[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 248 (Monday, December 28, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 80767-80768]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32609]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0719; FRL 9940-54-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; National Pretreatment Program (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``National Pretreatment Program''
(EPA ICR No. 0002.16, OMB Control No. 2040-0009) to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This is a
proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through
December 31, 2015. Public comments were previously requested via the
Federal Register (80 FR 60142) on October 5, 2015 during a 60-day
comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public
comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its
estimated burden and cost to the public. 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.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before January 27,
2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OW-2008-0719, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA
Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.

    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amelia Letnes, Office of Wastewater
Management, Mail Code 4203M, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-564-
5627; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: This ICR calculates the burden and costs associated with
managing and implementing the National Pretreatment Program as mandated
under Clean Water Act (CWA) sections 402(a) and (b) and 307(b). This
ICR includes all existing tasks under the National Pretreatment
Program, as amended by the EPA's Streamlining Rule. EPA's Office of
Wastewater Management (OWM) in the Office of Water (OW) is responsible
for the management of the pretreatment program. The CWA requires EPA to
develop national pretreatment standards to control discharges from
Industrial Users (IUs) into POTWs. These standards limit the level of
certain pollutants allowed in non-domestic wastewater that is
discharged to a POTW. EPA administers the pretreatment program through
the NPDES permit program. Under the NPDES permit program, EPA may
approve State or individual POTW implementation of the pretreatment
standards at their respective levels.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: State & Local Governments, Private
Entities
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory per Clean Water Act
(CWA) sections 402(a) and (b) and 307(b).
    Estimated number of respondents: 95,462 (total).
    Frequency of response: Annually, Semi-annually, on occasion
    Total estimated burden: 1,744,406 hours (per year). Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b)
    Total estimated cost: $77,907,187 (per year), includes $2,515,470
annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 62,110 hours in
the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently
approved by OMB. This decrease is due to updated estimates that account
for changes in the respondent universe.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2015-32609 Filed 12-24-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: July 14, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 134)]
[Notices]
[Page 40816-40817]
[DOCID:fr14jy10-57]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Sunshine Act Meeting Notice

July 8, 2010.
    The following notice of meeting is published pursuant to section
3(a) of the government in the Sunshine Act (Pub. L. No. 94-409), 5
U.S.C. 552b:

Agency Holding Meeting: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Date and Time: July 15, 2010, 10 a.m.

Place:  Room 2C, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.

Status: Open.

Matters To Be Considered: Agenda*.

    Note: Items listed on the agenda may be deleted without further
notice.

Contact Person for More Information:  Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. For a recorded message listing items struck
from or added to the meeting, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    This is a list of matters to be considered by the Commission. It
does not include a listing of all documents relevant to the items on
the agenda. All public documents, however, may be viewed on line at the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link,
or may be examined in the Commission's Public Reference Room.

         961st--Meeting; Regular Meeting; July 15, 2010; 10 a.m.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Item No.                 Docket No.            Company
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Administrative
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A-1...........................  AD02-1-000.......  Agency Administrative
                                                    Matters.
A-2...........................  AD02-7-000.......  Customer Matters,
                                                    Reliability,
                                                    Security and Market
                                                    Operations
A-3...........................  AD10-15-000......  Smart Grid Update.
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
                                Electric
------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-1...........................  EL10-64-000......  California Public
                                                    Utilities
                                                    Commission.
                                EL10-66-000......  Southern California
                                                    Edison Company,
                                                    Pacific Gas and
                                                    Electric Company and
                                                    San Diego Gas &
                                                    Electric Company.

E-2...........................  ER10-1269-000....  Southwest Power Pool,
                                                    Inc.
E-3...........................  RD10-13-000......  North American
                                                    Electric Reliability
                                                    Corporation.
E-4...........................  RM08-19-003......  Mandatory Reliability
                                                    Standards for the
                                                    Calculation of
                                                    Available Transfer
                                                    Capability, Capacity
                                                    Benefit Margins,
                                                    Transmission
                                                    Reliability;
                                                    Margins, Total
                                                    Transfer Capability,
                                                    and Existing
                                                    Transmission
                                                    Commitments;
                                                    Mandatory
                                                    Reliability
                                                    Standards for the
                                                    Bulk Power System.
                                RM05-5-019.......  Standards for
                                                    Business Practices
                                                    and Communication
                                                    Protocols for Public
                                                    Utilities.
E-5...........................  OA08-52-007......  New York Independent
                                                    System Operator,
                                                    Inc.
                                                   New York Transmission
                                                    Owners.
E-6...........................  ER10-1268-000....  South Carolina
                                                    Electric & Gas
                                                    Company.
                                ER10-516-000.....
                                ER10-855-000.....
E-7...........................  OMITTED
E-8...........................  EG06-73-000......  BG Dighton Power,
                                                    LLC.
                                EG98-79-000......  MASSPOWER.
                                EG99-220-000.....  Lake Road Generating
                                                    Company, LP.
E-9...........................  ER10-1185-000....  ISO New England Inc.
E-10..........................  ER10-765-000.....  California
                                                    Independent System
                                                    Operator
                                                    Corporation.
E-11..........................  ER10-942-000.....  ISO New England Inc.
                                                    and New England
                                                    Power Pool
E-12..........................  ER07-521-009.....  New York Independent
                                                    System Operator,
                                                    Inc.
E-13..........................  ER08-1281-004....  New York Independent
                                                    System Operator,
                                                    Inc.
E-14..........................  OMITTED
E-15..........................  EL10-69-000......  Virginia Electric and
                                                    Power Company v. PJM
                                                    Interconnection,
                                                    L.L.C.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Gas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
G-1...........................  RP09-2-002.......  Portland Natural Gas
                                                    Transmission System.
G-2...........................  RP01-245-031.....  Transcontinental Gas
                                                    Pipe Line
                                                    Corporation.
G-3...........................  RP10-149-000.....  Great Lakes Gas
                                                    Transmission Limited
                                                    Partnership.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Hydro
------------------------------------------------------------------------
H-1...........................  P-1888-028.......  York Haven Power
                                                    Company, LLC.
H-2...........................  UL09-1-002.......  L.S. Starrett
                                                    Company.
H-3...........................  P-460-033........  City of Tacoma,
                                                    Washington.
                                P-460-040
                                P-460-021
H-4...........................  EL10-53-000......  FPL Energy Maine
                                                    Hydro LLC v. Great
                                                    Lakes Hydro America,
                                                    LLC and Rumford
                                                    Falls Hydro LLC.
H-5...........................  P-2355-014.......  Exelon Generation
                                                    Company, LLC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Certificates
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-1...........................  OMITTED
C-2...........................  CP10-73-000......  TGGT Holdings, LLC.
C-3...........................  CP09-455-000.....  Florida Gas
                                                    Transmission
                                                    Company, LLC.
                                CP09-456-000.....  Transcontinental Gas
                                                    Pipe Line Company,
                                                    LLC.
                                                   Florida Gas
                                                    Transmission
                                                    Company, LLC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
    A free Web cast of this event is available through http://
www.ferc.gov. Anyone with Internet access who desires to view this
event can do so by navigating to http://www.ferc.gov's Calendar of
Events and locating this event in the Calendar. The event will contain
a link to its Web cast. The Capitol Connection provides technical
support for the free Web casts. It also offers access to this event via
television in the DC area and via phone bridge for a fee. If you have
any questions, visit http://www.CapitolConnection.org or contact
Danelle Springer or David Reininger at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Immediately following the conclusion of the Commission Meeting, a
press briefing will be held in the Commission Meeting Room. Members of
the public may view this briefing in the designated overflow room. This
statement is intended to notify the public that the press briefings
that follow Commission meetings may now be viewed remotely at
Commission headquarters, but will not be telecast through the Capitol
Connection service.

[FR Doc. 2010-17218 Filed 7-12-10; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


SIP SUBMITTAL COMPLETENESS CRITERIA CHECKLIST ( in accordance with 40 CFR Part 51  App. V)

SIP Submitted by: Maryland Date Submitted: October 31, 2005 Subject: Update to the definition of " VOC" ( COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>B( 53)).

Review Completed by: Harold A. Frankford Date Completed: December 14, 2005 Administrative Materials ACCEPTABLE EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL ( X)

1. A formal letter of submittal from the Governor or his designee, requesting EPA approval of the plan or revision thereof. 1. A formal letter of submittal to Donald Welsh, EPA Region III Regional Administrator, from Kendl P. Philbrick, Secretary,

Maryland Department of the Environment, dated October 31,

2005 was included with the SIP submittal. X 2. Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State code or body of regulations; or issued the permit, order,

consent agreement in final form. That evidence shall include the date of adoption or final issuance as well as the effective date of the plan, if different from the adoption/ issuance date. 2. A copy of the proposed regulation as contained in the Maryland Register on June 10, 2005 in Volume 32, Issue 12 and the final regulation as contained in the Maryland Register on September 2, 2005 in Volume 32, Issue 18 were included in the SIP submittal. The regulation was adopted on August 23,

2005 and became effective on September 12, 2005. Both the adoption and effective dates are included in the Maryland Register Notice of Final Action. X 3. Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under State law to adopt and implement the plan. 3. The legal authority is found in Environmental Article, Title 2 Annotated Code of Maryland as noted in the Maryland's final notice. X Administrative Materials EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL ( X)

2 4. A copy of actual regulation, or document submitted for approval and incorporation by reference into the plan,

including indication of the changes made to the existing approved plan, where applicable. The submittal shall be a copy of the official State regulation/ document signed, stamped,

dated by the appropriate State official indicating that it is fully enforceable by the State. The effective date of the regulation/ document shall, whenever possible, be indicated in the document itself. 4. The SIP submittal included a copy of the final rule as published in the Maryland Register on September 2, 2005. The effective date of September 12, 2005 is part of the Maryland Register Notice.

5. Evidence that the State followed all of the procedural requirements of the State's laws and constitution in conducting and completing the adoption/ issuance of the plan. 5. Letter of submittal dated October 31, 2005 signed by Kendl P. Philbrick, Secretary, Maryland Department of the Environment, certified that all state procedural requirements were followed in the adoption of the plan revision. X 6. Evidence that public notice was given of the proposed change consistent with procedures approved by EPA, including the date of publication of such notice. 6. Affidavits of publication from six newspapers were included in the SIP submittal. X 7. Certification that public hearings were held in accordance with the information provided in the public notice and the State's laws and constitution, if applicable. 7. Maryland held a public hearing on July 13, 2005 in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR Section 51.102.

A certified transcript of the public hearing was included in the SIP submittal which stated that the hearing was held in accordance with State law and according to the public notice. X 8. Compilation of public comments and the State's response thereto. 8. No written comments were received during the public comment period. No oral comments were received during the public hearing. X Technical Materials EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL ( X)

3 1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan. 1. N/ A; This revision is merely updating the reference to 40 CFR § 51.100( s)   the definition of " Volatile organic compounds ( VOC)," 2004 edition, which is cited in <IP_ADDRESS>B( 53). X 2. Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA attainment/ nonattainment designation of the locations and the status of the attainment plan for the affected area( s). 2. N/ A; This revision is merely updating the reference to 40 CFR § 51.100( s)   the definition of " Volatile organic compounds ( VOC)," 2004 edition, which is cited in <IP_ADDRESS>B( 53). X 3. Quantification of the changes in plan allowable emissions from the affected sources; estimates of changes in current actual emissions from affected sources or, where appropriate,

quantification of changes in actual emissions from affected sources through calculations of the differences between certain baseline levels and allowable emissions anticipated as a result of the revision. 3. N/ A; This revision is merely updating the reference to 40 CFR § 51.100( s)   the definition of " Volatile organic compounds ( VOC)," 2004 edition, which is cited in <IP_ADDRESS>B( 53). X 4. The State's demonstration that the national ambient air quality standards, prevention of significant deterioration increments, reasonable further progress demonstration, and visibility, as applicable, are protected if the plan is approved and implemented. 4. N/ A; This revision is merely updating the reference to 40 CFR § 51.100( s)   the definition of " Volatile organic compounds ( VOC)," 2004 edition, which is cited in <IP_ADDRESS>B( 53). X 5. Modeling information required to support the proposed revision, including input data, output data, models used,

ambient monitoring data used, meteorological data used,

justification for use of offsite data ( where used), modes of models used, assumptions, and other information relevant to the determination of adequacy of the modeling analysis. 5. N/ A; This revision is merely updating the reference to 40 CFR § 51.100( s)   the definition of " Volatile organic compounds ( VOC)," 2004 edition, which is cited in <IP_ADDRESS>B( 53). X Technical Materials EPA REQUIREMENT STATE SUBMITTAL ( X)

4 6. Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction technology. 6. N/ A; This revision is merely updating the reference to 40 CFR § 51.100( s)   the definition of " Volatile organic compounds ( VOC)," 2004 edition, which is cited in <IP_ADDRESS>B( 53). X 7. Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work practice standards and recordkeeping/ reporting requirements,

where necessary, to ensure emission levels. 7. N/ A; This revision is merely updating the reference to 40 CFR § 51.100( s)   the definition of " Volatile organic compounds ( VOC)," 2004 edition, which is cited in <IP_ADDRESS>B( 53). X 8. Compliance/ enforcement strategies, including how compliance will be determined in practice. 8. N/ A; This revision is merely updating the reference to 40 CFR § 51.100( s)   the definition of " Volatile organic compounds ( VOC)," 2004 edition, which is cited in <IP_ADDRESS>B( 53). X 9. Special economic and technological justifications required by any applicable EPA policies. ( If a policy is not appropriate,

explain why.) 9. N/ A. No special justifications are required. X 10. A Section 107 request must be accompanied by a maintenance plan demonstrating maintenance to the relevant NAAQS for at least 10 years after redesignation. 10. N/ A. Not applicable because this is not a section 107 request. X


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 76 (Wednesday, April 20, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22044-22045]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9292]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 158 and 161

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0110; FRL-8861-7]
RIN 2070-AD30

Data Requirements for Antimicrobial Pesticides; Notification to
the Secretaries of Agriculture and Health and Human Services

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notification to the Secretaries of Agriculture and Health and
Human Services.

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

SUMMARY: This document notifies the public that the Administrator of
EPA has forwarded to the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of
Health and Human Services a draft final rule under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). EPA is codifying a
separate listing of data requirements in the Code of Federal
Regulations for the registration of antimicrobial pesticide products.
These data requirements reflect current scientific knowledge and
current Agency regulatory practices. Besides providing the regulated
community with clearer and more transparent information, the updated
data requirements further enhance EPA's ability to make regulatory
decisions about the human health and environmental fate and effects of
antimicrobial pesticide products.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0110. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index available in http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Docket
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703)
305-5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathryn Boyle, Field and External
Affairs Division, (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or contact Scott Drewes, same address; telephone
number<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Does this action apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. It simply
announces the submission of a draft final rule to the U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA) and the Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS) and does not otherwise affect any specific entities. This action
may, however, be of particular interest if you are a producer of
pesticide products (NAICS 32532), antifoulants (NAICS 32551),
antimicrobial pesticides (NAICS 32561), wood preservatives (NAICS
32519), importers of such products, or any person or company who seeks
to register an antimicrobial, antifoulant coating, ballast water
treatment, wood preservative pesticide, or to obtain a tolerance for
such a pesticide. Since other entities may also be interested, the
Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may
be interested in this action. If you have any questions regarding this
action, consult one of the persons listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.

II. What action is EPA taking?

    Section 25(a)(2) of FIFRA requires the Administrator to provide the
Secretary of Agriculture with a copy of any final regulation at least
30 days before signing it for publication in the Federal Register.
Similarly, section 21(b) of FIFRA provides that the Administrator must
provide the Secretary of Health and Human Services with a copy of any
draft final rule pertaining to a public health pesticide at least 30
days before signing it for publication in the Federal Register. The
draft final rule is not available to the public until after it has been
signed by EPA. If either Secretary comments in writing regarding the
draft final rule within 15 days after receiving it, the Administrator
shall include the comments of the Secretary, if requested by the
Secretary, and the Administrator's response to those comments in the
final rule when published in the Federal Register. If the Secretary
does not comment in writing within 15 days after receiving the draft
final rule, the Administrator may sign the final rule for publication
in the Federal Register anytime after the 15-day period.

III. Do any statutory and executive order reviews apply to this
notification?

    No. This document is not a rule; it is merely a notification of
submission to the Secretaries of Agriculture and Health and Human
Services. As such, none of the regulatory assessment requirements apply
to this document.

IV. Will this Notification be Subject to the Congressional Review Act?

    No. This action is not a rule for purposes of the Congressional
Review Act (CRA), 5 U.S.C. 804(3), and will not be submitted to
Congress and the Comptroller General. EPA will submit the final rule to
Congress and the Comptroller General as required by the CRA.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 158

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 161

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: April 7, 2011.
Steven Bradbury,
Director, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011-9292 Filed 4-19-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 6, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 13317]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5343]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[ Project Nos. 14260-000, 14264-000, et al.]

Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund XII, BOST2, LLC, et al.; Notice
Announcing Filing Priority for Preliminary Permit Applications

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Project No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund XII...............................    14260-000
BOST2, LLC.................................................    14264-000
Riverbank Hydro No. 21, LLC................................    14267-000
FFP Project 96, LLC........................................    14273-000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 28, 2012, the Commission held a drawing to determine
priority between four competing preliminary permit applications with
identical filing times. In the event that the Commission concludes that
none of the applicants' plans are better adapted than the other to
develop, conserve, and utilize in the public interest the water
resources of the region at issue, the priority established by this
drawing will serve as the tiebreaker. Based on the drawing, the order
of priority is as follows:
    1. FFP Project 96, LLC: Project No. 14273-000.
    2. BOST2, LLC: Project No. 14264-000.
    3. Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund XII: Project No. 14260-000.
    4. Riverbank Hydro No. 21, LLC: Project No. 14267-000.

    Dated: February 29, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-5343 Filed 3-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 29, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 250)]
[Notices]
[Page 78419]
[DOCID:fr29de06-55]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RR07-8-000]

Delegation Agreement Between the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation and Florida Reliability Coordinating Council;
Notice of Filing

December 21, 2006.
    On December 21, 2006, the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC) submitted for Commission approval a delegation
agreement between NERC and the Florida Reliability Coordinating
Council. The delegation agreement has been assigned to the existing
docket number referenced above, which was created for a draft version
of the agreement previously filed for informational purposes.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of comments in lieu
of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons

unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies
of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is
accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the ``eLibrary'' link

and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room
in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' link on the Web site
that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document
is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online
service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call (866) 208-
3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Interested parties may file comments on this filing on or before
January 10, 2007.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-22350 Filed 12-28-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 136 (Friday, July 15, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 46131]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16867]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission Advisory Committee on Small and Emerging
Companies will hold a public meeting on Tuesday, July 19, 2016, in
Multi-Purpose Room LL-006 at the Commission's headquarters, 100 F
Street NE., Washington, DC.
    The meeting will begin at 9:30 a.m. (EDT) and will be open to the
public. Seating will be on a first-come, first-served basis. Doors will
open at 9:00 a.m. Visitors will be subject to security checks. The
meeting will be webcast on the Commission's Web site at www.sec.gov.
    On June 27, 2016, the Commission published notice of the Committee
meeting (Release No. 33-10105), indicating that the meeting is open to
the public and inviting the public to submit written comments to the
Committee. This Sunshine Act notice is being issued because a majority
of the Commission may attend the meeting.
    The agenda for the meeting includes matters relating to rules and
regulations affecting small and emerging companies under the federal
securities laws.
    For further information, please contact Brent J. Fields in the
Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 12, 2016.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-16867 Filed 7-13-16; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 34 (Tuesday, February 23, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10753-10767]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03565]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0691; Product Identifier 2020-NM-064-AD; Amendment
39-21377; AD 2021-01-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; MHI RJ Aviation ULC (Type Certificate
Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.) Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain MHI RJ Aviation ULC Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100
& 440) airplanes. This AD was prompted by evidence that a revised
structural life limit of some components of the nose landing gear (NLG)
and/or main landing gear (MLG) was not implemented during repair. This
AD requires verifying that the affected components are installed on the
airplane, revising the structural life limits in the existing
structural deviation inspection requirements (SDIR) airplane document,
and replacing affected components if necessary. The FAA is issuing this
AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective March 30, 2021.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of March 30,
2021.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact MHI

RJ Aviation ULC, 12655 Henri-Fabre Blvd., Mirabel, Qu[eacute]bec J7N
1E1, Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America toll-free
telephone +1-844-272-2720 or direct-dial telephone +1-514-855-8500; fax
+1-514-855-8501; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet https://mhirj.com.
You may view this service information at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th St., Des
Moines, WA. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0691.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2020-
0691; 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
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: Andrea Jimenez, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart
Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax 516-
794-5531; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation
authority for Canada, has issued Canadian AD CF-2020-09, dated April 7,
2020 (also referred to as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness
Information, or the MCAI), to correct an unsafe condition for certain
MHI RJ Aviation ULC Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440)
airplanes. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2020-0691.
    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain MHI RJ Aviation
ULC Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes. The
NPRM published in the Federal Register on October 5, 2020 (85 FR
62626). The NPRM was prompted by evidence that a revised structural
life limit of some components of the NLG and/or MLG was not implemented
during repair. The NPRM proposed to require verifying that the affected
components are installed on the airplane, revising the structural life
limits in the existing SDIR airplane document, and replacing affected
components if necessary. The FAA is issuing this AD to address
structural life limits that are lower than the life limit published in
the Maintenance Requirements Manual (MRM), Part 2. This condition, if
not corrected, could lead to the collapse of the affected NLG and/or
MLG, possibly resulting in airplane damage and injury to the occupants.
See the MCAI for additional background information.

Comments

    The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in
developing this final rule. The FAA has considered the comment
received. Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) stated that
it supports the NPRM.

Additional Change Made to This AD

    This AD has been revised to provide the revised structural life
limits in figure 1 to paragraph (h) of this AD instead of referencing
the individual repair engineering orders (REOs) in paragraph (h) of
this AD. The REOs did not meet the Office of the Federal Register's
criteria for incorporation by reference.

Conclusion

    The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment
received, and determined that air safety and the public interest
require adopting this final rule with the changes described previously
and minor editorial changes. The FAA has determined that these minor
changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.
    The FAA also determined that these changes will not increase the
economic burden on any operator or increase the scope of this final
rule.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    Bombardier has issued Service Bulletin 601R-32-112, dated November
11, 2019. This service information describes procedures for verifying
that affected components are installed on the airplane, revising the
structural life limits in the existing SDIR airplane document, and
replacing affected parts if necessary. 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
the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 456 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                      Estimated Costs for Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Labor cost                    Parts cost               Cost per product        Cost on U.S. operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Up to 143 work-hours x $85 per  Up to $103,114............  Up to $115,269...........  Up to $52,562,664.
 hour = Up to $12,155.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 products 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.

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13   [Amended]

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

2021-01-01 MHI RJ Aviation ULC (Type Certificate Previously Held by
Bombardier, Inc.): Amendment 39-21377; Docket No. FAA-2020-0691;
Product Identifier 2020-NM-064-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective March 30, 2021.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to MHI RJ Aviation ULC (type certificate
previously held by Bombardier, Inc.) Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet
Series 100 & 440) airplanes, certificated in any category, serial
numbers 7003 through 8999 inclusive.

(d) Subject

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

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by evidence that a revised structural life
limit of some components of the nose landing gear (NLG) and/or main
landing gear (MLG) was not implemented during repair. The FAA is
issuing this AD to address structural life limits that are lower
than the life limits published in the Maintenance Requirements
Manual (MRM), Part 2. This condition, if not corrected, could lead
to the collapse of the affected NLG and/or MLG, possibly resulting
in airplane damage and injury to the occupants.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Verification of Airplane or Technical Records

    Within 6 months from the effective date of this AD: Verify the
airplane or technical records to determine if an NLG or MLG
component listed in Table 1 or Table 2 of Bombardier Service
Bulletin 601R-32-112, dated November 11, 2019, is installed on the
airplane. If this verification determines that an affected component
listed in Table 1 or Table 2 of Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-32-
112, dated November 11, 2019, is installed on the airplane, perform
the actions specified in paragraph (h) or (i) of this AD, as
applicable.

(h) Incorporation of the Structural Deviation Inspection Requirements
(SDIR) Life Limit Into the Existing SDIR Airplane Document

    If the total flight cycles of the component is less than the
revised SDIR life limit identified in figure 1 to paragraph (h) of
this AD minus 2,000 flight cycles: Within 12 months after completing
the actions specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, incorporate the
applicable revised life limit of the affected component into the
existing SDIR airplane document as specified in figure 1 to
paragraph (h) of this AD.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23FE21.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23FE21.003

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23FE21.004

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23FE21.005

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23FE21.006

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23FE21.007

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23FE21.008

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23FE21.009

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23FE21.010

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23FE21.011

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23FE21.012

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C

(i) Replacement of Repaired NLG and/or MLG Component

    If the total flight cycles of the component is equal to or more
than the applicable revised SDIR life limit specified in figure 1 to
paragraph (h) of this AD minus 2,000 flight cycles: Within 12 months
or 2,000 flight cycles, whichever occurs first, after completing the
actions specified in paragraph (g) of this AD, replace the affected
component with a serviceable component.

(j) Parts Installation Prohibition

    As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install any
component listed in Table 1 or Table 2 of Bombardier Service
Bulletin 601R-32-112, dated November 11, 2019, on any airplane
without first incorporating the actions specified in paragraph (h)
or (i) of this AD, as applicable.

(k) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York ACO Branch, 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 Office, as appropriate. If
sending information directly to the manager of the certification
office, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing Operational
Safety, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Before
using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
local Flight Standards Office.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO
Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA); or MHI RJ
Aviation ULC's TCCA Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved
by the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

(l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian AD CF-2020-09, dated April 7, 2020, for related
information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet
at https://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket
No. FAA-2020-0691.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Andrea Jimenez,
Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA, New York
ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(m) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) 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 this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 601R-32-112, dated November 11,
2019.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact MHI
RJ Aviation ULC, 12655 Henri-Fabre Blvd., Mirabel, Qu[eacute]bec,
J7N 1E1 Canada; Widebody Customer Response Center North America
toll-free telephone +1-844-272-2720 or direct-dial telephone +1-514-
855-8500; fax +1-514-855-8501; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>internet
https://mhirj.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. 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_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on December 28, 2020.
Lance T. Gant,
Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-03565 Filed 2-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 211 (Thursday, November 4, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60756-60757]
[FR Doc No: 2021-23969]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2021-0633; Airspace Docket No. 21-ANM-22]
RIN 2120-AA66

Modification and Establishment of Class E Airspace; Frank Wiley
Field Airport, MT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace, designated as an
extension to a Class D or Class E surface area, at Frank Wiley Field
Airport, Miles City, MT. This action also removes the Class E airspace
extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface. Additionally, the
action implements an administrative update to the Class E2 and E5 text
headers. This action ensures the safety and management of instrument
flight rule (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, January 27, 2022. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11
and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov//air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you
can contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is also available for inspection at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of FAA Order JO 7400.11F at NARA, email
[email protected] or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Van Der Wal, Federal Aviation
Administration, Western Service Center, Operations Support Group, 2200
S 216th Street, Des Moines, WA 98198; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it establishes and modifies Class E airspace at Frank Wiley Field
Airport, Miles City, MT, to ensure the safety and management of IFR
operations at the airport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (86 FR 44670; August 13, 2021) for Docket No. FAA-2021-0633 to
establish and modify Class E airspace at Frank Wiley Field Airport,
Miles City, MT. Interested parties were invited to participate in this
rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the
FAA. No comments were received.
    Class E2, Class E4, and Class E5 airspace designations are
published in paragraphs 6002, 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA
Order JO 7400.11F, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15,
2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in FAA Order JO 7400.11.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations
and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September
15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F lists Class
A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 71 establishes Class E airspace,
designated as an extension to a Class D or Class E surface area, at
Frank Wiley Field Airport, Miles City, MT. The FAA proposes to amend
the VOR RWY 4 approach and the amendment will relocate the point where
aircraft descend below 1,000 feet above the surface from ``3.35 miles''
to ``10.8 miles southwest of the airport.'' The additional Class E
airspace will ensure the containment of IFR aircraft flying the
approach.
    This action also removes the Class E airspace extending upward from
1,200 feet above the surface. This airspace area is wholly contained
with the Glasgow en route airspace and duplication is not necessary.
    Additionally, the action implements an administrative update to the
Class E2 and E5 text headers. The city name should not appear in the
second line of the text header, and the term ``Airport'' should be
added. This line of text should be changed from ``Miles City, Frank
Wiley Field, MT'' to ``Frank Wiley Field Airport, MT''.

    FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
is published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial, and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant the preparation of an
environmental assessment.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10,
2021, and effective September 15, 2021, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as a Surface Area.

* * * * *

ANM MT E2 Miles City, MT [Amended]

Frank Wiley Field Airport, MT
    (Lat. 46[deg]25'41'' N, long. 105[deg]53'10'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within a 5-mile
radius of the airport.

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension to
a Class D or Class E Surface Area.

* * * * *

ANM MT E4 Miles City, MT [New]

Frank Wiley Field Airport, MT
    (Lat. 46[deg]25'41'' N, long. 105[deg]53'10'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 2.4 miles
each side of the 225[deg] bearing from the airport extending from
the Class E2's 5-mile radius of the airport to 10.8 miles southwest
of the airport.

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

* * * * *

ANM MT E5 Miles City, MT [Amended]

Frank Wiley Field Airport, MT
    (Lat. 46[deg]25'41'' N, long. 105[deg]53'10'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within an 8-mile radius of the airport.

    Issued in Des Moines, Washington, on October 28, 2021.
B.G. Chew,
Acting Group Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2021-23969 Filed 11-3-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: June 16, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 116)]
[Notices]
[Page 34004-34005]
[DOCID:fr16jn08-45]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2210-173]

Appalachian Power Company; Notice of Application for Non-Project
Use of Project Lands and Soliciting Comments, Motions to Intervene, and
Protests

June 9, 2008.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Non-Project Use of Project Lands and Waters.
    b. Project No: 2210-173.
    c. Date Filed: May 20, 2008.
    d. Applicant: Appalachian Power Company.
    e. Name of Project: Smith Mountain Pumped Storage Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the Roanoke River, in
Bedford, Pittsylvania, Franklin, and Roanoke Counties, Virginia.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Elizabeth B. Parcell, Environmental
Coordinator I, Appalachian Power Company, P.O. Box 2021, Roanoke,
Virginia 24022-2121<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Any questions on this notice should be addressed
to Shana High, Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, and e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protest:
July 11, 2008.
    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. Please include the project
number (P-2210-173) on any comments or motions filed. 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 e-
filings.
    k. Description of Request: Appalachian Power Company (APC) is
seeking Commission approval to grant permission to construct a single
dock with 2 boat slips adjacent to shoreline identified as an Impact
Mitigation Zone (IMZ), as defined in the project's shoreline management
plan (SMP). The proposed dock would serve two adjacent single-family
homes at 111 and 113 Saunders Point Road in Huddleston, Virginia. The
licensee is requesting a variance as required by the SMP for
development within the IMZ.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's 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. You may also
register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 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. 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.
    o. Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title
``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', as applicable,
and the Project Number of the particular application to which the
filing refers.
    p. 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.
    q. 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 at http://www.ferc.gov
under the ``e-Filing'' link.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-13414 Filed 6-13-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


1 Frequently Asked Questions about the Draft Federal Facility Identification Data Standard April 09, 2003 The questions and answers are arranged in four categories:

° General ° Implementation of the Data Standard ° Use of Data Standard ° Technical Questions for Implementers General:

Q1: What is the Draft Federal Facility Identification Data Standard? A: A " data standard" is a documented agreement among organizations that share or exchange data, including representation, formats, and definitions for such data. The Federal Facility Identification Data Standard provides a common vocabulary to be used by EPA, States, Tribes, and local government agencies to identify federal facilities. The Data Standard is made up of a list of data elements, data element definitions, and formats.

Q2: Who developed the Draft Federal Facility Identification Data Standard   is this another federal mandate? B: No, this is not another federal mandate. The decision to develop Data Standards, including the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard, was made jointly by EPA and the States ( through The Environmental Council of the States ( ECOS), an organization that represents the heads of the state environmental agencies). All recognized that sharing and exchanging accurate data is important and will remain so. All recognized that the public increasingly expects and deserves to have clear identification of shared information. Together, they established the Environmental Data Standards Council ( EDSC) to manage and guide the process. Action Teams were established to develop several different Data Standards, including the Draft Federal Facility Identification Data Standard. The Action Team that developed the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard was comprised of representatives from EPA, States, and Tribes. The co chairs were representatives from the State of Texas and EPA.

Q3: Why do we need this " common vocabulary"? A3: There are many different environmental programs, and many different government agencies involved in reporting environmental data. Often, these different programs or different agencies use different naming conventions and different codes when identifying the same federal facility. Similarly, there needs to be agreed upon naming conventions for identifying the federal agencies that are responsible for the federal facilities. 2 Q4: What was the business need for developing the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard? A4: EPA has several offices that are devoted to federal facilities. Within the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance ( OECA), there is the Federal Facilities Enforcement Office ( FFEO); and the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response ( OSWER) contains a Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Office ( FFRRO). These offices track environmental issues for federal facilities and former federal facilities. In addition, other offices within EPA collect specific data for federal facilities. The Toxics Release Inventory ( TRI), for example, collects information that identifies federal facilities and their parent agencies. The various EPA programs, however, typically collect and present their information without regard to how other programs collect and present their information. This standard therefore is intended to capture those data elements that are critical to the EPA programs that collect and hold data on federal facilities as well as to standardize the information that is presented to the public for federal facilities. States and Tribes may also benefit by utilizing these data elements and permissible values for their own systems.

Q5: For several of the data elements in the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard, the permissible values include values, such as " city", " county", " municipal", " state", in addition to " federal". Why? A5: There are many instances where a federally owned or operated site is no longer owned or operated by the federal government because it has sold or given away the property to a state or local government or to a private entity. An example is the more than 9,000 former Department of Defense ( DoD) sites that now are city parks, industrial zones or local airports. There have been cases where spent munitions or other materials have been found on these former DoD sites. EPA, States and Tribes therefore have a business need to keep the link between the present ownership or operation of these sites with their former uses. Permissible values, such as " city", " county" or " private" are tied to the name of the former DoD site to indicate its present status.

Implementation of the Data Standard:

Q6: Will my Agency ( or my program) be required to use the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard? A6: No. State, Tribal, or local government agencies or programs are not required to adopt or use the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard, nor to incorporate it into that agency's or program's own data systems. However, once EPA and state agencies adopt and begin implementing the Data Standard, it will likely become the specified " road map" for communications among environmental agencies exchanging environmental information.

Q7: If my program or agency decides to implement the Federal Facility Identification 3 Data Standard, must it begin collecting information for every data element? A7: No. The Federal Facility Identification Data Standard provides a range of data elements that may be of interest to programs and agencies. Programs or agencies may collect information for one or more of the data elements but there is not requirement that any program or agency collect information for all data elements.

Q8: When is the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard supposed to be approved by the States and EPA? A8: The EDSC is expected to review and approve this standard after a 45 day comment period beginning in April 2003.

Q9: Can some programs within a State, Tribe or local government follow the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard, while others do not? A9: Use of the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard is not required, although over time it may become the standard for sharing or exchanging data to or through the EPA national data systems, as well as between state agencies. State, tribal, or local government programs   especially those that do not exchange data with EPA, other Federal agencies or agencies in other states   are certainly not obliged to adopt or work within the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard. However, as it becomes a widely accepted standard, they may find it useful for data management and exchange.

Q10: I am in a State, Tribal or local government agency. My program doesn't use the same data elements as are used in the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard. Is there an expectation that we will change our data elements? A10: No. The Data Standard uses terminology intended for data exchange and is applicable only after the data you send crosses the threshold of your organization. Data that is exchanged will need to map to existing data holdings or conform in definition, meaning, and format to the Standard.

Q11: My EPA program doesn't use the data elements as are used in the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard. Is there an expectation that we will change our own data elements? A11: Although the Data Standard is intended for use in data exchange, it is expected that EPA programs will, as necessary ( and over time), modify the data elements that they currently collect to conform with the Data Elements and terms in the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard. The schedule for these changes is normally three years, with possible waivers in consideration of modernization and update schedules.

Q12: Is the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard the basis for a new data system design? Will we have to change our existing data system to conform to it? A12: The answer for State, Tribal and local government agencies is No. The Federal Facility Identification Data Standard is more like a dictionary to help translate or exchange data 4 from any one data system to any other. Use of the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard does not require that any non EPA agency or program to change its current data system. When data is exchanged from one system to another, the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard will provide the necessary information to ensure that data from a given field in the sending system is " mapped" to the correct location in the receiving system. Local system designers may, once they choose to use this Data Standard for data exchange, elect to modify their system ( perhaps in the context of a previously planned system modernization) in order to create the capability of exchanging data that conforms with the standard. As noted in the response to Question 11, above, EPA will be using the Data Standard as its own data systems are modified and updated.

Q13: We are planning to update ( one or more of) our current data system( s). How can the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard be of help to us in this effort? A13: The Federal Facility Identification Data Standard provides guidance to programs and agencies on naming conventions for federal agencies and federal facilities and permissible values for federal facilities. Using this information, you can update your system( s) so that it is in conformance with the standard, thus facilitating data exchange between your system( s) and other systems that collect the same data elements.

Q14: Are there any federal funds available to help States, Tribes, or local government agencies that implement federal programs if they choose to update their systems to enable them to communicate more easily using the Tribal Identifiers Data Standard? A14: Yes, although such funding is not linked directly to the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard development effort. EPA has and will continue to provide grant funding to assist other levels of government that implement federal environmental programs. Such assistance has often been used by grantees to help develop and update data management systems.

Q15: What does this standard have to do with National Environmental Information Exchange Network I keep hearing about? And I thought everything was supposed to be in XML   is this XML? A15: The Network concept relies upon common " Data Exchange Templates" ( DETs) expressed in " XML," and exchanged based on common protocols. This Data Standard would be used as the starting point or " core" for federal facility related DETs.

Use of Data Standard:

Q16: Who will use the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard? A16: All Federal, State, Tribal and local government agencies involved in environmental activities with federal facilities are encouraged to use this standard when and if they share or exchange data with other agencies. They are also encouraged to refer to the Federal 5 Facility Identification Data Standard, and use it as a tool, if they are planning to update or enhance their own existing data systems. The public will be the ultimate user of the standard, because it will provide the common vocabulary that will help such end users better understand the meaning of the data they are reviewing.

Q17: Will EPA be issuing rules for use of the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard? A17: No, at least not in the sense of issuing formal regulations. Information on the standard will be available through the EDSC website and the Environmental Data Registry ( EDR).

Q18: Will the Federal Facility Identification Data Standard be open for revision in the future? How will the Standard be maintained? A18: Yes. There is every reason to expect that adjustments or revisions will be necessary in the future as new or existing programs or agencies determine the need to collect additional data elements not provided on this list.

Technical Questions for Implementers:

Q19: Several of the data elements in Federal Facility Identification Data Standard provide a range of federal agencies and the naming convention to use for them. What if my program or agency wishes to include a federal agency or subagency not included in this list? A19: The list of permissible values provided for federal agencies are illustrative. Programs or agencies may wish to include additional federal agencies or subagencies that are not listed.

Q20: Do data elements in our application systems need to be the same data type as the Standard Data Element? What if our Data Element field lengths are longer or shorter than the standard? A20: This Standard only specifies how information will be exchanged, not how systems should be designed. At times, differences between system parameters and Data Standard specifications may require some translation from a system that uses field lengths, etc. Field lengths in the standard are intended to accommodate the expected maximum length of the values across partner systems based on analysis conducted to date. If a system has a longer value for a given element and the organization wishes to exchange data using the standard, the value exported from the system would have to be adjusted ( e. g. truncated or abbreviated). Field lengths in the standard can be increased, if partner needs require this, through the maintenance review of the standard.