018

Wetumpka, AL, Wetumpka Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Orig-B
Glendale, AZ, Glendale Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt
2
Phoenix, AZ, Phoenix Deer Valley, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 6
Phoenix, AZ, Phoenix Goodyear, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 2
Phoenix, AZ, Phoenix-Mesa Gateway, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Amdt 2
Scottsdale, AZ, Scottsdale, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 9
Los Angeles, CA, Whiteman, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 1
Los Angeles, CA, WHITEMAN ONE, Graphic DP
Santa Monica, CA, Santa Monica Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Amdt 1B
Springfield, CO, Springfield Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP,
Orig-A
Clewiston, FL, Airglades, RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Orig-A
DeFuniak Springs, FL, DeFuniak Springs, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Amdt 1
DeFuniak Springs, FL, DeFuniak Springs, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Amdt 2
Guam, GU, Guam Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 6L, Amdt 4A
Guam, GU, Guam Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 6R, Orig-C
Guam, GU, Guam Intl, NDB RWY 24R, Amdt 1A
Guam, GU, Guam Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 6L, Amdt 1B
Guam, GU, Guam Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 6R, Amdt 1B
Guam, GU, Guam Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 24L, Amdt 1C
Guam, GU, Guam Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 24R, Amdt 2A
Guam, GU, Guam Intl, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 24R, Amdt 1A
Guam, GU, Guam Intl, VOR-A, Orig-F
Guam, GU, Guam Intl, VOR OR TACAN RWY 6L, Orig-F
Guam, GU, Guam Intl, VOR OR TACAN RWY 24R, Amdt 1A
Kailua/Kona, HI, Ellison Onizuka Kona Intl at Keahole, RNAV (RNP) Z
RWY 17, Orig-B
Fort Madison, IA, Fort Madison Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 1
Fort Madison, IA, Fort Madison Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 1
Muscatine, IA, Muscatine Muni, ILS OR LOC RWY 24, Amdt 2A
Newton, IA, Newton Muni-Earl Johnson Field, ILS OR LOC RWY 32, Amdt
3
Newton, IA, Newton Muni-Earl Johnson Field, RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Amdt
1
Chicago, IL, Lansing Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Orig-B
Chicago/West Chicago, IL, DuPage, ILS OR LOC RWY 2L, Amdt 2F
St James, MN, St James Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig-
A
Bozeman, MT, Bozeman Yellowstone Intl, BOZEMAN SIX, Graphic DP
Bozeman, MT, Bozeman Yellowstone Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 12, Amdt 9B
Bozeman, MT, Bozeman Yellowstone Intl, RNAV (GPS)-A, Amdt 2B
Bozeman, MT, Bozeman Yellowstone Intl, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 12, Orig-B
Bozeman, MT, Bozeman Yellowstone Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle
DP, Amdt 4B
Bozeman, MT, Bozeman Yellowstone Intl, VOR RWY 12, Amdt 15B
Helena, MT, Helena Rgnl, COPTER VOR 254, Orig
Missoula, MT, Missoula Intl, GRZLY THREE, Graphic DP
Missoula, MT, Missoula Intl, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt
9
Ahoskie, NC, Tri-County, VOR-A, Amdt 6A
Chapel Hill, NC, Horace Williams, VOR RWY 27, Amdt 1D
Currituck, NC, Currituck County Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Orig-B
Erwin, NC, Harnett Rgnl Jetport, LOC RWY 5, Orig-A
Roxboro, NC, Person County, ILS OR LOC RWY 6, Amdt 1A
Smithfield, NC, Johnston Rgnl, ILS Z OR LOC Z RWY 3, Amdt 2A
Hebron, NE, Hebron Muni, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Orig-A
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, ILS OR LOC RWY 14L, Amdt 2
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, ILS OR LOC RWY 14R, ILS RWY 14R (SA CAT
I), ILS RWY 14R (CAT II), ILS RWY 14R (CAT III), Amdt 6
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, ILS OR LOC RWY 18, Amdt 10
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, ILS OR LOC RWY 32L, Amdt 3
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, ILS OR LOC RWY 32R, ILS RWY 32R (CAT
II), ILS RWY 32R (CAT III), Amdt 1
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, ILS OR LOC RWY 36, Amdt 1
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 14L, Amdt 2
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 14R, Amdt 3
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 18, Amdt 4
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 32L, Amdt 2
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 32R, Amdt 1
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 36, Amdt 2
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 14L, Orig-B
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 14R, Orig-C
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 18, Orig-B
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 32L, Orig-B
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 32R, Amdt 1
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 36, Orig-B
Omaha, NE, Eppley Airfield, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt
6A
Zuni Pueblo, NM, Black Rock, RNAV (GPS) RWY 6, Orig, CANCELED
Zuni Pueblo, NM, Black Rock, Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt
1, CANCELED
Zuni Pueblo, NM, Black Rock, VOR/DME RWY 6, Amdt 2B, CANCELED
Ashland, OH, Ashland County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 19, Orig-E
Kent, OH, Kent State Univ, RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, Amdt 2
Napoleon, OH, Henry County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 28, Amdt 1
Napoleon, OH, Henry County, VOR RWY 28, Amdt 4, CANCELED
Wadsworth, OH, Wadsworth Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 2, Amdt 2
Wadsworth, OH, Wadsworth Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 20, Amdt 2
Wauseon, OH, Fulton County, RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Orig-B
Miami, OK, Miami Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 1
New Castle, PA, New Castle Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Amdt 1C
New Castle, PA, New Castle Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Amdt 1C
Philadelphia, PA, Northeast Philadelphia, ILS OR LOC RWY 24, Amdt 13
Philadelphia, PA, Northeast Philadelphia, LOC BC RWY 6, Amdt 8
Philadelphia, PA, Northeast Philadelphia, RNAV (GPS) RWY 24, Amdt 1
Philadelphia, PA, Northeast Philadelphia, VOR RWY 6, Amdt 12B,
CANCELED
Philadelphia, PA, Northeast Philadelphia, VOR RWY 24, Amdt 19B,
CANCELED
Zelienople, PA, Zelienople Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 1A
Zelienople, PA, Zelienople Muni, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 1A
Gallatin, TN, Sumner County Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 3
Gallatin, TN, Sumner County Rgnl, RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 3
Edna, TX, Jackson County, RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig-A
Edna, TX, Jackson County, RNAV (GPS)-B, Orig-A

    Rescinded: On March 29, 2018 (83 FR 13411), the FAA published an
Amendment in Docket No. 31184, Amdt No. 3791, to Part 97 of the
Federal Aviation Regulations under section 97.29 and 97.33. The
following entries for New York, NY, effective May 24, 2018, is
hereby rescinded in their entirety:

New York, NY, John F Kennedy Intl, COPTER RNAV (GPS) 027, Orig-C
New York, NY, John F Kennedy Intl, ILS OR LOC RWY 22R, Amdt 2B

[FR Doc. 2018-08140 Filed 4-19-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P