[Federal Register: October 4, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 192)]
[Notices]
[Page 58596-58597]
[DOCID:fr04oc06-53]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ID-3780-001, et al.]

Johnson, Lisa D., et al.; Electric Rate and Corporate Filings

September 28, 2006.
    The following filings have been made with the Commission. The
filings are linked in ascending order within each classification.

1. Johnson, Lisa D.

[Docket No. ID-3780-001]

    Take notice that on September 26, 2006, Lisa D. Johnson filed an
application for authority to hold interlocking directorate positions
pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, Part 45.8 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure and Order No. 664.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 26, 2006.

2. Widdowson, Carl R.

[Docket No. ID-5061-000]

    Take notice that on September 26, 2006, Carl R. Widdowson filed an
application for authority to hold interlocking directorate positions
pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, Part 45.8 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure and Order No. 664.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 26, 2006.

3. Henry, Bruce A.

[Docket No. ID-5062-000]

    Take notice that on September 26, 2006, Bruce A. Henry filed an
application for authority to hold interlocking directorate positions
pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, Part 45.8 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure and Order No. 664.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 26, 2006.

4. Feuerberg, Stanley C.

[Docket No. ID-5063-000]

    Take notice that on September 26, 2006, Stanley C. Feuerberg filed
an application for authority to hold interlocking directorate positions
pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, Part 45.8 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure and Order No. 664.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 26, 2006.

5. Farmer, Kent D.

[Docket No. ID-5064-000]

    Take notice that on September 26, 2006, Kent D. Farmer filed an
application for authority to hold interlocking directorate positions
pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, Part 45.8 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure and Order No. 664.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 26, 2006.

6. Chappell, Glenn F.

[Docket No. ID-5065-000]

    Take notice that on September 26, 2006, Glenn F. Chappell filed an
application for authority to hold interlocking directorate positions
pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, Part 45.8 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure and Order No. 664.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 26, 2006.

7. White, Gregory W.

[Docket No. ID-5066-000]

    Take notice that on September 26, 2006, Gregory W. White filed an
application for authority to hold interlocking directorate positions
pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, Part 45.8 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure and Order No. 664.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 26, 2006.

8. Tankard, Philip B.

[Docket No. ID-5067-000]

    Take notice that on September 26, 2006, Philip B. Tankard filed an
application for authority to hold interlocking directorate positions
pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, Part 45.8 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure and Order No. 664.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 26, 2006.

9. Rummel, Myron D.

[Docket No. ID-5068-000]

    Take notice that on September 26, 2006, Myron D. Rummel filed an
application for authority to hold interlocking directorate positions
pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, Part 45.8 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure and Order No. 664.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 26, 2006.

10. Longshore, M. Larry

[Docket No. ID-5069-000]

    Take notice that on September 26, 2006, M. Larry Longshore filed an
application for authority to hold interlocking directorate positions
pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, Part 45.8 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure and Order No. 664.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 26, 2006.

11. King, Bruce M.

[Docket No. ID-5070-000]

    Take notice that on September 26, 2006, Bruce M. King filed an
application for authority to hold interlocking directorate positions
pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, Part 45.8 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure and Order No. 664.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 26, 2006.

12. Kees, Robert L.

[Docket No. ID-5071-000]

    Take notice that on September 26, 2006, Robert L. Kees filed an
application for authority to hold interlocking directorate positions
pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, Part 45.8 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure and Order No. 664.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 26, 2006.

13. Jones, David J.

[Docket No. ID-5072-000]

    Take notice that on September 26, 2006, David J. Jones filed an
application for authority to hold interlocking directorate positions
pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, Part 45.8 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure and Order No. 664.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 26, 2006.

Standard Paragraph

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions 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 e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-16342 Filed 10-3-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 26, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 75911-75915]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30916]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1230; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-107-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Embraer S.A. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede an existing airworthiness directive
(AD) that applies to certain Embraer S.A. Model ERJ 170 and ERJ 190
airplanes. The existing AD currently requires, for certain airplanes,
repetitively replacing the low-stage check valve and associated seals
of the right hand (RH) engine's engine bleed system with a new check
valve and new seals, replacing the low pressure check valves (LPCV),
and revising the maintenance program. For certain other airplanes, the
existing AD requires replacing a certain low-stage check valve with an
improved low-stage check valve. Since we issued that AD, we have
received reports of uncommanded engine shutdowns on both Model ERJ 170
and ERJ 190 airplanes due to excessive wear and failure of LPCVs having
certain part numbers. This proposed AD would also, for certain
airplanes, require replacing certain LPCVs of the left-hand (LH) and RH
engines, which would be an option for other airplanes. We are proposing
this AD to prevent the possibility of a dual engine in-flight shutdown
due to LPCV failure.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by February 11,
2013.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Embraer S.A., Technical Publications Section (PC 060), Av. Brigadeiro
Faria Lima, 2170--Putim--12227-901 S[atilde]o Jose dos Campos--SP--
BRASIL; telephone +55 12 3927-5852 or +55 12 3309-0732; fax +55 12
3927-7546; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.flyembraer.com. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2012-1230;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-107-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On June 23, 2010, we issued AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-16359 (75
FR 42585, July 22, 2010). That AD required actions intended to address
an unsafe condition on Embraer S.A. Model ERJ 170 and ERJ 190
airplanes.
    Since we issued AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR 42585,
July 22, 2010), there have been occurrences of uncommanded engine
shutdowns on both Model ERJ 170 and Model ERJ 190 airplanes due to
excessive wear and failure of LPCVs having part number 1001447-3 and
1001447-4. Both engines of the airplanes have the same valves, which
leads to the possibility of a dual engine in-flight shutdown due to
LPCV failure. The Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil
(ANAC), which is the aviation authority for Brazil, has issued
Brazilian Airworthiness Directives 2005-09-03R3 and 2006-11-01R6, both
effective May 30, 2011 (referred to after this as ``the MCAI''), to
correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI for
Embraer S.A. Model ERJ 170 airplanes states:

    It has been found the occurrence of an engine in-flight shutdown
* * * caused by the LPCV [low pressure check valves] failure P/N
[part number] 1001447-3 with 3,900 Flight Hours (FH) installed on
ERJ-170. This valve failed [to] open due [to] excessive wear. [I]t
was found the occurrence of an engine shutdown on-ground, caused by
the LPCV failure P/N 1001447-4 with 1,802 FH installed on ERJ-190
failed due [to] low cycle fatigue. Since the behavior of a valve P/N
1001447-4 removed from ERJ-190 is unknown on ERJ-170 and the P/N
1001447-4 is common between ERJ-170 and ERJ-190 airplane fleet, an
action is necessary to prevent the installation, in ERJ-170
airplanes, of LPCVs P/N 1001447-4 previously installed in ERJ-190
airplanes.
* * * * *
    The MCAI for Embraer S.A. Model ERJ 190 airplanes states:
    It has been found the occurrence of an engine in-flight shutdown
* * * caused by the LPCV failure P/N [part number] 1001447-3 with
3,900 Flight Hours (FH) installed on ERJ-170. This valve failed [to]
open due [to] excessive wear. [I]t was found the occurrence of an
engine shutdown on-ground, caused by

the LPCV failure P/N 1001447-4 with 1,802 FH installed on ERJ-190
failed due [to] low cycle fatigue. Since the behavior of a valve P/N
1001447-4 removed from ERJ-170 is unknown on ERJ-190 and the P/N
1001447-4 is common between ERJ-170 and ERJ-190 airplane fleet, an
action is necessary to prevent the installation, in ERJ-190
airplanes, of LPCVs P/N 1001447-4 previously installed in ERJ-170
airplanes.
* * * * *
    The unsafe condition is the possibility of a dual engine in-flight
shutdown due to LPCV failure. The required actions include retaining
the actions required by AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR 42585,
July 22, 2010), and include, for certain airplanes, replacing the LPCVs
of LH and RH engines, which would be an option for certain other
airplanes. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in
the AD docket.

Relevant Service Information

    EMBRAER has issued the following service information, which is
intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI.
     EMBRAER 170 Maintenance Review Board Report, MRB-1621,
Revision 7, dated November 11, 2010.
     EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190LIN-36-0004, dated December
23, 2009.

Changes to AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22,
2010)

    Paragraphs (j)(11) through (j)(14) of AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-
16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010), have been redesignated as
paragraphs (o)(1) through (o)(4) of this proposed AD.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service
information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all pertinent information and determined an unsafe condition
exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same
type design.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 253 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Number of U.S.-
              Action                    Labor cost        Cost per product     registered        Cost on U.S.
                                                                                airplanes         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement of RH check valves on  3 work-hours x $85   $255 per                         55  $14,025 per
 Model ERJ 170[dash]100 LR,         per hour = $255      replacement cycle.                   replacement cycle.
 [dash]100 STD, [dash]100 SE, and   per replacement
 [dash]100 SU airplanes (retained   cycle.
 actions from existing AD 2010-14-
 14 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010)).
Replacement of LH check valves on  3 work-hours x $85   $255 per                         75  $19,125 per
 Model ERJ 170[dash]100 LR,         per hour = $255      replacement cycle.                   replacement cycle.
 [dash]100 STD, [dash]100 SE,       per replacement
 [dash]100 SU, [dash]200 LR,        cycle.
 [dash]200 STD, and [dash]200 SU
 airplanes (retained actions from
 existing AD 2010-14-14 (75 FR
 42585, July 22, 2010)).
Replacement of LPCVs with P/N      2 work-hours x $85   $170...............             253  $43,010.
 1001447-6 (new proposed action).   per hour = $170.
Revision of maintenance program    1 work-hour x $85    $85................             253  $21,505.
 (new proposed action).             per hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would 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 this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    3. Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska; and
    4. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    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]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing airworthiness directive
(AD) 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-16359 (75

FR 42585, July 22, 2010), and adding the following new AD:

Embraer S.A.: Docket No. FAA-2012-1230; Directorate Identifier 2011-
NM-107-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by February 11, 2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR
42585, July 22, 2010), which superseded AD 2007-16-09, Amendment 39-
15148 (72 FR 44734, August 9, 2007). AD 2007-16-09 superseded AD
2005-23-14, Amendment 39-14372 (70 FR 69075, November 14, 2005).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Embraer S.A. Model ERJ 170-100 LR, -100 STD,
-100 SE., and -100 SU airplanes; Model ERJ 170-200 LR, -200 SU, and
-200 STD airplanes; Model ERJ 190-100 STD, -100 LR, -100 ECJ, and -
100 IGW airplanes; and Model ERJ 190-200 STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW
airplanes; certificated in any category; having Hamilton Sundstrand
low pressure check valve (LPCV) part number (P/N) 1001447-3 or
1001447-4.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 36, Pneumatic.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of uncommanded engine shutdowns
on both Model ERJ 170 and ERJ 190 airplanes due to excessive wear
and failure of LPCVs having certain part numbers. We are issuing
this AD to prevent the possibility of a dual engine in-flight
shutdown due to LPCV failure.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Replacement for Right-Hand (RH) Engine on Model ERJ 170-
100 LR, -100 STD, -100 SE., and -100 SU Airplanes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (f) of AD
2010-14-14, Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010). For
Model ERJ 170-100 LR, -100 STD, -100 SE, and -100 SU airplanes
equipped with LPCVs having P/N 1001447-3: Within 100 flight hours
after November 29, 2005 (the effective date of AD 2005-23-14,
Amendment 39-14372 (70 FR 69075, November 14, 2005)), or prior to
the accumulation of 3,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs
later, replace the low-stage check valve and associated seals of the
RH engine's engine bleed system with a new check valve and new
seals, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of EMBRAER
Alert Service Bulletin 170-36-A004, dated September 28, 2005; or
paragraph 3.C. of the Accomplishment Instructions of EMBRAER Service
Bulletin 170-36-0004, dated November 18, 2005, or Revision 01, dated
March 10, 2008. As of August 26, 2010 (the effective date of AD
2010-14-14), only use EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-36-0004, Revision
01, dated March 10, 2008, for the actions required by this
paragraph. Repeat the replacement thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 3,000 flight hours.

(h) Retained Provision for Removed Check Valves

    This paragraph restates the provision specified in paragraph (g)
of AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010).
Although EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin 170-36-A004, dated September
28, 2005, specifies to send removed check valves to the
manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.

(i) Retained Replacement for Left-Hand (LH) Engine on All Model ERJ 170
Airplanes

    This paragraph restates requirements of paragraph (h) of AD
2010-14-14, Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010). For
Model ERJ 170-100 LR, -100 STD, -100 SE., -100 SU, -200 LR, -200
STD, and -200 SU airplanes equipped with LPCVs having P/N 1001447-3:
Within 300 flight hours after September 13, 2007 (the effective date
of AD 2007-16-09, Amendment 39-15148 (72 FR 44734, August 9, 2007)),
or prior to the accumulation of 3,000 total flight hours, whichever
occurs later, replace the low-stage check valve and associated seals
of the LH engine's engine bleed system with a new check valve and
new seals, in accordance with paragraph 3.B. of the Accomplishment
Instructions of EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-36-0004, dated November
18, 2005; or Revision 01, dated March 10, 2008. As of August 26,
2010 (the effective date of AD 2010-14-14), only use EMBRAER Service
Bulletin 170-36-0004, Revision 01, dated March 10, 2008. Repeat the
replacement thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight
hours.

(j) Retained Provision for Removed Check Valves in Accordance With
Other Service Bulletin

    This paragraph restates the provision specified in paragraph (i)
of AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010).
Although EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-36-0004, dated November 18,
2005, specifies to send removed check valves to the manufacturer,
this AD does not include that requirement.

(k) Retained Actions and Compliance With Revised Service Information

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (j) of AD
2010-14-14, Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010), with
revised service information for paragraphs (k)(3), (k)(7), and
(k)(8) of this AD. Unless already done, do the following actions.
    (1) For Model ERJ 170-200 LR, -200 STD, and -200 SU airplanes
equipped with LPCV having P/N 1001447-3: Within 100 flight hours
after August 26, 2010 (the effective date of AD 2010-14-14,
Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010)), or prior to the
accumulation of 3,000 total flight hours, whichever occurs later,
replace the low-stage check valve and associated seals of the RH
engine's engine bleed system with a new check valve and new seals,
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of EMBRAER
Service Bulletin 170-36-0004, Revision 01, dated March 10, 2008.
Repeat the replacement thereafter at intervals not to exceed 3,000
flight hours.
    (2) For Model ERJ 170-100 LR, -100 STD, -100 SE., -100 SU, -200
LR, -200 STD, and -200 SU airplanes equipped with LPCV having P/N
1001447-3: Replacing the LPCV having P/N 1001447-3 with a new one
having P/N 1001447-4, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-36-0011, Revision 02,
dated July 19, 2007, terminates the repetitive replacements required
by paragraphs (g), (i), and (k)(1) of this AD.
    (3) For Model ERJ 170-100 LR, -100 STD, -100 SE., -100 SU, -200
LR, -200 STD, and -200 SU airplanes equipped with LPCV having P/N
1001447-3, at the earlier of the times specified in paragraphs
(k)(3)(i) and (k)(3)(ii) of this AD, revise the maintenance program
to include maintenance Task 36-11-02-002 (Low Stage Bleed Check
Valve), specified in Section 1 of the EMBRAER 170 Maintenance Review
Board Report (MRBR), MRB-1621, Revision 6, dated January 14, 2010;
or Revision 7, dated November 11, 2010. Thereafter, except as
provided by paragraph (q) of this AD, no alternative inspection
intervals may be approved for the task.
    (i) Within 180 days after accomplishing paragraph (k)(2) of this
AD.
    (ii) Before any LPCV having P/N 1001447-4 accumulates 3,000
total flight hours, or within 300 flight hours after August 26, 2010
(the effective date of AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR
42585, July 22, 2010)), whichever occurs later.
    (4) For Model ERJ 170-100 LR, -100 STD, -100 SE., -100 SU, -200
LR, -200 STD, and -200 SU airplanes equipped with LPCV having P/N
1001447-3: As of August 26, 2010 (the effective date of the
effective date of AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR 42585,
July 22, 2010)), no person may install any LPCV identified in
paragraph (k)(4)(i) or (k)(4)(ii) of this AD on any airplane.
    (i) Any LPCV having P/N 1001447-3, installed on Model ERJ-170
airplanes, that has accumulated more than 3,000 total flight hours.
    (ii) Any LPCV having P/N 1001447-3, installed on Model ERJ-170
and ERJ-190 airplanes, that has accumulated 3,000 or more total
flight hours. To calculate the equivalent number of flight hours for
a LPCV having P/N 1001447-3 that was installed on a Model ERJ-190
airplane to be installed on a Model ERJ-170 airplane, the flight
hours accumulated in operation on ERJ-190 models must be multiplied
by a factor of 2 (100 percent).
    (5) For Model ERJ 190-100 ECJ, -100 LR, -100 IGW, -100 STD, -200
STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW airplanes: Within 100 flight hours after
August 26, 2010 (the effective date of AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-
16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010)), replace all LPCVs having P/N
1001447-3 that have accumulated 1,500 total flight hours or more as
of August 26, 2010 (the effective date of AD 2010-14-14), with a new
or serviceable LPCV having P/N 1001447-4 that has accumulated less
than 2,000 total flight hours since new or since overhaul, in
accordance

with the Accomplishment Instructions of EMBRAER Service Bulletin
190-36-0006, Revision 01, dated July 19, 2007.
    (6) For Model ERJ 190-100 ECJ, -100 LR, -100 IGW, -100 STD, -200
STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW airplanes: Replace all LPCVs having P/N
1001447-3 that have accumulated less than 1,500 total flight hours
as of August 26, 2010 (the effective date of AD 2010-14-14,
Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010)), before the LPCV
accumulates 1,500 total flight hours or within 100 flight hours
after August 26, 2010 (the effective date of AD 2010-14-14),
whichever occurs later. Replace that LPCV with a new or serviceable
LPCV having P/N 1001447-4 that has accumulated less than 2,000 total
flight hours since new or since overhaul, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-36-0006,
Revision 01, dated July 19, 2007.
    (7) For Model ERJ 190-100 ECJ, -100 LR, -100 IGW, -100 STD, -200
STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW airplanes: Within 200 flight hours after
August 26, 2010 (the effective date of AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-
16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010)), or before any LPCV having P/N
1001447-4 installed on the right engine accumulates 2,000 total
flight hours since new or since overhaul, whichever occurs later,
replace the valve with a new or serviceable LPCV having P/N 1001447-
4 that has accumulated less than 2,000 total flight hours since new
or since overhaul, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-36-0014, Revision 01,
dated January 14, 2009; or EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190LIN-36-0004,
dated December 23, 2009 (for Model 190-100 ECJ airplanes). Repeat
the replacement on the right engine at intervals not to exceed 2,000
total flight hours on the LPCV since new or last overhaul.
    (8) For Model ERJ 190-100 ECJ, -100 LR, -100 IGW, -100 STD, -200
STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW airplanes: Within 200 flight hours after
August 26, 2010 (the effective date of AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-
16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010)), or before any LPCV having P/N
1001447-4 installed on the left engine accumulates 2,000 total
flight hours since new or last overhaul, whichever occurs later,
replace the valve with a new or serviceable LPCV having P/N 1001447-
4 that has accumulated less than 2,000 total flight hours since new
or since overhaul, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-36-0014, Revision 01,
dated January 14, 2009; or EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190LIN-36-0004,
dated December 23, 2009 (for Model 190-100 ECJ airplanes). Repeat
the replacement on the left engine at intervals not to exceed 2,000
total flight hours on the LPCV since new or last overhaul.
    (9) For Model ERJ 190-100 ECJ, -100 LR, -100 IGW, -100 STD, -200
STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW airplanes: As of August 26, 2010 (the
effective date of AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR 42585,
July 22, 2010)), installation on the left and right engines with a
LPCV having P/N 1001447-4 is allowed only if the valve has
accumulated less than 2,000 total flight hours since new or last
overhaul prior to installation.
    (10) For Model ERJ 190-100 ECJ, -100 LR, -100 IGW, -100 STD, -
200 STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW airplanes: As of August 26, 2010 (the
effective date of AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR 42585,
July 22, 2010)), no LPCV having P/N 1001447-3 may be installed on
any airplane. Any LPCV having P/N 1001447-3 already installed on an
airplane may remain in service until reaching the flight-hour limit
defined in paragraphs (k)(5) and (k)(6) of this AD.

(l) New Terminating Action

    For Model ERJ 190-100 STD, -100 LR, -100 ECJ, and -100 IGW
airplanes; and Model ERJ 190-200 STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW
airplanes: Except as provided by paragraph (m) of this AD, within 10
months after the effective date of this AD, install a new LPCV
having P/N 1001447-6, using a method approved by either the Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA;
or Ag[ecirc]ncia Nacional de Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil (ANAC) (or
its delegated agent). Installation of P/N 1001447-6 terminates the
requirement for installation and repetitive replacement of the LPCV
having P/N 1001447-3 or 1001447-4 required by paragraph (k) of this
AD.

(m) New Exception

    For Model ERJ 190-100 STD, -100 LR, -100 ECJ, and -100 IGW
airplanes; and Model ERJ 190-200 STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW
airplanes; that have an LPCV, P/N 1001447-4, that has been installed
before the compliance time specified in paragraph (l) of this AD:
Prior to the accumulation of 2,000 flight hours on the part since
new or overhauled, install a new LPCV having P/N 1001447-6, using a
method approved by either the Manager, International Branch, ANM-
116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or ANAC (or its delegated
agent).

(n) New Optional Terminating Action

    For Model ERJ 170-100 LR, -100 STD, -100 SE, and -100 SU
airplanes; Model ERJ 170-200 LR, -200 SU, and -200 STD airplanes:
Installation of a new LPCV having P/N 1001447-6 terminates the
requirement for installation and repetitive replacement of the LPCV
having P/N 1001447-3 or 1001447-4 required by paragraph (k) of this
AD.

(o) Credit for Previous Actions

    (1) This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraph (k)(2) of this AD, if those actions were performed before
August 26, 2010 (the effective date of AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-
16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010)), using EMBRAER Service Bulletin
170-36-0011, dated January 9, 2007; or EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-
36-0011, Revision 01, dated May 28, 2007; which are not incorporated
by reference in this AD.
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraphs (k)(5) and (k)(6) of this AD, if those actions were
performed before August 26, 2010 (the effective date of AD 2010-14-
14, Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010)), using EMBRAER
Service Bulletin 190-36-0006, dated April 9, 2007, which is not
incorporated by reference in this AD.
    (3) This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraph (k)(1) of this AD, if those actions were performed before
August 26, 2010 (the effective date of AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-
16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010)), using EMBRAER Service Bulletin
170-36-0004, dated November 18, 2005, which is not incorporated by
reference in this AD.
    (4) This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraph (k)(3) of this AD, if those actions were done before
August 26, 2010 (the effective date of AD 2010-14-14, Amendment 39-
16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010)), using Task 36-11-02-002 (Low
Stage Bleed Check Valve) specified in Section 1 of the EMBRAER 170
Maintenance Review Board Report (MRBR), MRB-1621, Revision 5, dated
November 5, 2008, which is not incorporated by reference in this AD.

(p) New Parts Installation Limitations

    (1) For Model ERJ 170-100 LR, -100 STD, -100 SE., and -100 SU
airplanes; and Model ERJ 170-200 LR, -200 SU, and -200 STD
airplanes: As of the effective date of this AD, no person may
install an LPCV having P/N 1001447-4 that was previously installed
on any Model ERJ-190 airplane, on any airplane, unless the valve has
been overhauled.
    (2) For Model ERJ 190-100 STD, -100 LR, -100 ECJ, and -100 IGW
airplanes; and Model ERJ 190-200 STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW
airplanes: As of the effective date of this AD, and until the
effective date specified in paragraph (p)(3) of this AD, no person
may install an LPCV having P/N 1001447-4 that was previously
installed on any Model ERJ-170 airplane, on any airplane, unless the
valve has been overhauled.
    (3) For Model ERJ 190-100 STD, -100 LR, -100 ECJ, and -100 IGW
airplanes; and Model ERJ 190-200 STD, -200 LR, and -200 IGW
airplanes: As of 10 months after the effective date of this AD, no
person may install any LPCV having P/N 1001447-4, on any airplane.

(q) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Cindy
Ashforth, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal
inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the
local flight standards district office/

certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter must
specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2010-14-14,
Amendment 39-16359 (75 FR 42585, July 22, 2010), are not approved as
AMOCs with this AD.

(r) Related Information

    (1) Refer to MCAI Brazilian Airworthiness Directive 2005-09-
03R3, effective May 30, 2011; Brazilian Airworthiness Directive
2006-11-01R6, effective May 30, 2011; and the following service
information; for related information.
    (i) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-36-A004, dated September 28,
2005.
    (ii) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-36-0004, dated November 18,
2005.
    (iii) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-36-0004, Revision 01, dated
March 10, 2008.
    (iv) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 170-36-0011, Revision 02, dated
July 19, 2007.
    (v) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-36-0006, Revision 01, dated
July 19, 2007.
    (vi) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-36-0014, Revision 01, dated
January 14, 2009.
    (vii) EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190LIN-36-0004, dated December
23, 2009.
    (viii) Task 36-11-02-002 (Low Stage Bleed Check Valve) specified
in Section 1 of the EMBRAER 170 MRBR MRB-1621, Revision 6, dated
January 14, 2010.
    (ix) Task 36-11-02-002 (Low Stage Bleed Check Valve) specified
in Section 1 of the EMBRAER 170 MRBR, MRB-1621, Revision 7, dated
November 11, 2010.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Embraer S.A., Technical Publications Section (PC 060), Av.
Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170--Putim--12227-901 S[atilde]o Jose dos
Campos--SP--Brasil; telephone +55 12 3927-5852 or +55 12 3309-0732;
fax +55 12 3927-7546; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.flyembraer.com. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 12, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-30916 Filed 12-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 203 (Friday, October 21, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63950-63955]
[FR Doc No: 2022-22833]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 372

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0155; FRL-6004-02-OCSPP]
RIN 2070-AK42

Parent Company Definition for Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
Reporting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing a rule
to codify the definition of ``parent company'' for purposes of
reporting to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) and to require the
reporting of a foreign parent company when applicable. The existing
regulation requires facilities reporting to TRI to identify their
parent company in annual reporting forms. This rule adds a codified
definition of this data element. Among the facilities reporting to TRI
are those with complicated corporate ownership structures. As such,
effort is required each year by reporting facilities and EPA to clarify
how the parent company data element should be represented on the form.
A codified definition of parent company will allow EPA to address
various corporate ownership scenarios explicitly and will reduce the
reporting burden caused by regulatory uncertainty. This rule clarifies
existing requirements to reporting facilities and adds a foreign parent
company data element, while improving the Agency's data quality.

DATES: This final rule is effective on December 20, 2022.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2018-0155, is available online
at https://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket) in the Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC). Please review the visitor
instructions and additional information about the docket available at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    For technical information contact: Stephanie Griffin, Data
Gathering and Analysis Division, (7406M), Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202) 564-1463; email address: [email protected].
    For general information contact: The Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Information Center; telephone number: (800)
424-9346, TDD<PHONE_NUMBER>; website: https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/epa-hotlines#epcraic.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Executive Summary

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if your facility
submits annual reports under section 313 of the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), 42 U.S.C. 11023, and section 6607
of the Pollution Prevention Act (PPA), 42 U.S.C. 13106, to EPA and
States or Tribes of the facility's environmental releases or other
waste management quantities of covered chemicals. (Pursuant to 40 CFR
372.30(a), facilities located in Indian country are required to report
to the appropriate tribal government official and EPA instead of to the
State and EPA. See April 19, 2012 (77 FR 23409) (FRL-9660-9)). To
determine whether your facility is affected by this action, you should
carefully examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR part 372,
subpart B. The following list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive,
but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this
document applies to them.

Potentially affected entities may include:
     Facilities included in the following NAICS manufacturing
codes (corresponding to Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes
20 through 39): 311*, 312*, 313*, 314*, 315*, 316, 321, 322, 323*, 324,
325*, 326*, 327, 331, 332, 333, 334*, 335*, 336, 337*, 339*, 111998*,
113310, 211130*, 212324*, 212325*, 212393*, 212399*, 488390*, 511110,
511120, 511130, 511140*, 511191, 511199, 512230*, 512250*, 519130*,
541713*, 541715*, or 811490*. (*Exceptions and/or limitations exist for
these NAICS codes.)
     Facilities included in the following NAICS codes
(corresponding to SIC codes other than SIC codes 20 through 39):
212111, 212112, 212113 (corresponds to SIC code 12, Coal Mining (except
1241)); or 212221, 212222, 212230, 212299 (corresponds to SIC code 10,
Metal Mining (except 1011, 1081, and 1094)); or 221111, 221112, 221113,
221118, 221121, 221122, 221330 (all are limited to facilities that
combust coal and/or oil for the purpose of generating power for
distribution in commerce) (corresponds to SIC codes 4911, 4931, and
4939, Electric Utilities); or 424690, 425110, 425120 (limited to
facilities previously classified in SIC code 5169, Chemicals and Allied
Products, Not Elsewhere Classified); or 424710 (corresponds to SIC code
5171, Petroleum Bulk Terminals and Plants); or 562112 (limited to
facilities primarily engaged in solvent recovery services on a contract
or fee basis (previously classified under SIC code 7389, Business
Services, NEC)); or 562211, 562212, 562213, 562219, 562920 (limited to
facilities regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act,
subtitle C, 42 U.S.C. 6921 et seq.) (corresponds to SIC code 4953,
Refuse Systems).
     Federal facilities.
     Any facility which the EPA Administrator has determined to
be subject to TRI reporting requirements under the discretionary
authority of EPCRA section 313(b)(2).

B. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

    EPA is taking this action under EPCRA sections 313(g)(1) and 328,
42 U.S.C. 11023(g)(1) and 11048.
    In general, EPCRA section 313 requires owners and operators of
covered facilities in specified SIC codes that manufacture, process, or
otherwise use listed toxic chemicals in amounts above specified
threshold levels to report certain facility specific information about
such chemicals, including the annual releases and other waste
management quantities. EPCRA section 313(g)(1) requires EPA to publish
a uniform toxic chemical release form for these reporting purposes, and
it also prescribes, in general terms, the types of information that
must be submitted on the form. Congress also granted EPA broad
rulemaking authority to allow the Agency to fully implement the
statute, to ensure the release forms are available to inform the public
of toxic chemical releases and ``to assist governmental agencies,
researchers, and other persons in the conduct of research and data
gathering'' (EPCRA section 313(h), 42 U.S.C. 11023(h)).
    EPCRA section 328 (42 U.S.C. 10048) states that: ``The
Administrator may prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to
carry out this chapter.''

C. What action is the Agency taking?

    EPA is codifying the definition of ``parent company'' for TRI
reporting purposes. Under this rule, EPA is clarifying existing
guidance and providing reporting clarity for facilities, including
those owned by corporate subsidiaries, multiple owners, foreign
entities, or that are publicly owned. EPA is also requiring facilities
to report their highest-level foreign parent company, when applicable,
beginning with Reporting Year 2023, for forms due by July 1, 2024 and
for each subsequent reporting year. With this rule, the definition of
``parent company'' for TRI reporting is more closely aligned with
definitions under other reporting programs, including the Chemical Data
Reporting (CDR) rule (40 CFR part 711) and the Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Program (GHGRP) rule (40 CFR part 98).
    The definition of ``parent company'' within TRI reporting
regulations is the highest-level company with the largest ownership
interest in the TRI facility as of December 31 of the reporting year.
This addresses the following ownership scenarios:
     A facility is owned by a single company, which is not
owned by another company;
     A facility is owned by a single company, which is owned by
another company;
     A facility is owned by multiple companies, including
companies that are themselves owned by other entities;
     A facility is owned by a joint venture or cooperative;
     A facility is owned, at least in part, by a foreign
company; and
     A facility is owned by the Federal Government, or a state,
tribal, or municipal government.
    EPA is also requiring facilities reporting to TRI to use
standardized naming conventions for parent company reporting, as
provided in the annual TRI Reporting Forms and Instructions (RFI),
available as a downloadable Excel file (``Standardized Parent Company
Names'') at https://www.epa.gov/tri/rfi. These naming conventions
address common formatting discrepancies, such as punctuation,
capitalization, and abbreviations (for example, ``Corp'' for
``Corporation'').

D. Why is the Agency taking this action?

    Facilities required to report to TRI must also report their parent
companies and identify whether any reportable off-site transfers of TRI
chemicals are sent to a facility also owned by that same parent
company. Reporting facilities rely on the TRI RFI to report this
information and to address questions, including what constitutes a
``parent company'' for TRI reporting purposes. The RFI does not address
all scenarios applicable to many TRI facilities, including facilities
owned by subsidiaries of larger companies; facilities with multiple
owners, none of whom are a majority owner; joint ventures that are not
purely 50:50; facilities directly owned by foreign entities; and,
publicly-owned facilities. Because the Agency's longstanding guidance
has repeatedly resulted in reporter confusion in situations such as a
facility having multiple owners, or when no single entity owns at least
50 percent of a facility, EPA is taking this action to provide
certainty over what must be reported for this data element. In addition
to greater regulatory certainty and clarity for facilities, the Agency
believes this will also provide time-saving benefits for both EPA and
the reporting community. In previous years, the Agency has found that
many facilities, relying only on a broad definition of ``parent
company'' in the RFI, inaccurately report parent company information to
TRI, resulting in repeated efforts to contact individual facilities to
verify their facility's ownership structure after each reporting year.
    EPA is also requiring the use of a standardized naming convention
for parent companies, including identical punctuation and
capitalization styles or using common abbreviations (for example,
reporting ``Inc'' for ``Incorporation'') (Ref. 1). The conventions have
been included in TRI guidance for several reporting cycles, and their
inclusion in the CFR would formalize the requirement to adhere to them
for the purpose of TRI data harmonization. The naming convention is
primarily a tool to streamline the data quality and aggregation
activities on submitted data. Thus, TRI reports and

EPA databases more accurately reflect which facilities are owned by the
same parent company, rather than counting parent companies reported
with variations in spelling, capitalization, punctuation, or
abbreviations as unique companies.
    EPA is also finalizing the requirement for TRI facilities to submit
their highest-level foreign parent company, where applicable. EPA
recognizes that there are a variety of ownership situations for TRI
facilities. In some situations, a TRI facility is owned, at least in
part, by a company outside of the United States. In these cases, the
facility is required to report on both their highest-level U.S.-based
and foreign parent companies, as applicable. Collecting the highest-
level foreign parent company name in addition to the highest level-
U.S.-based parent company name ensures greater data consistency for TRI
data users than just including one name (i.e., either the highest-level
U.S.-based company, or the foreign parent company). TRI data users
include researchers, industry, the public, and other EPA and government
reporting programs. The distinct data elements for U.S.-based and
foreign parent company names enable data users to include or exclude
any foreign parent companies from analyses or searches as they choose.
Conversely, allowing either a U.S.-based or foreign parent company name
to be reported for the same data element (i.e., a single parent company
field, regardless of location) would prevent TRI's public data tools
from distinguishing companies that are owned by U.S.-based entities
from those that are foreign-owned. This single data element would
prevent any data user from reasonably and efficiently determining where
the company is based, unless further data of the listed parent company,
such as address, was also required.
    EPA is finalizing the requirement for reporting a foreign parent
company to begin with Reporting Year 2023, for forms due by July 1,
2024. The later date for this requirement will both enable EPA to
update the TRI-MEweb reporting software with the beginning of a new
reporting year, and the reporting community to familiarize themselves
with the new data requirement.
    Ultimately, this rule more closely aligns the definition of parent
company for TRI reporters with the definition codified by the CDR
Program at 40 CFR 711.3. Differences in this proposed definition and
the definition codified in the CDR regulations result from differences
in the respective programs' longstanding terms of art (e.g., TRI uses
``facilities,'' whereas CDR uses ``sites''), as well as from edits
intended to provide greater clarity in the TRI context. For instance,
the TRI definition slightly differs from CDR regulations in the
paragraph referring to 50:50 joint ventures (40 CFR 372.3) in order to
clarify that a joint venture should be reported as its own parent
company, irrespective of whether any of the joint participants is owned
by a higher-level company. Nonetheless, this codified definition of
``parent company'' under TRI is much closer to the codified definition
under CDR. Having nearly identical definitions between the TRI and CDR
programs supports EPA's ability to compare the databases for data
quality purposes. Additionally, the GHGRP has codified the definition
of parent company at 40 CFR 98.3(c)(11). While the GHGRP definition of
this data element has some differences from the CDR definition and this
rule's definition, there are many similarities across the definitions,
including the need to report the highest-level company in the
facility's ownership hierarchy and the requirement to refer to
reporting instructions for standardized naming conventions. Thus, this
definition and reporting requirement is similar to those already
codified under other EPA reporting rules. This rule promotes
understanding of the data element within the regulated community,
especially among those facilities which also report to CDR and are
already familiar with the codified definition.

E. What are the estimated incremental impacts of this action?

    EPA has evaluated the potential incremental impacts of this rule.
The details are presented in the economic analysis prepared for the
rule (Ref. 2), which is available in the docket and is briefly
summarized in this unit.
    EPA estimates the incremental impacts across all facilities to be
up to $1,239,572 in the first year, and up to $14,238 every subsequent
year, with no annualized capital or operation and maintenance costs.
The paperwork burden is estimated to be up to 17,833 hours the first
year, and up to 205 hours every subsequent year. However, these
estimated impacts do not include the cost and time savings for
facilities who have previously had difficulty interpreting EPA's
guidance on this data element, nor do these impacts include the reduced
need for communication between the Agency and facilities in the annual
effort to standardize parent company names. The benefits of the rule
are described qualitatively in the economic analysis, as some of the
benefits are unable to be monetized (such as the improved ability of
various TRI data users to analyze parent company-level information
thoroughly); thus, the estimated incremental impact listed does not
factor in benefits. EPA estimates that a total of 21,154 entities
(i.e., all TRI reporting facilities) are impacted by this rule.

II. Background

    As discussed in the proposed rule (Ref. 3), EPA proposed to codify
a definition of ``parent company'' for TRI reporting purposes and to
require the reporting of the foreign parent company when applicable. In
the proposed rule, EPA described how codifying this definition provides
greater clarity to TRI reporting facilities and greater consistency
with other reporting programs. While EPA proposed adding a data element
for the highest-level foreign parent company, the Agency specifically
requested public comment on this proposed additional data element. The
proposed rule Economic Analysis (Ref. 4) also provided estimated burden
and costs associated with three different scenarios: simply codifying a
definition of ``parent company'' and not requiring the reporting of
foreign parent companies; codifying a definition of ``parent company''
and requiring only the reporting of the highest-level parent company of
the facility, which may be a U.S. or foreign company; and codifying a
definition of ``parent company'' and requiring the reporting of the
U.S. parent company and foreign parent company, if applicable.
    In the proposed rule, EPA estimated the incremental burden of the
action, under Option 3 which would require reporting both the highest-
level U.S. parent company and foreign parent company, if applicable.
The estimated incremental burden was 18,091 hours across the entire
reporting universe of 21,458 facilities in the first year, while
subsequent reporting years would see an impact of 210 hours.

III. Summary of Comments and EPA Responses

    In response to the proposed rule, EPA received four public
comments. The commenters included two individuals (one anonymous), one
law firm on behalf of a client, and one state environmental agency.
This unit summarizes the comments received and EPA's response to each
comment.
    Comment #1. One private citizen was supportive of the rule to
promote corporate accountability. The commenter also suggested that TRI
track carbon dioxide emissions.
    EPA response. Although carbon dioxide is not a TRI listed chemical,
and

therefore TRI does not track carbon dioxide emissions, EPA appreciates
the commenter's support of the rule. EPA also points out that the
Agency has other information reporting programs which may provide such
data, such as the GHGRP which tracks facility-level emissions from the
largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S.
    Comment #2. The anonymous commenter was critical of the rule,
stating that codifying this data element only serves to boost EPA's
enforcement authority against facilities who misreport their parent
company name. The commenter also questioned EPA's claims of how the
proposed rule may improve TRI data quality and reduce burden for
correcting submitted parent company information. The commenter also
thought that requiring facilities to report the foreign parent in
addition to the U.S.-based parent would be burdensome for the
respondent and should not be required.
    EPA response. EPA appreciates this perspective and understands that
requiring corporate structure data elements for reporting to TRI may
cause minimal work to each facility in the first year of reporting. EPA
respectfully disagrees that codifying these data elements will not lead
to improved data quality outcomes. Rather, EPA's experience with TRI
facility submissions for parent company information is that lack of a
codified definition results in inconsistent data. EPA believes that
without a codified definition, there would be continued inconsistency
in naming conventions, conflicting interpretations of the data
elements, and an inability to perform trend analysis across all TRI
facilities.
    Comment #3. The law firm commenter generally supports the rule and
encourages TRI facilities to reduce their toxic chemical releases. The
commenter also advocated for clearer guidance for determining which
entity should report under TRI for those facilities with complex
corporate structures (i.e., when the facility owner and operator are
different entities, and the facility owner does not have operating or
permitting control).
    EPA response. EPA appreciates the commenter's support of the rule.
In response to the commenter's questions related to reporting
responsibilities between different facility owners and operators, EPA
would direct the commenter to the language in EPCRA and in the TRI
implementing regulations, as well as longstanding guidance documents,
for clarity on which entity is responsible for reporting. For instance,
under ECPRA section 313(b)(1), TRI reporting requirements apply to both
``owners and operators of [covered facilities]''. EPA has also codified
this requirement at 40 CFR 372.5. Additionally, TRI reporting guidance
materials reiterate that both the owner and operator of a covered
facility are subject to reporting requirements, and both may be liable
for penalties if no reports are received from a covered facility.
However, for practical purposes, EPA believes the operator is generally
more likely to have necessary information for TRI reporting. Readers
are directed to TRI Q&As for additional information, including Q&A 86
(Ref. 5).
    Comment #4. The state environmental agency commenter did not
support the rule, stating that EPA's focus on this data element is
``misplaced'' in light of ``ongoing misperception'' caused by the TRI.
The commenter submitted comments on TRI data including that reported
releases do not distinguish between permitted and regulated releases
(such as to POTWs or waste storage areas) and unauthorized releases.
The commenter requested that EPA distinguish those types of releases in
the TRI data by collecting and reporting releases by percentage of
regulated releases. The commenter also suggested that EPA focus efforts
on certain entities including plastics, pharmaceuticals, and other
manufacturers.
    EPA response. EPA appreciates the concerns expressed by the
commenter and their depth of knowledge regarding the TRI program.
However, the concerns outlined in their comments are beyond the scope
of the proposed rule.

IV. Summary of Final Rule

    EPA is finalizing the rule as proposed. The Agency also updated the
estimated incremental impacts of this action based on 2022 wage rates
and the number of TRI reporting facilities for Reporting Year 2020, the
most recent year for which EPA has complete data at this time (Ref. 2).
EPA considered public comments received and the estimated incremental
costs of the three options discussed in the proposed rule, including
the addition of a data requirement for a highest-level foreign parent
company. The economic impact analysis demonstrates that the costs of
requiring both a U.S.-based and foreign parent company are minimal,
especially with the use of TRI-MEweb, EPA's web-based TRI reporting
tool. When facilities input their parent company(ies), the information
is only needed once to apply across all reporting forms, and
information submitted in previous years can be imported to forms
submitted for subsequent years if the information has not changed.
Thus, TRI facilities need only to provide this information once, unless
and until the appropriate parent company(ies) changes. Thus, TRI
facilities must report their highest-level U.S.-based parent companies,
following the definition of ``parent company'' as codified in 40 CFR
372, beginning with Reporting Year 2022, for which reports are due by
July 1, 2023. TRI facilities must also report their highest-level
foreign parent company, if applicable, beginning with Reporting Year
2023, for which reports are due by July 1, 2024.

V. References

    The following is a listing of the documents that are specifically
referenced in this document. The docket includes these documents and
other information considered by EPA, including documents that are
referenced within the documents that are included in the docket, even
if the referenced document is not physically located in the docket. For
assistance in locating these other documents, please consult the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    1. EPA, OPPT. RY 2021--Standardized Parent Company Names.
January 2022. https://ordspub.epa.gov/ords/guideme_ext/f?p=guideme:rfi-home#downloadable.
    2. EPA, OPPT. Economic Analysis of the Parent Company Definition
for TRI Reporting. July 18, 2022.
    3. EPA. Proposed Rule; Parent Company Definition for Toxics
Release Inventory (TRI) Reporting. Federal Register. 86 FR 53577,
September 28, 2021 (FRL-6004-01-OCSPP).
    4. EPA, OPPT. Economic Analysis of the Proposed Parent Company
Definition for TRI Reporting. March 29, 2021.
    5. EPA. ECPRA Section 313 Questions & Answers: 2019
Consolidation Document. April 2019. https://ordspub.epa.gov/ords/guideme_ext/guideme_ext/guideme/file/2019qa.pdf.
    6. EPA. Supporting Statement for an Information Collection
Request (ICR) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA); entitled
``Parent Company Definition for TRI Reporting; Final Rule (RIN
2070AK42).'' EPA ICR No. 2597.02; OMB Control No. 2070-0216. October
2022.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders#influence.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review under

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR
3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    The information collection activities in this final rule have been
submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The
information Collection Request (ICR) document that EPA prepared is
assigned EPA ICR No. 2597.02 and identified by OMB Control No. 2070-
0216 (Ref. 6). You can find a copy of the ICR in the rulemaking docket
and it is briefly summarized in this unit. The information collection
requirements are not enforceable until OMB approves them.
    Currently, the facilities subject to the reporting requirements
under EPCRA section 313 and PPA section 6607 may use either EPA Toxic
Chemicals Release Inventory Form R (EPA Form 1B9350-1), or EPA Toxic
Chemicals Release Inventory Form A (EPA Form 1B9350-2), as appropriate
under 40 CFR 372. OMB has approved the reporting and recordkeeping
requirements related to Forms A and R, supplier notification and
petitions under OMB Control number 2070-0212 (EPA ICR No. 2613.04) and
those related to trade secret designations under OMB Control 2050-0078
(EPA ICR No. 1428.11). As such, once this ICR is approved, EPA intends
to ask OMB to amend the existing ICR to include the following
additional details:
    Respondents/affected entities: See Unit I.A. of this document. This
action will not change the universe of TRI reporting facilities.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (EPCRA section 313).
    Estimated number of respondents: 21,154 facilities.
    Frequency of response: Annual.
    Total estimated burden: Across all facilities, the total first year
burden hours will be up to17,833 hours and up to 205 burden hours every
subsequent year. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: Up to $1,239,572 in the first year and up to
$14,238 every subsequent year. This estimate includes $0 annualized
capital or operation and maintenance costs.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB approves
this ICR, the Agency will announce that approval in the Federal
Register.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA, 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq. In making this determination, EPA concludes that the
impact of concern for this rule is any significant adverse economic
impact on small entities and that the agency is certifying that this
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities because the rule has no net burden on the
small entities subject to the rule.
    The small entities subject to the requirements of this action are
TRI facilities, which include small privately-owned facilities and
municipal government-owned facilities who are required to report to EPA
under EPCRA section 313. Based on the results of the small entity
analysis, a total of 7,669 small parent entities are estimated to be
parent companies of TRI reporting facilities (7,653 private businesses
and 16 municipalities). The Agency has determined that all small
entities impacted by this rule will incur compliance costs less than
one percent of revenues under the rule and only in the first year
following this rule's effective date. Details of this analysis are
presented in the Economic Analysis of the final rule (Ref. 2), which is
available in the docket. The Agency has therefore concluded that this
action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state,
local or tribal governments or the private sector.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). It will not have
substantial direct effects 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.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) because it will
not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes. This rule will not impose substantial
direct compliance costs on Indian tribal governments, nor would it
change the relationship between the Federal government and Indian
tribes. This rule only impacts Indian tribes if they own or operate a
TRI reporting facility and are required to report to EPA under EPCRA
section 313. Because TRI facilities owned or operated by public
entities do not have foreign parent companies, this rule does not
impose any additional reporting requirements on those facilities or
public entities. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this
action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental
health or safety risks that the EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per the definition of ``covered
regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This
action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not
concern an environmental health risk or safety risk.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution
or use of energy and has not otherwise been designated as a significant
energy action by the Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This action does not involve technical standards that would require
Agency consideration under NTTAA section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272.

J. Executive Orders 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations and Low-
Income Populations and Executive Order 14008: Tackling the Climate
Crisis at Home and Abroad

    EPA believes that this action is not subject to Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) and Executive Order 14008 (86 FR
7619, January 27, 2021) because this rule does not establish an
environmental health or safety standard.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., and EPA
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 372

    Community right-to-know, Environmental protection, Reporting and
recordkeeping.

    Dated: October 17, 2022
Michal Freedhoff,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.

    Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending
40 CFR part 372 as follows:

PART 372 TOXIC CHEMICAL RELEASE REPORTING COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW

0
1. The authority citation for part 372 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 11023 and 11048.

0
2. In Sec.  372.3, add in alphabetical order a definition for ``Parent
company'' to read as follows:

Sec.  372.3  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Parent company means the highest-level company (or companies) of
the facility's ownership hierarchy as of December 31 of the year for
which data are being reported according to the following instructions.
The U.S. parent company is located within the United States while the
foreign parent company is located outside the United States:
    (1) If the facility is entirely owned by a single U.S. company that
is not owned by another company, that single company is the U.S. parent
company.
    (2) If the facility is entirely owned by a single U.S. company that
is, itself, owned by another U.S.-based company (e.g., it is a division
or subsidiary of a higher-level company), the highest-level company in
the ownership hierarchy is the U.S. parent company. If there is a
higher-level parent company that is outside of the United States, the
highest-level foreign company in the ownership hierarchy is the foreign
parent company.
    (3) If the facility is owned by more than one company (e.g.,
company A owns 40 percent, company B owns 35 percent, and company C
owns 25 percent), the highest-level U.S. company with the largest
ownership interest in the facility is the U.S. parent company. If there
is a higher-level foreign company in the ownership hierarchy, that
company is the foreign parent company.
    (4) If the facility is owned by a 50:50 joint venture or a
cooperative, the joint venture or cooperative is its own parent
company.
    (5) If the facility is entirely owned by a foreign company (i.e.,
without a U.S.-based subsidiary within the facility's ownership
hierarchy), the highest-level foreign parent company is the facility's
foreign parent company.
    (6) If the facility is federally owned, the highest-level Federal
agency or department operating the facility is the U.S. parent company.
    (7) If the facility is owned by a non-Federal public entity (e.g.,
a State, municipal, or tribal government), that entity is the U.S.
parent company.
* * * * *

0
3. In Sec.  372.85 revise paragraph (b)(8) to read as follows:

Sec.  372.85  Toxic chemical release reporting form and instructions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (8) Name of the facility's parent company, including:
    (i) Legal name of the facility's highest-level U.S.-based parent
company and its Dun and Bradstreet identification number, when
applicable.
    (ii) Beginning with the reporting year ending December 31, 2023,
for which reporting forms are due July 1, 2024, and for each subsequent
reporting year, the legal name of the facility's highest-level foreign
parent company and its Dun and Bradstreet identification number, when
applicable.
    (iii) The facility must report using the standardized conventions
for the naming of a parent company as provided in the toxic chemical
release inventory reporting instructions identified in paragraph (a) of
this section.
* * * * *

0
4. In Sec.  372.95 revise paragraph (b)(12) to read as follows:

Sec.  372.95   Alternate threshold certification and instructions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (12) Name of the facility's parent company, including:
    (i) Legal name of the facility's highest-level U.S.-based parent
company and its Dun and Bradstreet identification number, when
applicable.
    (ii) Beginning with the reporting year ending December 31, 2023,
for which reporting forms are due July 1, 2024, and for each subsequent
reporting year, the legal name of the facility's highest-level foreign
parent company and its Dun and Bradstreet identification number, when
applicable.
    (iii) The facility must report using the standardized conventions
for the naming of a parent company as provided in the toxic chemical
release inventory reporting instructions identified in paragraph (a) of
this section.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2022-22833 Filed 10-20-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: November 30, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 230)]
[Notices]
[Page 67724-67725]
[DOCID:fr30no07-47]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-1148; FRL-8500-2]

Board of Scientific Counselors, Computational Toxicology
Subcommittee Meeting--December 2007

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-
463, the Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development (ORD), gives notice of one meeting of the Board of
Scientific Counselors (BOSC) Computational Toxicology Subcommittee.

DATES: The meeting will be held on Monday, December 17, 2007, from 1
p.m. to 5 p.m. The meeting will continue on Tuesday, December 18, 2007,
from 8:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. All times noted are eastern time. The meeting
may adjourn early if all business is finished. Requests for the draft
agenda or for making oral presentations at the meeting will be accepted
up to 1 business day before the meeting.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the U.S. EPA Research Triangle
Park (RTP) Campus, EPA Main Building (Room C114 on December 17 and Room
C111C on December 18), 109 T. W. Alexander Dr., Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina 27711. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-1148, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: Send comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-1148.

     Fax: Fax comments to:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Attention Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-1148.
     Mail: Send comments by mail to: Board of Scientific
Counselors, Computational Toxicology Subcommittee Meetings--end 2007/
early 2008 Docket, Mailcode: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-1148.
     Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver comments to: EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC), Room B102, EPA West Building, 1301 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-
1148.

    Note: This is not a mailing address. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the

docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should
be made for deliveries of boxed information.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-
2007-1148. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,

unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.

The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,

which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov,

your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Board of Scientific

Counselors, Computational Toxicology Subcommittee Meetings--end 2007/
early 2008 Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the ORD Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Designated Federal Officer via
mail at: Lorelei Kowalski, Mail Code 8104-R, Office of Science Policy,
Office of Research and Development, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; via phone/voice
mail at:<PHONE_NUMBER>; via fax at:<PHONE_NUMBER>; or via e-mail at:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

General Information

    Any member of the public interested in receiving a draft BOSC
agenda or making a presentation at the meeting may contact Lorelei
Kowalski, the Designated Federal Officer, via any of the contact
methods listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above. In
general, each individual making an oral presentation will be limited to
a total of three minutes.
    Proposed agenda items for the meeting include, but are not limited
to: overview of National Center for Computational Toxicology (NCCT)
activities; presentations of NCCT work on ToxCast, IM/IT (information
management/information technology)--informatics, a Virtual Liver,
developmental systems biology, and arsenic biologically-based dose
response model (BBDR); wrap up with presentation of preliminary
findings; and discussion of the draft letter report. The meeting is
open to the public.
    Information on Services for Individuals with Disabilities: For
information on access or services for individuals with disabilities,
please contact Lorelei Kowalski at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To request accommodation of a disability,

please contact Lorelei Kowalski, preferably at least 10 days prior to
the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your
request.

    Dated: November 21, 2007.
Jeff Morris,
Acting Director, Office of Science Policy.
 [FR Doc. E7-23297 Filed 11-29-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 52 (Friday, March 16, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15748-15749]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6401]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PR09-24-001]

Atmos Energy Corporation/Atmos Energy--Kentucky/Mid-States
Division; Notice of Motion for Extension of Rate Case Filing Deadline

    Take notice that on March 9, 2012, Atmos Energy Corporation filed
on behalf of Atmos Energy--Kentucky/Mid-States Division (Atmos) a
motion requesting an extension consistent with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission's (Commission) revised policy of periodic review
from a triennial to a five year period. The Commission, in Order No.
735, modified its policy concerning periodic reviews of rates charges
by section 311 and Hinshaw pipelines to extend the cycle for such
reviews from three to five years.\1\ Therefore, Atmos requests that the
date for its next rate filing be extended to March 17, 2014, which is
five years from the date of Atmos' most recent rate filing with this
Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Contract Reporting Requirements of Intrastate Natural Gas
Companies, Order No. 735, 131 FERC ] 61,150 (May 20, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any person desiring to participate in this proceeding must file a
motion to intervene or to protest this filing 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). 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. Any
person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or
motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests
must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing
an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the
intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 7 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<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, March 16, 2012.

    Dated: March 12, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-6401 Filed 3-15-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P