[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 150 (Monday, August 7, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52021-52024]
[FR Doc No: 2023-16648]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 150 / Monday, August 7, 2023 / Rules
and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2023-1654; Project Identifier MCAI-2023-00920-T;
Amendment 39-22520; AD 2023-16-01]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc., Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2023-12-
20, which applied to certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B16 (604
Variant) airplanes. AD 2023-12-20 required replacing certain oxygen
system hoses and prohibited installing affected oxygen hoses. Since the
FAA issued AD 2023-12-20, the FAA has learned of an error in a required
compliance time. This AD retains the requirements of AD 2023-12-20,
with a revised compliance time for the replacement. The FAA is issuing
this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD is effective August 23, 2023.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of August 23,
2023 (88 FR 46063, July 19, 2023).
    The FAA must receive comments on this AD by September 21, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 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: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-1654; or in person at Docket Operations between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this final rule, the mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI), any comments received, and other information. The
street address for Docket Operations is listed above.
    Material Incorporated by Reference:
     For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Bombardier Business Aircraft Customer Response Center, 400
C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email bombardier.com">[email protected].bombardier.com; website
bombardier.com.
     You may view this referenced service information at the
FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available at
regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-1654.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Dowling, Aviation Safety
Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    The FAA invites you to send any written data, views, or arguments
about this final rule. Send your comments to an address listed under
ADDRESSES. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2023-1654; Project Identifier MCAI-
2023-00920-T'' at the beginning of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of the final rule, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. The FAA
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this final rule because of those comments.
    Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in
the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. The
agency will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal
contact received about this final rule.

Confidential Business Information

    CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily
and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public
disclosure. If your comments responsive to this AD contain commercial
or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that
you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to
this AD, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing
CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat such marked submissions as
confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public
docket of this AD. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to
Elizabeth Dowling, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue,
Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected]. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this rulemaking.

Background

    The FAA issued AD 2023-12-20, Amendment 39-22479 (88 FR 46063, July
19, 2023) (AD 2023-12-20), for certain Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-
2B16 (604 Variant) airplanes. AD 2023-12-20 was prompted by an MCAI
originated by Transport Canada, which is the aviation authority for
Canada. Transport Canada issued AD CF-2022-34, dated June 20, 2022
(Transport Canada AD CF-2022-34), to correct an unsafe condition.
    AD 2023-12-20 required replacing oxygen system hoses having any
part number in the O2C20T1 and O2C20T14 series and prohibited
installing affected oxygen hoses. The FAA issued AD 2023-12-20 to
address a leak in the oxygen system, which could result in failure to
provide oxygen to passengers and crew and result in an oxygen-

enriched atmosphere creating a fire risk on the airplane.

Actions Since AD 2023-12-20 Was Issued

    Since AD 2023-12-20 was issued, the FAA has learned that paragraph
(g)(1) of AD 2023-12-20 contains an error in the compliance time for
the replacement of the oxygen system hoses. As written, paragraph
(g)(1) of AD 2023-12-20 requires compliance for the affected airplanes
within 31 months, or no later than ``12 months after the completion of
the interior modification specified in STC ST02355NY,'' whichever
occurs first. The correct compliance time is within 31 months, or no
later than ``12 months after the airplane reaches 6 years from the STC
ST02355NY airplane's completion issuance (specific airplane's
Modification Data Summary release date),'' whichever occurs first.
Paragraph (g)(1) of this AD specifies the correct compliance time. The
compliance time as written in AD 2023-12-20 could unnecessarily ground
some airplanes. Correcting this error in this AD provides relief by
extending the compliance time. There are no other changes in this AD.
    While the two ADs are effective August 23, 2023, this AD supersedes
AD 2023-12-20.
    The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these
products.
    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under
Docket No. FAA-2023-1654.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    This AD requires Bombardier Service Bulletins 605-35-006 and 650-
35-002, both Revision 01, both dated January 28, 2022, which the
Director of the Federal Register approved for incorporation by
reference as of August 23, 2023 (88 FR 46063, July 19, 2023). This
service information is reasonably available because the interested
parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by
the means identified in ADDRESSES.

FAA's Determination

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it
has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. The FAA is issuing this AD after
determining that the unsafe condition described previously is likely to
exist or develop on other products of the same type design.

AD Requirements

    This AD retains all of the requirements of AD 2023-12-20, with a
revised compliance time for replacing the oxygen system hoses for
certain airplanes.

Justification for Immediate Adoption and Determination of the Effective
Date

    Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5
U.S.C. 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 providing notice and seeking
comment prior to issuance. Further, section 553(d) of the APA
authorizes agencies to make rules effective in less than thirty days,
upon a finding of good cause.
    The FAA has learned of an error in a compliance time that could
unnecessarily ground some airplanes. Correcting this error provides
relief by extending that compliance time, and is the only change in
this AD. To address this issue in a timely manner, the FAA has
determined that it is appropriate to require the immediate adoption of
this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to
adoption. Accordingly, notice and opportunity for prior public comment
are unnecessary pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).
    In addition, the FAA finds that good cause exists pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(d) for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days,
for the same reasons the FAA found good cause to forgo notice and
comment.

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    The requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) do not
apply when an agency finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt
a rule without prior notice and comment. Because FAA has determined
that it has good cause to adopt this rule without prior notice and
comment, RFA analysis is not required.

Costs of Compliance

    The FAA estimates that this AD affects 42 airplanes of U.S.
registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                  Estimated Costs for Retained Required Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
                          Labor cost                              Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 work-hours x $85 per hour = $255...........................            $100             $355          $14,910
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

              Estimated Costs for Retained Optional Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85......              $0              $85
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-
condition actions that would be required based on the results of any
optional mitigating actions. The FAA has no way of determining the
number of aircraft that might need this on-condition action:

            Estimated Costs of Retained On-Condition Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Cost per
              Labor cost                   Parts cost        product
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 work-hours x $85 per hour = $255....            $100             $355
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate.
According to the manufacturer, however, some or all of the costs of
this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact
on affected operators.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by:
0
a. Removing Airworthiness Directive 2023-12-20, Amendment 39-22479 (88
FR 46063, July 19, 2023); and
0
b. Adding the following new airworthiness directive:

2023-16-01 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-22520; Docket No. FAA-
2023-1654; Project Identifier MCAI-2023-00920-T.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective August 23, 2023.

(b) Affected ADs

    This AD replaces AD 2023-12-20, Amendment 39-22479 (88 FR 46063,
July 19, 2023) (AD 2023-12-20).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc., Model C-600-2B16 (604
Variant) airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers
5701 through 5990 inclusive and 6050 through 6162 inclusive, with an
interior modified in accordance with Supplemental Type Certificate
(STC) ST02355NY.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 35, Oxygen.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of oxygen leaks caused by
cracked, brittle, or broken oxygen hoses that were found during
scheduled maintenance tests of the airplane oxygen system. The FAA
is issuing this AD to address a leak in the oxygen system. The
unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in failure to
provide oxygen to passengers and crew and result in an oxygen-
enriched atmosphere creating a fire risk on the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Retained Replacement, With Revised Compliance Time in Paragraph
(g)(1)

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (g) of AD
2023-12-20, with a revised compliance time in paragraph (g)(1) of
this AD. At the applicable compliance times specified in paragraphs
(g)(1) and (2) of this AD: Replace oxygen system hoses having any
part number in the O2C20T1 series, and, as applicable, the O2C20T14
series, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the
applicable service information specified in figure 1 to paragraph
(g) of this AD.
    (1) For airplanes having, as of the effective date of this AD, 6
years or less from the completion of the interior modification
specified in STC ST02355NY: Within 31 months after the effective
date of this AD, or no later than 12 months after the airplane
reaches 6 years from the STC ST02355NY airplane's completion
issuance (specific airplane's Modification Data Summary release
date), whichever occurs first.
    (2) For airplanes having, as of the effective date of this AD,
more than 6 years from the completion of the interior modification
specified in STC T02355NY: Within 7 months after the effective date
of this AD.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07AU23.713

(h) Retained Optional Mitigation for Certain Airplanes, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the provisions of paragraph (h) of AD
2023-12-20, with no changes. For airplanes identified in Bombardier
Service Bulletin 650-35-002, Revision 01, dated January 28, 2022,
having, as of the effective date of this AD, less than 6 years from
the completion of the interior modification specified in STC
ST02355NY: In lieu of accomplishing the oxygen system hose
replacement required by paragraph (g) of this AD, comply with all
conditions specified in paragraphs (h)(1) through (3) of this AD.
    (1) The passenger oxygen system is tested within 6 months after
the effective date of this AD, and thereafter at intervals not to
exceed 36 months, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions
of Bombardier Service Bulletin 650-35-002, Revision 01, dated
January 28, 2022.
    (2) If, during a test specified in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD,
any leak is found on any hose, all oxygen system hoses having a part
number in the O2C20T1 series must be replaced before further flight
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier
Service Bulletin 650-35-002, Revision 01, dated January 28, 2022.
Doing this replacement terminates the tests specified in paragraph
(h)(1) of this AD.
    (3) Except as specified by paragraph (h)(2) of this AD, all
oxygen system hoses having a part number in the O2C20T1 series must
be replaced within 6 years from the completion of the interior
modification specified in STC ST02355NY. Doing this replacement
terminates the tests specified in paragraph (h)(1) of this AD.

(i) Retained Parts Installation Prohibition, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the requirements of paragraph (i) of AD
2023-12-20, with no changes. As of the effective date of this AD, no
person may install any oxygen system hose having a part number in
the O2C20T1 and O2C20T14 series on any airplane.

(j) Retained Credit for Previous Actions, With No Changes

    This paragraph restates the provisions of paragraph (j) of AD
2023-12-20, with no changes.
    (1) This paragraph provides credit for actions required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Bombardier Service Bulletin 605-35-
006, dated August 23, 2021; or Bombardier Service Bulletin 650-35-
002, dated August 23, 2021; as applicable.
    (2) This paragraph provides credit for actions specified in
paragraph (h) of this AD, if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Bombardier Service Bulletin 650-35-
002, dated August 23, 2021.

(k) Additional AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Validation Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or responsible Flight Standards Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the
International Validation Branch, mail it to ATTN: Program Manager,
Continuing Operational Safety, at the address identified in
paragraph (l)(2) of this AD or email to: [email protected]. If
mailing information, also submit information by email.
    (i) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the responsible Flight Standards Office.
    (ii) AMOCs approved for AD 2023-12-20 are approved as AMOCs for
the corresponding provisions of this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain instructions from a manufacturer, the instructions must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Validation Branch, FAA; or Transport Canada; or Bombardier, Inc.'s
Transport Canada Design Approval Organization (DAO). If approved by
the DAO, the approval must include the DAO-authorized signature.

(l) Additional Information

    (1) Refer to Transport Canada AD CF-2022-34, dated June 20,
2022, for related information. This Transport Canada AD may be found
in the AD docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2023-1654.
    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Elizabeth
Dowling, Aviation Safety Engineer, FAA, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite
410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email [email protected].
    (3) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference is available at the addresses specified in
paragraphs (m)(4) and (5) of this AD.

(m) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
August 23, 2023 (88 FR 46063, July 19, 2023).
    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 605-35-006, Revision 01, dated
January 28, 2022.
    (ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 650-35-002, Revision 01, dated
January 28, 2022.
    (4) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier Business Aircraft Customer Response Center, 400
C[ocirc]te-Vertu Road West, Dorval, Qu[eacute]bec H4S 1Y9, Canada;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email bombardier.com">[email protected].bombardier.com; website
bombardier.com.
    (5) You may view this service information at the FAA,
Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 2200
South 216th St., Des Moines, WA. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (6) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, email [email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued on July 31, 2023.
Victor Wicklund,
Deputy Director, Compliance & Airworthiness Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-16648 Filed 8-4-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 38 (Monday, February 27, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11519-11520]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4417]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC12-6-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities; Comment Request;
Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is soliciting public comment on the
currently approved information collection, FERC-585, Reporting of
Electric Energy shortages and Contingency Plans under PURPA.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due April 27,
2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (identified by Docket No. IC12-6-
000) by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web Site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at (202)
273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-585, Reporting of Electric Energy shortages and
Contingency Plans under PURPA.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0138.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-585 information
collection requirements with no changes to the current reporting
requirements.
    Abstract: The information collected under the requirements of FERC-
585, ``Reporting of Electric Energy Shortages and Contingency Plans
under PURPA'', is used by the Commission to implement the statutory
provisions of section 206 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act
of 1979 (PURPA) Public Law 95-617, 92 Stat. 3117. Section 206 of PURPA
amended the Federal Power Act (FPA) by adding a new subsection (g) to
section 202, under which the Commission by rule, was to require each
public utility to (1) report to the Commission and appropriate state
regulatory authorities

of any anticipated shortages of electric energy or capacity which would
affect the utility's capability to serve its wholesale customers; and
(2) report to the Commission and any appropriate state regulatory
authority contingency plan that would outline what circumstances might
give rise to such occurrences.
    In Order No. 575,\1\ the Commission modified the reporting
requirements in 18 CFR 294.101(b) to provide that, if a public utility
includes in its rates schedule, provisions that: (a) During electric
energy and capacity shortages it will treat firm power wholesale
customers without undue discrimination or preference; and (b) it will
report any modifications to its contingency plan for accommodating
shortages within 15 days to the appropriate state regulatory agency and
to the affected wholesale customers, then the utility need not file
with the Commission an additional statement of contingency plan for
accommodating such shortages. This revision merely changed the
reporting mechanism; the public utility's contingency plan would be
located in its filed rate rather than in a separate document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 60 FR 4859 (25 Jan 1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Order No. 659, \2\ the Commission modified the reporting
requirements in 18 CFR 294.101(e) to provide that the means by which
public utilities must comply with the requirements to report shortages
and anticipated shortages is to submit this information electronically
using the Office of Electric Reliability's pager system at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>in lieu of submitting an original and two copies
with the Secretary of the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 70 FR 35028 (16 Jun 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission uses the information to evaluate and formulate an
appropriate option for action in the event an unanticipated shortage is
reported and/or materializes. Without this information, the Commission
and State agencies would be unable to: (1) Examine and approve or
modify utility actions, (2) prepare a response to anticipated
disruptions in electric energy, and (3) ensure equitable treatment of
all public utility customers under the shortage situations. The
Commission implements these filing requirements in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) under 18 CFR part 294.
    Type of Respondents: Public utilities.
    Estimate of Annual Burden \3\: The Commission estimates the total
Public Reporting Burden for this information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. For
further explanation of what is included in the information
collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal Regulations
1320.3(b)(1).

         FERC-585 (IC12-6-000): Reporting of Electric Energy Shortages and Contingency Plans Under PURPA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of                    Average burden     Estimated
                                     Number of     responses per   Total number      hours per     total annual
                                    respondents     respondent     of responses      response         burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             (A)             (B)     (A) x (B) =             (D)       (C) x (D)
                                                                             (C)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency Plan................               1               1               1              73              73
Capacity Shortage...............               1               1               1            0.25            0.25
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................         N/A \4\         N/A \4\               2         N/A \4\           73.25
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The total estimated annual cost burden to respondents is $5,054
[73.25 hours / 2,080 \5\ hours/year = 0.03521 * $143,540/year \6\ =
$5,054].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Not applicable.
    \5\ 2080 hours = 40 hours/week * 52 weeks (1 year).
    \6\ Average annual salary per employee in 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The estimated annual cost of filing the FERC-585 per response is
$2,527.02 [$5,054 / 2 responses = $2,527/response].
    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: February 17, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-4417 Filed 2-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 80 (Tuesday, April 26, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24597-24598]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09733]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9945-70-OA]

Farm, Ranch, and Rural Communities Committee

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463,
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) gives notice of a meeting of
the Farm, Ranch, and Rural Communities Committee (FRRCC). The FRRCC is
a policy-oriented committee that provides policy advice, information,
and recommendations to the EPA Administrator on a range of
environmental issues and policies that are of importance to agriculture
and rural communities.
    The purpose of this meeting is to draft and review recommendations
regarding how EPA can best create a framework for facilitating
collaborative and innovative partnerships, building upon existing
resource protection efforts to promote soil health, particularly as it
relates to water and air and to adaptation of a changing climate.

DATES: The Farm, Ranch, and Rural Communities Committee will hold an
open meeting on Wednesday, May 25, 2016, from 9:00 a.m. until 5:30 p.m.
and Thursday, May 26, 2016 from 9:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. Eastern
Standard Time.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at EPA One Potomac Yard, 2777
Crystal Dr., Arlington VA, 22202, Room 4370/80 fourth floor. The
meeting is open to the public, with limited seating on a first-come,
first-served basis.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Perla, Acting Designated Federal
Officer<EMAIL_ADDRESS>202-564-0184, U.S. EPA, Office of the
Administrator (1101A), Room 2415,

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Requests to make brief oral comments or
provide written statements to the FRRCC should be sent to Donna Perla,
Acting Designated Federal Officer, at the contact information above.
All requests must be submitted no later than May 18, 2016, at the
contact information above.
    Meeting Access: For information on access or services for
individuals with disabilities, please contact Donna Perla at 202-564-
0184 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To request accommodation of a disability,
please contact Donna Perla, preferably at least 10 days prior to the
meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

    Dated: April 19, 2016.
Donna Perla,
Acting Designated Federal Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016-09733 Filed 4-25-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 119 (Thursday, June 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28517-28518]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12999]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4304-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2017-0001]

Kansas; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Kansas (FEMA-4304-DR), dated February 24, 2017, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: June 13, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the

Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, David G.
Samaniego, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating
Officer for this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Michael L. Parker as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Robert J. Fenton,
Acting Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2017-12999 Filed 6-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: November 4, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 212)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 57085-57092]
[DOCID:fr04no09-12]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-2009-0062, EPA-HQ-SFUND-2009-0066, EPA-HQ-SFUND-2008-
0584; FRL-8977-5]
RIN 2050-AD75

National Priorities List, Final Rule No. 48

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980 (``CERCLA'' or ``the Act''), as amended, requires
that the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan (``NCP'') include a list of national priorities among the known
releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants throughout the United States. The National Priorities List
(``NPL'') constitutes this list. The NPL is intended primarily to guide
the Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'' or ``the Agency'') in
determining which sites warrant further investigation. These further
investigations will allow EPA to assess the nature and extent of public
health and environmental risks associated with the site and to
determine what CERCLA-financed remedial action(s), if any, may be
appropriate. This rule adds three sites to the NPL, all to the General
Superfund Section.

DATES: Effective Date: The effective date for this amendment to the NCP
is December 4, 2009.

ADDRESSES: For addresses for the Headquarters and Regional dockets, as
well as further details on what these dockets contain, see section II,
``Availability of Information to the Public'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION portion of this preamble.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terry Jeng, phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Site Assessment and Remedy Decisions Branch;
Assessment and Remediation Division; Office of Superfund Remediation
and Technology Innovation (mail code 5204P); U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency; 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460;
or the Superfund Hotline, phone<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER> in the
Washington, DC, metropolitan area.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table Of Contents

I. Background
    A. What Are CERCLA and SARA?
    B. What Is the NCP?
    C. What Is the National Priorities List (NPL)?
    D. How Are Sites Listed on the NPL?
    E. What Happens to Sites on the NPL?
    F. Does the NPL Define the Boundaries of Sites?
    G. How Are Sites Removed From the NPL?
    H. May EPA Delete Portions of Sites From the NPL as They Are
Cleaned Up?
    I. What Is the Construction Completion List (CCL)?
    J. What Is the Sitewide Ready for Anticipated Use Measure?
II. Availability of Information to the Public
    A. May I Review the Documents Relevant to This Final Rule?
    B. What Documents Are Available for Review at the Headquarters
Docket?
    C. What Documents Are Available for Review at the Regional
Dockets?
    D. How Do I Access the Documents?
    E. How May I Obtain a Current List of NPL Sites?
III. Contents of This Final Rule
    A. Additions to the NPL
    B. What Did EPA Do With the Public Comments It Received?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    1. What Is Executive Order 12866?
    2. Is This Final Rule Subject to Executive Order 12866 Review?
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    1. What Is the Paperwork Reduction Act?
    2. Does the Paperwork Reduction Act Apply to This Final Rule?
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    1. What Is the Regulatory Flexibility Act?
    2. How Has EPA Complied With the Regulatory Flexibility Act?
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    1. What Is the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)?
    2. Does UMRA Apply to This Final Rule?
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    1. What Is Executive Order 13132 and
    2. Is Executive Order 13132 Applicable to This Final Rule?
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    1. What Is Executive Order 13175?
    2. Does Executive Order 13175 Apply to This Final Rule?
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    1. What Is Executive Order 13045?
    2. Does Executive Order 13045 Apply to This Final Rule?
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Usage
    Is This Rule Subject to Executive Order 13211?
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    1. What Is the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act?
    2. Does the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Apply to This Final Rule?
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
    1. What Is Executive Order 12898?
    2. Does Executive Order 12898 Apply to This Final Rule?
    K. Congressional Review Act
    1. Has EPA Submitted This Rule to Congress and the Government
Accountability Office?
    2. Could the Effective Date of This Final Rule Change?
    3. What Could Cause a Change in the Effective Date of This Rule?

I. Background

A. What Are CERCLA and SARA?

    In 1980, Congress enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601-9675 (``CERCLA'' or
``the Act''), in response to the dangers of uncontrolled releases or
threatened releases of hazardous substances, and releases or
substantial threats of releases into the environment of any pollutant
or contaminant that may present an imminent or substantial danger to
the public health or welfare. CERCLA was amended on October 17, 1986,
by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (``SARA''), Public
Law 99-499, 100 Stat. 1613 et seq.

B. What Is the NCP?

    To implement CERCLA, EPA promulgated the revised National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (``NCP''), 40 CFR part
300, on July 16, 1982 (47 FR 31180), pursuant to CERCLA section 105 and

Executive Order 12316 (46 FR 42237, August 20, 1981). The NCP sets
guidelines and procedures for responding to releases and threatened
releases of hazardous substances, or releases or substantial threats of
releases into the environment of any pollutant or contaminant that may
present an imminent or substantial danger to the public health or
welfare. EPA has revised the NCP on several occasions. The most recent
comprehensive revision was on March 8, 1990 (55 FR 8666).
    As required under section 105(a)(8)(A) of CERCLA, the NCP also
includes ``criteria for determining priorities among releases or
threatened releases throughout the United States for the purpose of
taking remedial action and, to the extent practicable, taking into
account the potential urgency of such action, for the purpose of taking
removal action.'' ``Removal'' actions are defined broadly and include a
wide range of actions taken to study, clean up, prevent or otherwise
address releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances,
pollutants or contaminants (42 U.S.C. 9601(23)).

C. What Is the National Priorities List (NPL)?

    The NPL is a list of national priorities among the known or
threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants throughout the United States. The list, which is appendix
B of the NCP (40 CFR part 300), was required under section 105(a)(8)(B)
of CERCLA, as amended. Section 105(a)(8)(B) defines the NPL as a list
of ``releases'' and the highest priority ``facilities'' and requires
that the NPL be revised at least annually. The NPL is intended
primarily to guide EPA in determining which sites warrant further
investigation to assess the nature and extent of public health and
environmental risks associated with a release of hazardous substances,
pollutants or contaminants. The NPL is only of limited significance,
however, as it does not assign liability to any party or to the owner
of any specific property. Also, placing a site on the NPL does not mean
that any remedial or removal action necessarily need be taken.
    For purposes of listing, the NPL includes two sections, one of
sites that are generally evaluated and cleaned up by EPA (the ``General
Superfund Section''), and one of sites that are owned or operated by
other Federal agencies (the ``Federal Facilities Section''). With
respect to sites in the Federal Facilities Section, these sites are
generally being addressed by other Federal agencies. Under Executive
Order 12580 (52 FR 2923, January 29, 1987) and CERCLA section 120, each
Federal agency is responsible for carrying out most response actions at
facilities under its own jurisdiction, custody, or control, although
EPA is responsible for preparing a Hazard Ranking System (``HRS'')
score and determining whether the facility is placed on the NPL.

D. How Are Sites Listed on the NPL?

    There are three mechanisms for placing sites on the NPL for
possible remedial action (see 40 CFR 300.425(c) of the NCP): (1) A site
may be included on the NPL if it scores sufficiently high on the HRS,
which EPA promulgated as appendix A of the NCP (40 CFR part 300). The
HRS serves as a screening tool to evaluate the relative potential of
uncontrolled hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants to pose a
threat to human health or the environment. On December 14, 1990 (55 FR
51532), EPA promulgated revisions to the HRS partly in response to
CERCLA section 105(c), added by SARA. The revised HRS evaluates four
pathways: Ground water, surface water, soil exposure, and air. As a
matter of Agency policy, those sites that score 28.50 or greater on the
HRS are eligible for the NPL. (2) Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 9605(a)(8)(B),
each State may designate a single site as its top priority to be listed
on the NPL, without any HRS score. This provision of CERCLA requires
that, to the extent practicable, the NPL include one facility
designated by each State as the greatest danger to public health,
welfare, or the environment among known facilities in the State. This
mechanism for listing is set out in the NCP at 40 CFR 300.425(c)(2).
(3) The third mechanism for listing, included in the NCP at 40 CFR
300.425(c)(3), allows certain sites to be listed without any HRS score,
if all of the following conditions are met:
     The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
(ATSDR) of the U.S. Public Health Service has issued a health advisory
that recommends dissociation of individuals from the release.
     EPA determines that the release poses a significant threat
to public health.
     EPA anticipates that it will be more cost-effective to use
its remedial authority than to use its removal authority to respond to
the release.
    EPA promulgated an original NPL of 406 sites on September 8, 1983
(48 FR 40658) and generally has updated it at least annually.

E. What Happens to Sites on the NPL?

    A site may undergo remedial action financed by the Trust Fund
established under CERCLA (commonly referred to as the ``Superfund'')
only after it is placed on the NPL, as provided in the NCP at 40 CFR
300.425(b)(1). (``Remedial actions'' are those ``consistent with
permanent remedy, taken instead of or in addition to removal actions *
* *.'' 42 U.S.C. 9601(24).) However, under 40 CFR 300.425(b)(2) placing
a site on the NPL ``does not imply that monies will be expended.'' EPA
may pursue other appropriate authorities to respond to the releases,
including enforcement action under CERCLA and other laws.

F. Does the NPL Define the Boundaries of Sites?

    The NPL does not describe releases in precise geographical terms;
it would be neither feasible nor consistent with the limited purpose of
the NPL (to identify releases that are priorities for further
evaluation), for it to do so. Indeed, the precise nature and extent of
the site are typically not known at the time of listing.
    Although a CERCLA ``facility'' is broadly defined to include any
area where a hazardous substance has ``come to be located'' (CERCLA
section 101(9)), the listing process itself is not intended to define
or reflect the boundaries of such facilities or releases. Of course,
HRS data (if the HRS is used to list a site) upon which the NPL
placement was based will, to some extent, describe the release(s) at
issue. That is, the NPL site would include all releases evaluated as
part of that HRS analysis.
    When a site is listed, the approach generally used to describe the
relevant release(s) is to delineate a geographical area (usually the
area within an installation or plant boundaries) and identify the site
by reference to that area. However, the NPL site is not necessarily
coextensive with the boundaries of the installation or plant, and the
boundaries of the installation or plant are not necessarily the
``boundaries'' of the site. Rather, the site consists of all
contaminated areas within the area used to identify the site, as well
as any other location where that contamination has come to be located,
or from where that contamination came.
    In other words, while geographic terms are often used to designate
the site (e.g., the ``Jones Co. plant site'') in terms of the property
owned by a particular party, the site, properly understood, is not
limited to that property (e.g., it may extend beyond the property due
to contaminant migration), and conversely

may not occupy the full extent of the property (e.g., where there are
uncontaminated parts of the identified property, they may not be,
strictly speaking, part of the ``site''). The ``site'' is thus neither
equal to, nor confined by, the boundaries of any specific property that
may give the site its name, and the name itself should not be read to
imply that this site is coextensive with the entire area within the
property boundary of the installation or plant. In addition, the site
name is merely used to help identify the geographic location of the
contamination, and is not meant to constitute any determination of
liability at a site. For example, the name ``Jones Co. plant site,''
does not imply that the Jones company is responsible for the
contamination located on the plant site.
    EPA regulations provide that the Remedial Investigation (``RI'')
``is a process undertaken * * * to determine the nature and extent of
the problem presented by the release'' as more information is developed
on site contamination, and which is generally performed in an
interactive fashion with the Feasibility Study (``FS'') (40 CFR 300.5).
During the RI/FS process, the release may be found to be larger or
smaller than was originally thought, as more is learned about the
source(s) and the migration of the contamination. However, the HRS
inquiry focuses on an evaluation of the threat posed and therefore the
boundaries of the release need not be exactly defined. Moreover, it
generally is impossible to discover the full extent of where the
contamination ``has come to be located'' before all necessary studies
and remedial work are completed at a site. Indeed, the known boundaries
of the contamination can be expected to change over time. Thus, in most
cases, it may be impossible to describe the boundaries of a release
with absolute certainty.
    Further, as noted above, NPL listing does not assign liability to
any party or to the owner of any specific property. Thus, if a party
does not believe it is liable for releases on discrete parcels of
property, it can submit supporting information to the Agency at any
time after it receives notice it is a potentially responsible party.
    For these reasons, the NPL need not be amended as further research
reveals more information about the location of the contamination or
release.

G. How Are Sites Removed From the NPL?

    EPA may delete sites from the NPL where no further response is
appropriate under Superfund, as explained in the NCP at 40 CFR
300.425(e). This section also provides that EPA shall consult with
states on proposed deletions and shall consider whether any of the
following criteria have been met:
    (i) Responsible parties or other persons have implemented all
appropriate response actions required;
    (ii) All appropriate Superfund-financed response has been
implemented and no further response action is required; or
    (iii) The remedial investigation has shown the release poses no
significant threat to public health or the environment, and taking of
remedial measures is not appropriate.

H. May EPA Delete Portions of Sites From the NPL as They Are Cleaned
Up?

    In November 1995, EPA initiated a new policy to delete portions of
NPL sites where cleanup is complete (60 FR 55465, November 1, 1995).
Total site cleanup may take many years, while portions of the site may
have been cleaned up and made available for productive use.

I. What Is the Construction Completion List (CCL)?

    EPA also has developed an NPL construction completion list
(``CCL'') to simplify its system of categorizing sites and to better
communicate the successful completion of cleanup activities (58 FR
12142, March 2, 1993). Inclusion of a site on the CCL has no legal
significance.
    Sites qualify for the CCL when: (1) Any necessary physical
construction is complete, whether or not final cleanup levels or other
requirements have been achieved; (2) EPA has determined that the
response action should be limited to measures that do not involve
construction (e.g., institutional controls); or (3) the site qualifies
for deletion from the NPL. For the most up-to-date information on the
CCL, see EPA's Internet site at: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/cleanup/
ccl.htm.

J. What Is the Sitewide Ready for Anticipated Use Measure?

    The Sitewide Ready for Anticipated Use measure (formerly called
Sitewide Ready-for-Reuse) represents important Superfund
accomplishments and the measure reflects the high priority EPA places
on considering anticipated future land use as part of our remedy
selection process. See Guidance for Implementing the Sitewide Ready-
for-Reuse Measure, May 24, 2006, OSWER 9365.0-36. This measure applies
to final and deleted sites where construction is complete, all cleanup
goals have been achieved, and all institutional or other controls are
in place. EPA has been successful on many occasions in carrying out
remedial actions that ensure protectiveness of human health and the
environment, including current and future land users, in a manner that
allows contaminated properties to be restored to environmental and
economic vitality while ensuring protectiveness for current and future
land users. For further information, please go to http://www.epa.gov/
superfund/programs/recycle/tools/index.html.

II. Availability of Information to the Public

A. May I Review the Documents Relevant to This Final Rule?

    Yes, documents relating to the evaluation and scoring of the sites
in this final rule are contained in dockets located both at EPA
Headquarters and in the Regional offices.
    An electronic version of the public docket is available through
http://www.regulations.gov (see table below for Docket Identification
numbers). Although not all Docket materials may be available
electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available
Docket materials through the Docket facilities identified below in
section II D.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Site name                   City/county, state                      Docket ID No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Raritan Bay Slag.....................  Old Bridge Township/     EPA-HQ-SFUND-2009-0062.
                                        Sayreville, NJ.
Peck Iron and Metal..................  Portsmouth, VA.........  EPA-HQ-SFUND-2009-0066.
U.S. Magnesium.......................  Toole County, UT.......  EPA-HQ-SFUND-2008-0584.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. What Documents Are Available for Review at the Headquarters Docket?

    The Headquarters Docket for this rule contains, for each site, the
HRS score sheets, the Documentation Record describing the information
used to compute the score, pertinent information regarding statutory
requirements or EPA listing policies that affect the site, and a list
of documents referenced in the Documentation Record. For sites that
received comments during the comment period, the Headquarters Docket
also contains a Support Document that includes EPA's responses to
comments.

C. What Documents Are Available for Review at the Regional Dockets?

    The Regional Dockets contain all the information in the
Headquarters Docket, plus the actual reference documents containing the
data principally relied upon by EPA in calculating or evaluating the
HRS score for the sites located in their Region. These reference
documents are available only in the Regional Dockets. For sites that
received comments during the comment period, the Regional Docket also
contains a Support Document that includes EPA's responses to comments.

D. How Do I Access the Documents?

    You may view the documents, by appointment only, after the
publication of this rule. The hours of operation for the Headquarters
Docket are from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding Federal holidays. Please contact the Regional Dockets for
hours.
    Following is the contact information for the EPA Headquarters:
Docket Coordinator, Headquarters; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency;
CERCLA Docket Office; 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW; EPA West, Room
3334, Washington, DC 20004, 202/566-0276.
    The contact information for the Regional Dockets is as follows:
    Dennis Munhall, Region 2 (NJ, NY, PR, VI), U.S. EPA, 290 Broadway,
New York, NY 10007-1866; 212/637-4343.
    Dawn Shellenberger (ASRC), Region 3 (DE, DC, MD, PA, VA, WV), U.S.
EPA, Library, 1650 Arch Street, Mailcode 3PM52, Philadelphia, PA 19103;
215/814-5364.
    Gwen Christiansen, Region 8 (CO, MT, ND, SD, UT, WY), U.S. EPA,
1595 Wynkoop Street, Mailcode 8EPR-B, Denver, CO 80202-1129; 303/312-
6463.

E. How May I Obtain a Current List of NPL Sites?

    You may obtain a current list of NPL sites via the Internet at
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/ (look under the Superfund sites category)
or by contacting the Superfund Docket (see contact information above).

III. Contents of This Final Rule

A. Additions to the NPL

    This final rule adds the following three sites to the NPL, all to
the General Superfund Section. The sites are presented in the table
below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              State                    Site name          City/county
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NJ..............................  Raritan Bay Slag..  Old Bridge
                                                       Township/
                                                       Sayreville.
UT..............................  U.S. Magnesium....  Tooele County.
VA..............................  Peck Iron and       Portsmouth.
                                   Metal.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. What Did EPA Do With the Public Comments It Received?

    EPA has received comments on all three sites being added to the NPL
in this rule. For two of the sites, U.S. Magnesium (UT) and Peck Iron
and Metal (VA), the comments, EPA's responses to the comments, and the
impacts, if any, on the HRS scores, are presented in support documents
responding to the comments for each of the two sites. These support
documents are being placed in the Headquarters and regional dockets
concurrently with the publication of this rule.
    The third site is Raritan Bay Slag (NJ). More than 35 comments were
received on this site, all in favor of placing the site on the NPL.
Commenters expressed concern over the human and ecological effects of
the contamination, and the impacts of the contamination on the economic
viability of the area. In response, EPA is placing the Raritan Bay Slag
site on the NPL. After listing, EPA will continue to study the site to
determine the most appropriate means to address the contamination
causing the concerns reflected in the above comments.
    In addition, commenters provided suggestions for how best to assess
and address the contamination at Raritan Bay Slag and other nearby slag
sites. Commenters expressed concern about the adequacy of measures
taken to restrict public access to the contamination, suggested that a
removal action is appropriate at the site, and urged EPA to quickly
address the contamination. Commenters further requested establishing
public information sharing venues, including a Community Advisory Group
and a public file sharing system for the dissemination of information
to the public. One commenter stated that the site also raised
unspecified environmental justice concerns. In response, EPA will
proceed as quickly as possible to gather additional information through
an RI and determine the best approach for site cleanup. While listing a
site on the NPL is a prerequisite for initiating a Fund-financed
remedial action, it is not a prerequisite to EPA taking removal action
at the site. With respect to the comments that the measures taken to
date to restrict public access are inadequate, EPA has to date taken
several measures to limit access. These include the installation of
chain-link fence, in most cases 6-foot high, along documented source
areas containing slag material and along access points along U.S.
Highway 35. In addition, warning signs were placed along the entire
length of the fenced area at approximately 125-foot intervals. Since
the water bodies are either heavily fished or used for other
recreational purposes (bathing, rafting, etc.), preventing access to
the shoreline from those water bodies is extremely difficult. EPA,
through public outreach to both residents and local fishing centers,
has attempted to educate these local users of the waterfront to the
hazards associated with this material. To date, EPA has held 4
availability sessions, maintained an on-site office from April though
September 2009 and coordinated with local schools to send over 800
informational flyers home with students. EPA will evaluate additional
means of restricting both public and environmental exposure. EPA
implements its commitment to environmental justice by ensuring fair
treatment and meaningful involvement for minority, low income, tribal,
and other disproportionately burdened communities. As previously
explained, EPA is taking steps to ensure full protection for citizens
affected by this site. EPA also intends to keep the community informed
of its activities and provide opportunities for public

comment and suggestions on EPA's investigation and cleanup approach,
and will provide a mechanism to ensure that information EPA generates
will be readily available to the public.
    All comments that were received by EPA are contained in the
Headquarters Docket and are also listed in EPA's electronic public
Docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

1. What Is Executive Order 12866?
    Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)) the
Agency must determine whether a regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review
and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million
or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere
with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter
the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4)
raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive
Order.
2. Is This Final Rule Subject to Executive Order 12866 Review?
    No. The listing of sites on the NPL does not impose any obligations
on any entities. The listing does not set standards or a regulatory
regime and imposes no liability or costs. Any liability under CERCLA
exists irrespective of whether a site is listed. It has been determined
that this action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not subject to OMB
review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

1. What Is the Paperwork Reduction Act?
    According to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information that requires OMB
approval under the PRA, unless it has been approved by OMB and displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations, after initial display in the preamble of the final rules,
are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
2. Does the Paperwork Reduction Act Apply to This Final Rule?
    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
EPA has determined that the PRA does not apply because this rule does
not contain any information collection requirements that require
approval of the OMB.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

1. What Is the Regulatory Flexibility Act?
    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996) whenever an agency is required to publish a notice of
rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that
describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions).
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of
an agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. SBREFA amended the
Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a
statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
2. How Has EPA Complied With the Regulatory Flexibility Act?
    This rule listing sites on the NPL does not impose any obligations
on any group, including small entities. This rule also does not
establish standards or requirements that any small entity must meet,
and imposes no direct costs on any small entity. Whether an entity,
small or otherwise, is liable for response costs for a release of
hazardous substances depends on whether that entity is liable under
CERCLA 107(a). Any such liability exists regardless of whether the site
is listed on the NPL through this rulemaking. Thus, this rule does not
impose any requirements on any small entities. For the foregoing
reasons, I certify that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

1. What Is the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)?
    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before EPA promulgates a rule where a written statement is
needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and
consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the
least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal

governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a
small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying
potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected
small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
2. Does UMRA Apply to This Final Rule?
    This final rule does not contain a Federal mandate that may result
in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any one year.
Listing a site on the NPL does not itself impose any costs. Listing
does not mean that EPA necessarily will undertake remedial action. Nor
does listing require any action by a private party or determine
liability for response costs. Costs that arise out of site responses
result from site-specific decisions regarding what actions to take, not
directly from the act of placing a site on the NPL. Thus, this rule is
not subject to the requirements of section 202 and 205 of UMRA.
    This rule is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of
UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. As is mentioned
above, site listing does not impose any costs and would not require any
action of a small government.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

1. What Is Executive Order 13132 and
    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.''
2. Is Executive Order 13132 Applicable to This Final Rule?
    This final rule does not have federalism implications. 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,
as specified in Executive Order 13132, because it does not contain any
requirements applicable to States or other levels of government. Thus,
the requirements of the Executive Order do not apply to this final
rule.
    EPA believes, however, that this final rule may be of significant
interest to State governments. In the spirit of Executive Order 13132,
and consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between EPA
and State and local governments, EPA therefore consulted with State
officials and/or representatives of State governments early in the
process of developing the rule to permit them to have meaningful and
timely input into its development. All sites included in this final
rule were referred to EPA by States for listing. For all sites in this
rule, EPA received letters of support either from the Governor or a
State official who was delegated the authority by the Governor to speak
on their behalf regarding NPL listing decisions.

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

1. What Is Executive Order 13175?
    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, 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.''
2. Does Executive Order 13175 Apply to This Final Rule?
    This final rule does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Listing a site
on the NPL does not impose any costs on a tribe or require a tribe to
take remedial action. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to
this final rule.

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

1. What Is Executive Order 13045?
    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health
or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
2. Does Executive Order 13045 Apply to This Final Rule?
    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not
an economically significant rule as defined by Executive Order 12866,
and because the Agency does not have reason to believe the
environmental health or safety risks addressed by this section present
a disproportionate risk to children.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Usage

Is This Rule Subject to Executive Order 13211?
    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. Further, we have concluded that this
rule is not likely to have any adverse energy impacts because proposing
a site to the NPL does not require an entity to conduct any action that
would require energy use, let alone that which would significantly
affect energy supply, distribution, or usage. Thus, Executive Order
13175 does not apply to this action.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

1. What Is the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act?
    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note), directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities

unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress,
through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available
and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
2. Does the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act Apply to
This Final Rule?
    No. This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
Therefore, EPA did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus
standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

1. What Is Executive Order 12898?
    Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
2. Does Executive Order 12898 Apply to This Rule?
    EPA has determined that this final rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. As this rule does not impose any enforceable duty upon
State, tribal or local governments, this rule will neither increase nor
decrease environmental protection.

K. Congressional Review Act

1. Has EPA Submitted This Rule to Congress and the Government
Accountability Office?
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, that includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA has submitted a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A ``major rule''
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
2. Could the Effective Date of This Final Rule Change?
    Provisions of the Congressional Review Act (CRA) or section 305 of
CERCLA may alter the effective date of this regulation.
    Under the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801(a), before a rule can take effect the
federal agency promulgating the rule must submit a report to each House
of the Congress and to the Comptroller General. This report must
contain a copy of the rule, a concise general statement relating to the
rule (including whether it is a major rule), a copy of the cost-benefit
analysis of the rule (if any), the agency's actions relevant to
provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (affecting small
businesses) and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (describing
unfunded federal requirements imposed on state and local governments
and the private sector), and any other relevant information or
requirements and any relevant Executive Orders.
    EPA has submitted a report under the CRA for this rule. The rule
will take effect, as provided by law, within 30 days of publication of
this document, since it is not a major rule. Section 804(2) defines a
major rule as any rule that the Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) of the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) finds has resulted in or is likely to result in: An
annual effect on the economy of $100,000,000 or more; a major increase
in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal,
State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions; or
significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based
enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic and
export markets. NPL listing is not a major rule because, as explained
above, the listing, itself, imposes no monetary costs on any person. It
establishes no enforceable duties, does not establish that EPA
necessarily will undertake remedial action, nor does it require any
action by any party or determine its liability for site response costs.
Costs that arise out of site responses result from site-by-site
decisions about what actions to take, not directly from the act of
listing itself. Section 801(a)(3) provides for a delay in the effective
date of major rules after this report is submitted.
3. What Could Cause a Change in the Effective Date of This Rule?
    Under 5 U.S.C. 801(b)(1) a rule shall not take effect, or continue
in effect, if Congress enacts (and the President signs) a joint
resolution of disapproval, described under section 802.
    Another statutory provision that may affect this rule is CERCLA
section 305, which provides for a legislative veto of regulations
promulgated under CERCLA. Although INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919,103 S.
Ct. 2764 (1983) and Bd. of Regents of the University of Washington v.
EPA, 86 F.3d 1214,1222 (D.C. Cir. 1996) cast the validity of the
legislative veto into question, EPA has transmitted a copy of this
regulation to the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of
Representatives.
    If action by Congress under either the CRA or CERCLA section 305
calls the effective date of this regulation into question, EPA will
publish a document of clarification in the Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous substances, Hazardous waste, Intergovernmental relations,
Natural resources, Oil pollution, Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water pollution control, Water
supply.

    Dated: October 29, 2009.
Barry N. Breen,
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response.

0
40 CFR part 300 is amended as follows:

PART 300--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O.
12777, 56 FR 54757, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR
2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp., p. 193.

0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended by adding the following
sites in alphabetical order to read as follows:

Appendix B to Part 300--National Priorities List

                                       Table 1--General Superfund Section
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Notes
                  State                              Site name                    City/county            \(a)\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
NJ.......................................  Raritan Bay Slag............  Old Bridge Township/
                                                                          Sayreville.

                                                  * * * * * * *
UT.......................................  U.S. Magnesium..............  Tooele County...............

                                                  * * * * * * *
VA.......................................  Peck Iron and Metal.........  Portsmouth..................

                                                 * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\(a)\ A = Based on issuance of health advisory by Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry (if scored,
  HRS score need not be <=28.50).
C = Sites on construction completion list.
S = State top priority (included among the 100 top priority sites regardless of score).
P = Sites with partial deletion(s).

* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-26539 Filed 11-3-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 21, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35967-35968]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15118]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0249; Airspace Docket No. 11-ANM-6]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Bozeman, MT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action modifies Class E airspace at Bozeman, Gallatin
Field Airport, Bozeman, MT, to accommodate aircraft using Instrument
Landing System (ILS) Localizer (LOC) standard instrument approach
procedures at the airport. This improves the safety and management of
Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport. This action
also adjusts the airport's geographic coordinates for the Class D and E
airspace areas, and updates the airport name.

DATES: Effective date, 0901 UTC, August 25, 2011. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On April 7, 2011, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to amend controlled airspace at Bozeman,
MT (76 FR 19281). Interested parties were invited to participate in
this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal
to the FAA. No comments were received.
    Class D and E airspace designations are published in paragraph
5000, 6002, 6004 and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9U dated
August 18, 2010, and effective September 15, 2010, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and Class E
airspace

designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in
that Order. With the exception of editorial changes, this rule is the
same as that proposed in the NPRM.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by modifying Class E surface airspace designated as an
extension to Class D surface area at Bozeman, Gallatin Field Airport,
Bozeman, MT. Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate aircraft
using the ILS LOC standard instrument approach procedures at the
airport. This action is necessary for the safety and management of IFR
operations. The geographic coordinates of the airport for Class D
airspace, Class E surface area airspace, and Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface, are being adjusted in
accordance with the FAA's aeronautical database. This action also
updates the airport name to Bozeman, Gallatin Field Airport, MT, from
Bozeman, Gallatin Field, MT.
    The FAA has determined this regulation only involves an established
body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments
are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this
regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to
issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S.
Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 discusses the authority of the FAA
Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is
promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A,
Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to
ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This
regulation is within the scope of that authority as it modifies
controlled airspace at Bozeman, Gallatin Field Airport, Bozeman, MT.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9U, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15,
2010 is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D airspace.

* * * * *

ANM MT D Bozeman, MT [Amended]

Bozeman, Gallatin Field Airport, MT
    (Lat. 45[deg]46'39'' N., long. 111[deg]09'07'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
7,000 feet MSL within a 4.4-mile radius of Bozeman, Gallatin Field
Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific
dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in
the Airport/Facility Directory.

Paragraph 6002 Class E airspace designated as surface areas.

* * * * *

ANM MT E2 Bozeman, MT [Amended]

Bozeman, Gallatin Field Airport, MT
    (Lat. 45[deg]46'39'' N., long. 111[deg]09'07'' W.)

    Within a 4.4-mile radius of Bozeman, Gallatin Field Airport.
This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates
and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in
the Airport/Facility Directory.

Paragraph 6004 Class E airspace designated as an extension to a
Class D surface area.

* * * * *

ANM MT E4 Bozeman, MT [Modified]

Bozeman, Gallatin Field Airport, MT
    (Lat. 45[deg]46'39'' N., long. 111[deg]09'07'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 3 miles
each side of the 316[deg] bearing of Bozeman, Gallatin Field Airport
extending from the 4.4-mile radius of the airport to 15.5 miles
northwest of the airport, and that airspace 2.4 miles each side of
the 212[deg] bearing of the Bozeman, Gallatin Field Airport
extending from the 4.4-mile radius of the airport to 7 miles
southwest of the airport.

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ANM MT E5 Bozeman, MT [Amended]

Bozeman, Gallatin Field Airport, MT
    (Lat. 45[deg]46'39'' N., long. 111[deg]09'07'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 13.5-mile radius of Bozeman, Gallatin Field Airport, and
within 4.8 miles northeast and 13 miles southwest of the 316[deg]
bearing of the airport extending from the 13.5-mile radius to 24.4
miles northwest of the airport.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on June 10, 2011.
John Warner,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2011-15118 Filed 6-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P