[Federal Register: September 2, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 169)]
[Notices]
[Page 45520-45521]
[DOCID:fr02se09-109]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[NHTSA Docket No. NHTSA-2009-0155]

National Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council (NEMSAC);
Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT)

ACTION: National Emergency Medical Services Advisory Council (NEMSAC);
Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The NHTSA announces a meeting of NEMSAC to be held in the
Metropolitan Washington, DC area. This notice announces the date, time
and location of the meeting, which will be open to the public. The
purpose of NEMSAC is to provide a nationally recognized council of
emergency medical services representatives and consumers to provide
advice and recommendations regarding Emergency Medical Services (EMS)
to the U.S. DOT's NHTSA.

DATES: The meeting will be held on September 29, 2009, from 8 a.m. to
Noon, and September 30, 2009, from 8 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. A public
comment period will take place on September 29, 2009, between 11 a.m.
and 11:30 a.m.
    Comment Date: Written comments or requests to make oral
presentations must be received by September 22, 2009.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Crystal Gateway Marriott,
1700 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202. Persons wishing to
make an oral presentation or who are unable to attend or speak at the
meeting may submit written comments. Written comments and requests to
make oral presentations at the meeting should reach Drew Dawson at the
address listed below and must be received by September 22, 2009.
    All submissions received must include the docket number, NHTSA-
2009-0155, and may be submitted by any one of the following methods:
You may submit or retrieve comments online through the Document
Management System (DMS) at http://www.regulations.gov/under the docket
number listed at the beginning of this notice. The DMS is available 24
hours each day, 365 days each year. Electronic submission and retrieval
help guidelines are available under the help section of the Web site.
    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded from the
Federal Register's home page at http://www.archives.gov and the
Government Printing Office's database at http://www.access.gpo.gov/
nara.
    Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will
continue to file relevant information in the docket as it becomes
available.
    E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Drew Dawson, Director, Office of
Emergency Medical Services, National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., NTI-140, Washington, DC
20590, telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of this meeting is given under the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Public Law 92-463, as amended (5
U.S.C. App. 1 et seq.) The NEMSAC will be holding its seventh meeting
on Tuesday and Wednesday, September 29 and 30, 2009, at the Crystal
Gateway Marriott, 1700 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202.

Agenda of Council Meeting, September 29-30, 2009.

    The tentative agenda includes the following:

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

(1) Opening Remarks;
(2) Introduction of Members and all in attendance;
(3) Review and Approval of Minutes of last Meeting;
(4) Committee Reports and Discussion/Action;
(5) Public Comment Period;
(6) New & Emerging Issues.
    (Note: The NEMSAC Committees will hold their meetings the afternoon
of the 29th--these are not part of the larger public meeting.)

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

(1) Introductions and Review of 29 September Discussion;
(2) Future Meetings;
(3) NHTSA and FICEMS Update
(4) H1N1 Flu Panel & Discussion;
(5) Unfinished Business from 29 September;
(6) Next Steps and Adjourn.
    A public comment period will take place on September 29, 2009,
between 10 a.m. and 10:30 a.m. Public Attendance: The meeting is open
to the public. Persons with disabilities who require special assistance
should advise Drew Dawson of their anticipated special needs as early
as possible. Members of the public who wish to make comments on
Tuesday, September 29 between 11 a.m. and 11:30 a.m. are requested to
register in advance. In order to allow as many people as possible to
speak, speakers are requested to limit their remarks to 3 minutes. For
those wishing to submit written comments, please follow the procedure
noted above.
    This meeting will be open to the public. Individuals wishing to
register must provide their name, affiliation, phone number, and e-mail
address to Drew Dawson by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by telephone
at<PHONE_NUMBER> no later than September 22, 2009. There will be
limited seating, so please register early. Pre-registration is
necessary to enable proper arrangements.
    Minutes of the NEMSAC Meeting will be available to the public
online through the DOT Document Management System (DMS) at: http://
www.regulations.gov under the docket number listed at the beginning of
this notice.

    Issued on: August 28, 2009.
Jeffrey P. Michael,
Associate Administrator for Research and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E9-21209 Filed 9-1-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: December 7, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 234)]
[Notices]
[Page 72825-72826]
[DOCID:fr07de05-74]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Application and Applicant-Prepared EA Accepted for
Filing, Soliciting Motions To Intervene and Protests, and Soliciting
Comments, and Final Terms and Conditions, Recommendations, and
Prescriptions

November 30, 2005.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application and
applicant-prepared environmental assessment has been filed with the
Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: New Major License.
    b. Project No.: 11841-002.
    c. Date filed: August 12, 2004.
    d. Applicant: Ketchikan Public Utilities.
    e. Name of Project: Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project would be
located on Whitman Lake in Ketchikan Gateway Borough, Ketchikan,
Alaska. The proposed project would affect approximately 155.8 acres of
federal lands (155.0-acres managed by the U.S. Forest Service and 0.8-
acres managed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management).
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Don Thompson, WESCORP, 3035 Island Crest
Way, Suite 200, Mercer Island, WA 98040; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Kenneth Hogan at<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    j. Deadline for filing motions to intervene and protests, comments,
and final terms and conditions, recommendations, and prescriptions: 60
days from the issuance of this notice.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing
documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each
person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an
intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to
the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a
particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document
on that resource agency.
    Motions to intervene, protests, comments, terms and conditions,
recommendations, and prescriptions may be filed electronically via the
Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions
on the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-

Filing'' link.
    k. This application has been accepted for filing.
    l. The proposed Whitman Lake Hydroelectric Project will have an
installed generating capacity of 4.6 Megawatts with a maximum hydraulic
capacity of 180 cubic feet per second (cfs). The proposed project would
consist of the following features: (1) The existing 39-foot-high, 220-
foot-long concrete gravity arch dam; (2) 40-foot-wide Ogee spillway
within the dam; (3) a 148 surface acre reservoir (Whitman Lake); (4) a
2,450-foot-long, 45-inch-diameter penstock; (5) a 2,000-foot-long, 21-
inch-diameter pipeline; (6) a horizontal Francis turbine and 3,900 kW
generator, with a hydraulic capacity of 150 cfs; (7) a horizontal or
vertical Francis turbine and 700 kW generator, with a hydraulic
capacity of 30 cfs; and (8) other appurtenant facilities.
    Ketchikan Public Utilities (KPU) estimates that the average annual
generation will be 16,225 megawatthours (MWh). KPU proposes to use the
project to supplement, as well as displace, other generation resources
owned and operated by KPU. With the construction and operation of the
project, KPU hopes to minimize its use and dependency on fossil fuel
generation.
    m. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may 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, contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-
866-208-3676, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is also available for
inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above.
    Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp
 to be notified via email of new filings and issuances

related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    n. Any qualified applicant desiring to file a competing application
must submit to the Commission, on or before the specified deadline date
for the particular application, a competing development application, or
a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely
notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing
development application no later than 120 days after the specified
deadline date for the particular application. Applications for
preliminary permits will not be accepted in response to this notice.
    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.
    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.
    The Commission directs, pursuant to section 4.34(b) of the
Regulations (see Order No. 533 issued May 8, 1991, 56 FR 23108, May 20,
1991) that all comments, recommendations, terms and conditions and
prescriptions concerning the application and APEA be filed with the
Commission within 60 days from the issuance date of this notice. All
reply comments must be filed with the Commission within 105 days from
the date of this notice.
    Anyone may obtain an extension of time for these deadlines from the
Commission only upon a showing of good cause or extraordinary
circumstances in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2008.
    All filings must: (1) Bear in all capital letters the title
``PROTEST'', ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', ``NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE
COMPETING APPLICATION,'' ``COMPETING APPLICATION,'' ``COMMENTS,''
``REPLY COMMENTS,'' ``RECOMMENDATIONS,'' ``TERMS AND CONDITIONS,'' or
``PRESCRIPTIONS;'' (2) set forth in the heading the name of the
applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing
responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the
person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply

with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, recommendations, terms and conditions or prescriptions must
set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the
requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the
application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or
motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the
applicant specified in the particular application. A copy of all other
filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof
of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the
Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and
385.2010.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-6956 Filed 12-6-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 2, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39576-39583]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15843]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 91

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0503; Amdt. No. 91-328]
RIN 2120-AK25

Adoption of Statutory Prohibition on the Operation of Jets
Weighing 75,000 Pounds or Less That Are Not Stage 3 Noise Compliant

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rulemaking amends the airplane operating regulations to
include certain provisions of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of
2012 that affect jet airplanes with a maximum weight of 75,000 pounds
or less operating in the United States. The law provides that after
December 31, 2015, such airplanes will not be allowed to operate in the
contiguous United States unless they meet Stage 3 noise levels. This
final rule incorporates that prohibition and describes the
circumstances under which an otherwise prohibited airplane may be
operated.

DATES: This rule becomes effective September 3, 2013. Send comments on
or before August 1, 2013.
    Compliance with the prohibition in Sec.  91.801(e) is required
after December 31, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this action, contact Sandy Liu, AEE-100, Office of Environment and
Energy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile (202) 267-
5594; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

    For legal questions concerning this action, contact Karen Petronis,
AGC-200, Office of the Chief Counsel, International Law, Legislation,
and Regulations Division, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
3073; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Good Cause for Immediate Adoption

    Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5
USC 551 et seq.) authorizes agencies to dispense with notice and
comment procedures for rules when the agency for ``good cause'' finds
that those procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to
the public interest.'' Under this section, an agency, upon finding good
cause, may issue a final rule without seeking comment prior to the
rulemaking.
    In February 2012, in section 506 of the FAA Modernization and
Reform Act of 2012 (``the Act''), Congress prohibited the operation of
jet airplanes weighing 75,000 pounds or less in the contiguous United
States after December 31, 2015, unless the airplanes meet Stage 3 noise
levels. The Act also describes certain circumstances under which
otherwise prohibited operations will be allowed. These provisions have
been codified at 49 U.S.C. 47534.
    This final rule codifies the statutory prohibition and relieving
circumstances into the regulations in 14 CFR. The FAA has no discretion
to change any provision of the statute, and it is being codified into
the regulations as adopted. The statute also directs the Secretary of
Transportation to prescribe the regulations necessary to implement the
statutory provisions.
    Accordingly, the FAA finds that further public comment on the
codification of these provisions is unnecessary.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules on 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 III, Section 44715, Controlling aircraft
noise and sonic boom. Under that section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to measure and abate aircraft noise. This
rulemaking is also promulgated under the authority of Section 47534,
prohibition on operating certain aircraft weighing 75,000 pounds or
less and not complying with Stage 3 noises levels. That authority
directs the agency to prescribe regulations necessary to implement the
requirements of Section 506 of the Act. This regulation is within the
scope of that authority.

I. Overview of This Final Rule

    This final rule adopts into the operating rules certain
prohibitions from Section 506 of the Act, codified at 49 USC 47534.
That statute prohibits, after December 31, 2015, the operation in the
contiguous United States of jet airplanes weighing 75,000 pounds or
less that do not meet Stage 3 noise levels as defined in 14 CFR Part
36. This prohibition will decrease airplane noise in the contiguous
United States. Operators of these airplanes that do not comply with
Stage 3 noise levels may choose to replace them, or to incorporate
noise-reduction technologies that may be available to make the
airplanes Stage 3 noise compliant.

II. History of Noise Operating Rules in the United States

    In December 1976, the FAA adopted its first noise operating rules
in the United States as Subpart E to Part 91 of Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (14 CFR). That subpart was recodified in August
1989 as Subpart I--Operating Noise Limits. The first regulations
prohibited the operation of Stage 1 airplanes by U.S. operators in the
United States after December 31, 1984 (41 FR 56046, December 23, 1976).
In November 1980, the regulations were amended to include operations
conducted by foreign operators in the United States (45 FR 79302,
November 28, 1980).
    By the late 1980s, more than 400 U.S. airports had adopted some
type of airport access restriction or other action in an effort to
reduce local noise in their communities. To eliminate this growing
patchwork of restrictions, on November 5, 1990, Congress established a
national noise policy in the adoption of the Airport Noise and Capacity
Act of 1990 (ANCA). The law required the phase-out of Stage 2 airplanes
weighing over 75,000 pounds operating in the contiguous United States.
The phase-out was completed on December 31, 1999, leaving only Stage 3
large jets operating in the contiguous United States.

III. Recent Statutory Changes

    The noise from smaller jet airplanes continues to have an impact on
communities near airports. In recognition of this impact, Congress
addressed the operations of these airplanes in the Act. Section 506 of
the Act states:

    ``[A]fter December 31, 2015, a person may not operate a civil
subsonic jet airplane with a maximum weight of 75,000 pounds or
less, and for which an airworthiness certificate (other than an
experimental certificate) has been issued, to or from an airport in
the United States unless the Secretary of Transportation finds that
the aircraft complies with [S]tage 3 noise levels.''

The law is applicable to operations in the 48 contiguous United States.
The law also provides for operation of otherwise prohibited airplanes
after that date under certain circumstances.
    This final rule codifies into the regulations of 14 CFR part 91 the
operating prohibition of Sec.  47534 (a), and the circumstances for
which otherwise prohibited operations may be conducted as listed in
Sec.  47534 (c). The circumstances are similar to those that were
allowed under the 1990 statute that were codified in 14 CFR 91.858.
    This prohibition is being codified into the operating rules as
Sec.  91.881. Because Congress included operational circumstances in
the Act that were not included in ANCA, we are codifying them
separately as Sec.  91.883 to prevent confusion with the circumstances
applicable to larger jet airplanes.

IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

A. Regulatory Evaluation

    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct that each
Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that the benefits of the intended regulation justify its
costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354)
requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of regulatory changes
on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act (Pub. L. 96-39)
prohibits agencies from setting standards that create unnecessary
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In developing
U.S. standards, the Trade Act requires agencies to consider
international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of
the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that
include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State,
local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector, of $100 million or more

annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of 1995). This portion
of the preamble summarizes the FAA's analysis of the economic impacts
of this final rule.
    Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies
and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations.
If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed or final rule
does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits that a statement
to that effect and the basis for it be included in the preamble if a
full regulatory evaluation of the cost and benefits is not prepared.
Such a determination has been made for this final rule. The reasoning
for this determination is as follows:
    This rule implements those provisions of the Act that prohibit the
operation of civil jet airplanes weighing 75,000 pounds or less in the
48 contiguous United States after December 31, 2015, unless they comply
with Stage 3 noise levels. This part of the Act completes the
elimination of Stage 2 jet airplane noise that was begun in 1990 with
the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA), which phased out
civil jet airplanes weighing over 75,000 pounds from operating at Stage
2 noise levels, by the end of 1999. As Congress mandated this phase-
out, the benefits of the phase-out are presumed to exceed the costs.
    The Act affects 457 registered owners of 599 \1\ airplanes that
range between 25 to 50 years in age. Four hundred and three of the
registered owners (88 percent) have only one airplane affected by the
ban; 51 of the owners have 2 to 10 affected airplanes; and three owners
(all nonscheduled airlines) have a combined total of 51 airplanes
affected by the ban.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ OAG Aviation Solutions Fleet Database as of November 14,
2012, was used to identify the individual airplanes affected by the
ban.

   Operator Categories for Civil Stage 2 Jet Airplanes Weighing 75,000
                             Pounds or Less
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Number of       Number of
            Operator category                 owners         airplanes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corporation (Non-Airline)...............             349             413
Nonscheduled Airline....................              55             128
Leasing Company/Broker/Parts Dealer/Etc.              31              35
Private Individual......................              16              17
Financial Institution...................               6               6
                                         -------------------------------
    Grand Total.........................             457             599
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Some models of the banned airplanes can be upgraded to Stage 3
noise levels with the installation of a hushkit. A hushkit is a device
used for reducing engine noise. Of the 17 models of airplanes affected
by this ban, hushkits had previously been available for six models: the
Dassault Falcon 20; the Learjet 23, 24, and 25; and the Gulfstream II
and III. An unknown number of these airplanes may have already
installed a hushkit.
    Currently, the only hushkits available for Stage 2 civil jet
airplanes weighing 75,000 pounds or less are for the Gulfstream II and
Gulfstream III. There are two companies that perform the Gulfstream
engine modifications required to meet Stage 3 noise levels, and each
has provided cost estimates to the FAA for this service. The estimates
range from $0.85 million to $1.50 million. There are 217 Gulfstream IIs
and IIIs that can potentially be hushkitted; however, the cost of the
hushkkit for the Gulfstream II exceeds the recorded value of the
airplanes.
    The hushkit for the Falcon 20 is no longer manufactured and the
Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) for the Learjet engine modification
was returned to the FAA. There is no indication that hushkits will be
manufactured for these airplanes. Thus, of the 599 airplanes affected
by the ban, 382 cannot be made Stage 3 compliant.
    Owners of civil Stage 2 airplanes that cannot be made Stage 3
compliant will have three alternatives for complying with the mandate:
(1) Sell the airplanes for operation outside of the 48 contiguous
United States, (2) salvage the airplanes for parts, or (3) scrap the
airplanes. The actions of the owners will result in an indeterminate
mix of these choices. The FAA uses the retail price of the aircraft as
a proxy for its economic value. The true economic cost of the mandate
is the pre-law retail price minus the post-law retail price. For the
reasons discussed below, the best estimate of the economic cost is the
value of the fleet before the mandate minus a couple of special
considerations.
    The following table provides an estimate of the monetary impact to
owners based on the action they may choose to comply with the ban. The
table includes the pre-law retail price of selling, scrapping, or
hushkitting an airplane by equipment type. Information on airplane
salvage value is not available to be included, and with the engines
being the most valuable part of these airplanes, the engine value is
expected to equal the airplane's scrap value.

                         Pre-Law Airplane Retail Value and Cost of Hushkit Installation
                                                 [Per airplane]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Average retail value*                          Average
                                                 --------------------------------  Average scrap      hushkit
            Equipment              Number of A/C                                     value **      installation
                                                        Low            High                          cost ***
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dassault Falcon 20C/CF/D/DF/DC/               69        $200,000        $850,000          $2,118             N/A
 ECM/E/F........................
Gulfstream II (G-1159/B/TT/SP)..             109         250,000       1,050,000           8,075       1,162,500
Gulfstream III (G-1159A)........             108       1,000,000       2,200,000           8,075       1,162,500
Hawker Siddeley HS.125-1/2/3....               8         167,000         200,000           2,440             N/A

Hawker Siddeley HS.125-400......               7         167,000         200,000           2,440             N/A
Hawker Siddeley HS.125-600......              12         400,000         400,000           2,440             N/A
IA1123..........................               1         400,000         400,000           2,261             N/A
Learjet 23......................               3         100,000         100,000           1,355             N/A
Learjet 24......................              78         100,000         280,000           1,355             N/A
Learjet 25......................             143         150,000         600,000           1,355             N/A
Learjet 28......................               4         400,000         400,000           1,355             N/A
Lockheed L-1329 Jetstar II......              13         550,000         800,000           4,845             N/A
Rockwell 1121 Jet Commander.....               3         235,000         235,000           2,128             N/A
Rockwell Sabre 40...............              15         235,000         290,000           2,518             N/A
Rockwell Sabre 50...............               1         235,000         235,000           2,299             N/A
Rockwell Sabre 60...............              24         235,000         330,000           2,299             N/A
Rockwell UTX/T-39 Sabreliner....               1         235,000         235,000           1,759             N/A
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................             599        $100,000      $2,200,000          $4,797  ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Airplane Bluebook Price Digest, Winter 2011. The Airplane Bluebook Price Digest contains the average retail
  value, by year, model, and serial number for each airplane affected by the ban. The range in value is
  primarily due to age (i.e., the older an airplane the lower its retail value versus a newer model of the same
  airplane). Note that this reflects the pre-law airplane value. The post-law values have yet to be determined
  but they are expected to be lower than the values shown in the table.
**Average scrap value is based on information provided by two companies that perform this work. It does not
  include incidental expenses associated with delivery of the airplane to a scrap yard.
***Average hushkit installation cost is based on four estimates provided by two companies that perform this
  work.

    The value of these airplanes before this mandate equals their
retail value at that time. To determine the pre-law retail value, the
Airplane Blue Book Price Digest \2\ was used. The ``Digest'' provides
average retail values for airplanes by model, year, and serial number.
It is only a guide since the actual condition and upgrades to
individual airplanes are not known. For the small minority of airplanes
affected by the ban but not listed in the ``Digest,'' a proxy is used
based on an airplane of similar type and year. The average pre-law
retail value equals the sum of the listed retail value for each of the
599 airplanes. This summation equals $355.5 million ($271.2 million in
the year 2016 using 7 percent present value), which is the maximum
economic cost for the mandate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Winter 2011 Edition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To comply with the mandate and to mitigate economic losses, owners
will most likely attempt to sell their Stage 2 airplanes to operators
outside of the United States. However, such an action will create a
glut in the marketplace. Furthermore, with the Stage 2 ban in effect in
the lower 48 states, this further reduction in operating space reduces
these airplanes' value to potential buyers.
A Limited World-Wide Market
    Many countries have already preceded the U.S. in either banning or
legislating limited operations of these airplanes. At least eight
countries already ban Stage 2 operations by airplanes of any size.
These countries include Australia, Austria, Belgium, Hong Kong, Japan,
Macau, Singapore, and Switzerland.\3\ The inability to operate the
Stage 2 airplanes across all borders will reduce their desirability for
ownership.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Additionally, other countries have noise restrictions in
place or legislation enacted to limit their operation. http://www.qtaerospace.com/noise_report.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Excluding the United States, there are 50 countries that have a
total of 392 registered airplanes like those banned in the United
States. Almost 50 percent of these jets are registered in Mexico. The
U.S. ban on Stage 2 operations reduces the value of these airplanes in
Mexico as a large potential destination for operators is lost. The
limited world-wide market hinders an owner's ability to sell a banned
airplane at the pre-law retail value.

   Foreign Countries With Registered Stage 2 Airplanes Weighing 75,000
                             Pounds or Less
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Number of
           Rank                  Country         airplanes     % Share*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1........................  Mexico.............          182         46.4
2........................  Republic of South             25          6.4
                            Africa.
3........................  Venezuela..........           24          6.1
4........................  Iran...............           17          4.3
5........................  United Kingdom.....           16          4.1
6........................  Brazil.............           14          3.6
7........................  France.............           13          3.3
8........................  Argentina..........           12          3.1
9........................  Republic of Congo..            7          1.8
10.......................  Saudi Arabia.......            7          1.8
11.......................  Dominican Republic.            6          1.5
12.......................  Spain..............            5          1.3
13.......................  Bolivia............            4          1.0

14.......................  Canada.............            4          1.0
15.......................  Ecuador............            4          1.0
16.......................  India..............            4          1.0
17.......................  Libya..............            3          0.8
18.......................  Pakistan...........            3          0.8
19.......................  Cameroon...........            2          0.5
20.......................  Egypt..............            2          0.5
21.......................  Israel.............            2          0.5
22.......................  Malaysia...........            2          0.5
23.......................  Morocco............            2          0.5
24.......................  Nigeria............            2          0.5
25.......................  Sudan..............            2          0.5
26.......................  Syria..............            2          0.5
27.......................  Turkey.............            2          0.5
28.......................  Ukraine............            2          0.5
29.......................  Angola.............            1          0.3
30.......................  Bahrain............            1          0.3
31.......................  Chad...............            1          0.3
32.......................  Chile..............            1          0.3
33.......................  Comoros Islands....            1          0.3
34.......................  Eritrea............            1          0.3
35.......................  Gabon..............            1          0.3
36.......................  Ghana..............            1          0.3
37.......................  Guatemala..........            1          0.3
38.......................  Indonesia..........            1          0.3
39.......................  Italy..............            1          0.3
40.......................  Ivory Coast........            1          0.3
41.......................  Japan..............            1          0.3
42.......................  Philippines........            1          0.3
43.......................  Portugal...........            1          0.3
44.......................  Russia.............            1          0.3
45.......................  Senegal............            1          0.3
46.......................  Sweden.............            1          0.3
47.......................  Togo...............            1          0.3
48.......................  United Arab                    1          0.3
                            Emirates.
49.......................  Uruguay............            1          0.3
50.......................  Zimbabwe...........            1          0.3
                                               -------------------------
                            Total.............          392       100.0%
                            United States.....          599  ...........
                                               -------------------------
                            Grand Total.......  ...........          991
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Totals in table may exactly add due to rounding.

``Scrappage'' of Banned Airplanes
    A lack of demand for the banned airplanes will leave most owners
with no choice other than to sell the airplanes for their scrap value.
The salvage value is likely to equal the scrap value. The single most
valuable part on the airplane is the engines which after the ban have
essentially no value. Secondarily, the round-dial instrumentation used
in the affected fleet is largely obsolete with a small used market.
Hushkits
    Other than their sale and scrappage, the remaining option is to
hushkit the Gulfstreams. In November 2012, there were 217 Gulfstream II
and III airplanes registered in the United States. At that time, these
airplanes had a pre-law retail value ranging from $250,000 to $2.2
million. Gulfstream owners will have to weigh the cost of hushkitting
against not having use of the airplane.
    The cost to hushkit a Gulfstream II or III will average between
$0.85 to $1.5 million, per airplane. This cost exceeds the pre-law
retail value for most Gulfstream II's. The measure of economic loss for
the Gulfstream II equals its pre-mandate value (assuming very few have
been sold since that date). However, for a majority of the Gulfstream
III's, the cost to hushkit is less than its pre-law retail value. If
all Gulfstream III owners hushkit their airplanes the economic loss is
the cost of the hushkit which equals $125.6 million.
    For the owners of the remaining 491 airplanes, the economic cost is
$204.3 million. This cost equals their pre-mandate resale value
excluding some minor salvage value. Additionally some of these
airplanes may have been sold to foreign buyers. The total economic loss
equals the Gulfstream III hushkit loss of $125.6 million plus the
$204.3 million equaling $329.9 million, or in present value $251.7
million using 7 percent.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Costs by action and number of aircraft
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Present value
                                                                                in 2016 at 7%
                             Action                                  Number of      Millions of   discount rate--
                                                                     aircraft          2012$        millions of
                                                                                2012$
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hushkit.........................................................             108         $ 125.6          $ 95.8
Scrapped/Sold Aircraft..........................................             491           204.3           155.9
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             599           329.9           251.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since Congress has mandated the prohibition on the operation of
certain airplanes weighing 75,000 pounds or less that do not comply
with Stage 3 noise levels, Congress has determined that the benefits
exceed the costs. The FAA has determined that this final rule is a
significant regulatory action as defined in section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866, and is significant as defined in DOT's Regulatory Policies
and Procedures.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-354) (RFA)
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation.'' To achieve this principle, agencies are
required to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to
explain the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals
are given serious consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide-range of small
entities, including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions.
    Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
    However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the
agency may so certify and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required. The certification must include a statement providing the
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be
clear.
Estimated Number of Small Firms Potentially Impacted
    The Act requires that (except as otherwise noted) after December
31, 2015, civil subsonic jet airplanes with a maximum weight of 75,000
pounds or less and for which an airworthiness certificate (other than
an experimental certificate) has been issued, shall not be operated to
or from an airport in the United States unless the Secretary of
Transportation finds that the airplane complies with Stage 3 noise
levels. The purpose of this statutory provision is to reduce noise
levels at airports and the communities surrounding them across the
United States.
    Under the RFA, the FAA must determine whether a proposed rule
significantly affects a substantial number of small entities. This
determination is typically based on small entity size and revenue
thresholds that vary depending on the affected industry.\4\ To
determine the number of small entities affected by the mandate, we
searched a commercially available airplane fleet database.\5\ The
search results identified five operator categories consisting of 457
entities that own 599 airplanes. The entities consist of privately held
corporations, financial institutions, leasing companies, non-scheduled
airlines, and private individuals. In most cases, the size of the
entities cannot be determined because financial and employment data for
privately held entities is sparse. Nevertheless, the number of small
business entities is believed to be substantial.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Thresholds are based on the North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS). The NAICS is the standard used by
Federal statistical agencies in classifying business establishments
for the purpose of collecting, analyzing, and publishing statistical
data related to the U.S. business economy.
    \5\ OAG Aviation Solutions Fleet Database as of November 14,
2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Of the 599 affected airplanes, over half (382 airplanes) cannot be
converted to Stage 3 noise levels because there are no modifications
currently available. Owners of airplanes that are unable to modify
their airplanes may choose to (1) Sell their airplanes to an entity
whose operations are not constrained by noise restrictions, (2) salvage
the airplanes for parts, or (3) sell the airplanes for scrap value. For
the remaining 217 airplanes that are able to be converted to Stage 3
noise levels, owners will have to determine if the benefit of operating
the airplanes outweighs the cost of making the airplanes Stage 3 noise
compliant and the higher operating costs are worth the expense.
    As the effective date of the prohibition approaches (January 1,
2016), the resale value of any remaining airplanes in the U.S. fleet
will fall dramatically, ultimately to zero. In addition, the value of
the entire world fleet of these Stage 2 airplanes will be reduced with
the influx of U.S. airplanes available for sale and the prohibition of
foreign Stage 2 airplanes from operating in the U.S. Complying with the
congressional mandate creates a significant economic impact for owners
since the compliance cost requires an owner to either forego the use of
its airplane or to purchase one that meets Stage 3 noise levels. Since
this rule only places Congress' language of the statutory ban into the
civil regulations and has no requirements of its own, the requirements
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act do not apply.

C. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such as the protection of safety, and does not operate in a
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective.
    The statute also requires consideration of international standards

and, where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. The
FAA has assessed the potential effect of this final rule and determined
that since it implements an action by Congress, the Trade Agreements
Act provisions do not apply.

D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more
(in 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $143.1 million in lieu of $100
million. Although this rule exceeds $143.1 million the year it takes
effect, it implements the direction of Congress and thus Title II of
the Act is not applicable.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information
collection burdens imposed on the public. The FAA has determined that
there is no new information collection associated with the requirement
to demonstrate eligibility under the statutory provisions when making a
request for special flight authorization for otherwise prohibited jet
airplane operations. That information collection requirement previously
was approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d))
and was assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0652.

F. International Compatibility and Cooperation

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has
reviewed the corresponding ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices and
has identified no differences with these regulations.
    Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation, promotes international regulatory cooperation to meet
shared challenges involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues and to reduce, eliminate, or prevent
unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements. The FAA has
analyzed this action under the policies and agency responsibilities of
Executive Order 13609, and has determined that this action would have
no effect on international regulatory cooperation.

G. Environmental Analysis

    This rule implements Section 506 of the Act by adding jets weighing
75,000 pounds or less to the applicability of the operating noise
subpart in Sec.  91.801. This rule incorporates the prohibition on
operations of small jets not meeting Stage 3 noise levels after
December 31, 2015. It also incorporates the special operating
circumstances allowed by law for these smaller jets. The environmental
impacts of this rule, including the reduction in jet noise in the
contiguous United States, and the minor impacts of allowing statutorily
limited operations of Stage 2 jets, are a result of the statutory
requirements. The FAA has no authority to change any of these statutory
provisions or their environmental impact.
    FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA actions that are categorically
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical
exclusion identified in paragraph 312(f) of the Order and involves no
extraordinary circumstances.

IV. Executive Order Determinations

A. Executive Order 12866

    See the ``Regulatory Evaluation'' discussion in the ``Regulatory
Notices and Analyses'' section elsewhere in this preamble.

B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency determined
that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on the
States, or the relationship between the Federal Government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, and, therefore, does not have Federalism
implications.

C. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    The FAA analyzed this final rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The agency has determined that it
is not a ``significant energy action'' under the executive order and it
is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.

V. Additional Information

A. Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    An electronic copy of a rulemaking document may be obtained by
using the Internet--
    1. Search the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov);
    2. Visit the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/; or
    3. Access the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html.
    Copies may also be obtained by sending a request (identified by
notice, amendment, or docket number of this rulemaking) to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

B. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 requires FAA to comply with small entity requests for information
or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations within its
jurisdiction. A small entity with questions regarding this document,
may contact its local FAA official, or the person listed under the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the beginning of the preamble.
To find out more about SBREFA on the Internet, visit http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91

    Aircraft, Operating noise limits.

The Amendments

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends chapter I of Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:

PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES

0
1. The authority citation for part 91 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103, 40113, 40120, 44101,
44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717,
44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506-46507, 47122, 47508, 47528-
47531, 47534, articles 12 and 29 of the Convention on International
Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180), (126 Stat. 11).

0
2. Amend Sec.  91.801 by adding new paragraph (e) to read as follows:

Sec.  91.801  Applicability: Relation to part 36.

* * * * *
    (e) Sections 91.881 through 91.883 of this subpart prescribe
operating noise limits and related requirements that apply to any civil
subsonic jet airplane with a maximum takeoff weight of 75,000 pounds or
less and for which an airworthiness certificate (other than an
experimental certificate) has been issued, operating to or from an
airport in the contiguous United States under this part, part 121, 125,
129, or 135 of this chapter on and after December 31, 2015.

0
3. Add new Sec.  91.881 to read as follows:

Sec.  91.881  Final compliance: Civil subsonic jet airplanes weighing
75,000 pounds or less.

    Except as provided in Sec.  91.883, after December 31, 2015, a
person may not operate to or from an airport in the contiguous United
States a civil subsonic jet airplane subject to Sec.  91.801(e) of this
subpart unless that airplane has been shown to comply with Stage 3
noise levels.

0
4. Add new Sec.  91.883 to read as follows:

Sec.  91.883  Special flight authorizations for jet airplanes weighing
75,000 pounds or less.

    (a) After December 31, 2015, an operator of a jet airplane weighing
75,000 pounds or less that does not comply with Stage 3 noise levels
may, when granted a special flight authorization by the FAA, operate
that airplane in the contiguous United States only for one of the
following purposes:
    (1) To sell, lease, or use the airplane outside the 48 contiguous
States;
    (2) To scrap the airplane;
    (3) To obtain modifications to the airplane to meet Stage 3 noise
levels;
    (4) To perform scheduled heavy maintenance or significant
modifications on the airplane at a maintenance facility located in the
contiguous 48 States;
    (5) To deliver the airplane to an operator leasing the airplane
from the owner or return the airplane to the lessor;
    (6) To prepare, park, or store the airplane in anticipation of any
of the activities described in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5) of this
section;
    (7) To provide transport of persons and goods in the relief of an
emergency situation; or
    (8) To divert the airplane to an alternative airport in the 48
contiguous States on account of weather, mechanical, fuel, air traffic
control, or other safety reasons while conducting a flight in order to
perform any of the activities described in paragraphs (a)(1) through
(a)(7) of this section.
    (b) An operator of an affected airplane may apply for a special
flight authorization for one of the purposes listed in paragraph (a) of
this section by filing an application with the FAA's Office of
Environment and Energy. Except for emergency relief authorizations
sought under paragraph (a)(7) of this section, applications must be
filed at least 30 days in advance of the planned flight. All
applications must provide the information necessary for the FAA to
determine that the planned flight is within the limits prescribed in
the law.

    Issued under authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f) and 47534 in
Washington, DC, on June 18, 2013.
Michael P. Huerta,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2013-15843 Filed 7-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: September 3, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 171)]
[Notices]
[Page 51462-51463]
[DOCID:fr03se08-57]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

August 28, 2008.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP06-200-049.
    Applicants: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Rockies Express Pipeline LLC submits Second Revised
Sheet 8C to FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 08/27/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080828-0015.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 08, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP96-272-079.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Northern Natural Gas Co. submits Ninth Revised Sheet
66B.01 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume 1, to be
effective 7/1/08.
    Filed Date: 08/26/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080827-0054.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 08, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-538-000.
    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company.
    Description: El Paso Natural Gas Co. submits Third Revised Sheet
202A.01 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume 1A.
    Filed Date: 08/25/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080826-0301.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 08, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-539-000.
    Applicants: Venice Gathering System, LLC.
    Description: Venice Gathering System, LLC submits Eighth Revised
Sheet 4 to FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1, to be effective 10/1/08.
    Filed Date: 08/25/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080827-0053.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 08, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-540-000.
    Applicants: Kern River Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Request for limited waiver of tariff procedures for
issuing refunds in the context of capacity release arrangements re Kern
River Gas Transmission Co.
    Filed Date: 08/26/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080826-5084.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 08, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-541-000.
    Applicants: Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.
    Description: Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc. submits 1st
Revised Ninth Revised Sheet 11 to FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 08/26/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080827-0296.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 08, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-542-000.
    Applicants: Northern Border Pipeline Company.
    Description: Northern Border Pipeline Co. submits Twelfth Revised
Sheet 99 to FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume 1, effective 10/1/08.
    Filed Date: 08/26/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080827-0295.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 08, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: RP08-543-000.
    Applicants: Carolina Gas Transmission Corporation.
    Description: Carolina Gas Transmission Corporation submits Third
Revised Sheet 10 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Volume 1, to be effective
10/1/08.
    Filed Date: 08/27/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080828-0016.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, September 08, 2008.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://

www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also 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 e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-20456 Filed 9-2-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 9, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72975-72976]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28842]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2014-0978]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Upper Mississippi River,
Dubuque, IA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the Illinois Central Railroad
Drawbridge, across the Upper Mississippi River, mile 579.9, at Dubuque,
Iowa. The deviation is necessary to allow the bridge owner time to
perform preventive maintenance that is essential to the continued safe
operation of the drawbridge. Maintenance is scheduled in the winter
when there is less impact on navigation, instead of scheduling work in
the summer when river traffic increases. This deviation allows the
bridge to open on signal if at least 24-hours advance notice is given.
It further allows the bridge to remain closed for up to 72 hours in
duration occasionally to replace larger components as long as 72-hours
notice is given to the USCG District Eight Western Rivers Bridge
Branch.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 5 p.m., December 15, 2014 until
9 a.m., March 1, 2015.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, (USCG-2014-0978) is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Eric A. Washburn, Bridge
Administrator, Western Rivers, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Cheryl F. Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Chicago, Central & Pacific Railroad
requested a temporary deviation for the Illinois Central Railroad
Drawbridge, across the Upper Mississippi River, mile 579.9, at Dubuque,
Iowa to open on signal if at least 24-hours advance notice is given for
76 days from 5 p.m., December 15, 2014 until 9 a.m., March 1, 2015 for
scheduled maintenance on the bridge. The deviation further allows the
bridge to remain closed for up to 72 hours in duration occasionally to
replace larger components as long as 72-hours notice is given to the
USCG District Eight Western Rivers Bridge Branch.
    The Illinois Central Railroad Drawbridge currently operates in
accordance with 33 CFR 117.5, which states the general requirement that
the drawbridge shall open on signal.
    There are no alternate routes for vessels transiting this section
of the Upper Mississippi River.
    Winter conditions on the Upper Mississippi River coupled with the
closure of Army Corps of Engineer's Lock No. 17 (Mile 437.1 UMR) and
Lock No. 20 (Mile 343.2 UMR) from 7 a.m. January 5, 2015 until 12 p.m.,
March 6, 2015 will preclude any significant navigation demands for the
drawspan opening. In addition, Army Corps Lock No. 12 (Mile 556.7 UMR)
and Lock No. 13 (Mile 522.5 UMR) will be closed from 7:30 a.m. December
15, 2014 to 11:00 March 1, 2015.
    The Illinois Central Railroad Drawbridge, in the closed-to-
navigation position, provides a vertical clearance of 19.9 feet above
normal pool. Navigation on the waterway consists primarily of
commercial tows and recreational

watercraft and will not be significantly impacted. The drawbridge will
open if at least 24-hours advance notice is given and will close for up
to 72 hours provided 72-hours advance notice is given to the USCG
District Eight Western Rivers Bridge Branch. This temporary deviation
has been coordinated with waterway users. No objections were received.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: November 24, 2014.
Eric A. Washburn,
Bridge Administrator, Western Rivers.
[FR Doc. 2014-28842 Filed 12-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: July 6, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 128)]
[Notices]
[Page 38864]
[DOCID:fr06jy10-120]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-1999-5748; FMCSA-2001-11426; FMCSA-2002-11714; FMCSA-
2008-0021]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Renewals; Vision

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA previously announced its decision to renew the
exemptions from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations for 12 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to
exempt individuals from the vision requirement if the exemptions
granted will not compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that
granting these exemptions will provide a level of safety that will be
equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety maintained without
the exemptions for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical
Programs,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W64-224, Washington,
DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
for a 2-year period if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that
would be achieved absent such exemption.'' The statute also allows the
Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. The comment
period ended on June 16, 2010 (75 FR 27621).

Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

Conclusion

    The Agency has not received any adverse evidence on any of these
drivers that indicates that safety is being compromised. Based upon its
evaluation of the 12 renewal applications, FMCSA renews the Federal
vision exemptions for Guy M. Alloway, Joe W. Brewer, James D. Coates,
Donald D. Dunphy, James W. Ellis, IV, John E. Engstad, David A. Inman,
Lawrence C. Moody, Stanley W. Nunn, Bobby C. Spencer, Kevin R. Stoner
and Marion E. Terry.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each renewal
exemption will be valid for 2 years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
The exemption will be revoked if: (1) The person fails to comply with
the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has
resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was
granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent
with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.

    Issued on: June 28, 2010.
 Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2010-16223 Filed 7-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


Attachment H

2011 Federal Agency Training Week

(FEDWEEK)

Courses Offered and Numbers of Session Registrants

FEDWEEK Course Number, Name	Date	Number Registrants

9115 - Distracted Driving (2 sessions)	August 3	30

 	August 4	21

9115 - Distracted Driving	Total	51

9122 - Pandemic Influenza Planning Seminar (2 sessions)	August 2	23

 	August 3	31

9122 - Pandemic Influenza Planning	Total	54

9203 - Electrical Seminar (3 sessions)	August 2	23

 	August 3	19

 	August 4	21

9203 - Electrical	Total	63

9207 - Fire Protection Seminar (2 sessions)	August 3	29

 	August 4	23

9207 - Fire Protection	Total	52

9225 - Ergonomics Seminar (2 sessions)	August 2	29

 	August 3	27

9225 - Ergonomics	Total	56

9245 - Safety & Health Management Systems Seminar (2 sessions)	August 2 29

 	August 4	24

9245 - Safety & Health Management Systems	Total	53

9600 - Office Environment Safety & Health (2 sessions)	August 2	21

 	August 4	27

9600 - Office Environment Safety & Health	Total	48

9845 - Recordkeeping Seminar (3 sessions)	August 2	22

 	August 3	30

 	August 4	24

9845 - Recordkeeping	Total	76

Registrants Grand Total	453

2011 Federal Agency Training Week

(FEDWEEK)

Agency and Number of Registrants

Organization	Registrants

Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES)	12

Bureau of Land Management	6

Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Supply System	13

Employee Education System (EES)	28

Indiana Department of Environmental Management	2

Internal Revenue Service (IRS)	3

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)	8

National Capital Planning Commission	6

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)	2

National Park Service	6

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation	3

Smithsonian Institution	4

Transportation Security Administration (TSA)	54

US Air Force	22

US Army	18

US Army Corps of Engineers	4

US Coast Guard	4

US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)	6

US Department of Defense (DoD)	19

US Department of Energy (DOE)	6

US Department of Health and Human Services(US DHHS)	5

US Department of Homeland Security	16

US Department of Interior	6

US Department of Treasury	6

US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)	33

US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)	4

US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)	77

US General Services Administration (GSA)	12

US Geological Survey (USGS)	11

US Marines	5

US National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)	6

US Navy	2

US Railroad Retirement Board	4

US Social Security Administration (SSA)	18

Veterans Administration (VA) Hospital	22

Grand Total of Registrants in Courses	453


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 80 (Friday, April 24, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22977-22978]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08026]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0548; FRL-10007-89-OAR]

Additional Air Quality Designations for the 2015 Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards: Notice of Action Denying Petition for
Reconsideration of Uinta Basin, Utah Designation

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of action denying petition for reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is providing notice
that it has responded to a petition for reconsideration of a rule
published in the Federal Register on June 4, 2018 titled, ``Additional
Air Quality Designations for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards,'' that promulgated initial ozone air quality
designations for certain areas in the United States. The August 3,
2018, petition, submitted on behalf of Patel Industrial Park, requested
that the EPA reconsider the nonattainment designation for the Uinta
Basin, Utah area. The petition also requested that the EPA stay the
designation rule as it applies to the Uinta Basin, Utah area, pending
reconsideration. The EPA carefully considered the petition and
supporting information, along with information contained in the
rulemaking docket, in reaching its decision on the petition. The EPA
denied the petition for reconsideration in a letter to the petitioner
and the letter has been included in the rulemaking docket. The letter
explains the EPA's basis for the denial. Because the EPA denied the
reconsideration request, the EPA also denied the stay request.

DATES: April 24, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code C539-04, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carla Oldham, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code
C539-04, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, phone number<PHONE_NUMBER>
or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Where can I get copies of this document and other related
information?

    This Federal Register notice, the petition for reconsideration,\1\
and the response letter to the petitioner are available in the docket
that the EPA established for the rulemakings to promulgate the air
quality designations for the 2015 ozone standards, under Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0548.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Although the petitioner framed its request under Clean Air
Act (CAA) section 307(d)(7)(B), that provision is not applicable
here because the Agency action at issue was not promulgated under
CAA section 307(d). Therefore, we are responding to the request as a
petition to revise or modify the EPA's final rule under the
Administrative Procedure Act. Use of the term ``petition for
reconsideration'' throughout this notice is solely to reflect the
language used by the petitioner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All documents in the docket are listed in the index at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information 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. The EPA
is temporarily suspending its Docket Center and Reading Room for public
visitors to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19. Written comments
submitted by mail will be delayed and no hand deliveries will be
accepted. Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide remote
customer service via email, phone, and webform. For further information
and updates on EPA Docket Center services, please visit us online at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    The EPA continues to carefully and continuously monitor information
from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, local area health
departments, and our Federal partners so we can respond rapidly as
conditions change regarding COVID-19.
    In addition, the EPA has established a website for the ozone
designations rulemakings at: http://www.epa.gov/ozone-designations.
This Federal Register notice, the petition for reconsideration, and the
response letter denying the petition are also available on this website
along with other information relevant to the designation process.

II. Judicial Review

    Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA indicates which Federal Courts of
Appeal have venue for petitions of review of final actions by the EPA.
This section provides, in part, that petitions for review must be filed
in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit: (i) When
the agency action consists of ``nationally applicable regulations
promulgated, or final actions taken, by the Administrator,'' or (ii)
when such action is locally or regionally applicable, if ``such action
is based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect and if in
taking such action the Administrator finds and publishes that such
action is based on such a determination.''
    The EPA's action is a denial of an administrative petition
requesting reconsideration of an aspect of a nationally applicable
action, ``Additional Air Quality Designations for the 2015 Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards,'' that is currently being
challenged in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit.\2\ To the extent a court finds the EPA's action denying the
administrative petition to be locally or regionally applicable, the EPA
finds that the action is based on a determination of ``nationwide scope
or effect'' within the meaning of CAA section 307(b)(1). The action
addresses an administrative petition for the EPA to reconsider its
previous action that designated 51 nonattainment areas, 1
unclassifiable

area, and numerous attainment/unclassifiable areas located in 32 states
and the District of Columbia and 11 federal judicial circuits. This
final action is also based on a common core of factual findings and
analyses concerning the interaction between the EPA's June 4, 2018,
ozone designations rulemaking and the EPA's Exceptional Event Rule,
titled, ``Treatment of Data Influenced by Exceptional Events'' (81 FR
68216, October 3, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Clean Wisconsin v. EPA, No. 18-1203 (D.C. Cir., August 1,
2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For these reasons, the action is nationally applicable or,
alternatively, to the extent a court finds this action to be locally or
regionally applicable, the Administrator has determined that the action
is based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect for purposes
of CAA section 307(b)(1). Thus, pursuant to CAA section 307(b), any
petition for review of the final letter denying the petition for
reconsideration from Patel Industrial Park must be filed in the Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on or before June 23,
2020.

Andrew Wheeler,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2020-08026 Filed 4-23-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


800.....................................              13.3              17.1               4.7               4.1
900.....................................              15.0              19.3               5.0               4.4
1000....................................              16.7              21.4               5.2               4.6
1100....................................              18.3              23.6               5.5               4.9
1200....................................              20.0              25.7               5.7               5.1
1300....................................              21.7              27.8               6.0               5.3
1400....................................              23.3              30.0               6.2               5.5
1500....................................              25.0              32.1               6.4               5.7
1600....................................              26.7              34.3               6.6               5.9
1700....................................              28.3              36.4               6.8               6.0
1800....................................              30.0              38.5               7.0               6.2
1900....................................              31.7              40.7               7.2               6.4

2000....................................              33.3              42.8               7.4               6.5
2100....................................              35.0              45.0               7.6               6.7
2200....................................              36.7              47.1               7.7               6.9
2300....................................              38.3              49.3               7.9               7.0
2400....................................              40.0              51.4               8.1               7.2
2500....................................              41.7              53.5               8.3               7.3
2600....................................              43.3              55.7               8.4               7.5
2700....................................              45.0              57.8               8.6               7.6
2800....................................              46.7              60.0               8.7               7.7
2900....................................              48.3              62.1               8.9               7.9
3000....................................              50.0              64.2               9.0               8.0
3100....................................              51.7              66.4               9.2               8.1
3200....................................              53.3              68.5               9.3               8.3
3300....................................              55.0              70.7               9.5               8.4
3400....................................              56.7              72.8               9.6               8.5
3500....................................              58.3              75.0               9.8               8.7
3600....................................              60.0              77.1               9.9               8.8
3700....................................              61.7              79.2              10.0               8.9
3800....................................              63.3              81.4              10.2               9.0
3900....................................              65.0              83.5              10.3               9.1
4000....................................              66.7              85.7              10.4               9.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec.  39.6009  Barge person in charge: Designation and qualifications--
B/ALL.

    The designation and qualification requirements contained in 33 CFR
155.700 and 33 CFR 155.710(a)(2) apply to the barge person in charge.

    Dated: June 25, 2013.
J.G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards, U. S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2013-15808 Filed 7-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P