[Federal Register: October 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 207)]
[Notices]
[Page 66103]
[DOCID:fr27oc10-74]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0544]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Application for Participation in the Medical Device
Fellowship Program

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an
opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain
information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(the PRA), Federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information,
including each proposed extension of an existing collection of
information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the
notice. This notice solicits comments on the application for
participation in the Medical Device Fellowship Program (MDFP).

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection
of information by December 27, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments on the collection of information
to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments on the
collection of information to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-
305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with the docket
number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Gittleson, Office of
Information Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr.,
PI50-400B, Rockville, MD 20850,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information before
submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this
requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of
information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Application for Participation in the Medical Device Fellowship
Program--5 U.S.C. 1104, 1302, 3301, 3304, 3320, 3361, 3393, and 3394
(OMB Control Number 0910-0551)--Extension

    Sections 1104, 1302, 3301, 3304, 3320, 3361, 3393, and 3394 of
Title 5 of the United States Code, authorize Federal agencies to rate
applicants for Federal jobs. Collecting applications for the MDFP will
allow FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) to easily
and efficiently elicit and review information from students and health
care professionals who are interested in becoming involved in CDRH
activities. The process will reduce the time and cost of submitting
written documentation to the Agency and lessen the likelihood of
applications being misrouted within the Agency mail system. It will
assist the Agency in promoting and protecting the public health by
encouraging outside persons to share their expertise with CDRH.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                     Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Annual
                 5 U.S.C. Section                     FDA form No.      Number of      frequency per     Total annual      Hours per       Total hours
                                                                       respondents        response        responses         response
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1104, 1302, 3301, 3304, 3320, 3361, 3393, 3394....            3608              250                1              250                1             250
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    FDA based these estimates on the number of inquiries that have been
received concerning the program and the number of requests for
application forms over the past 3 years.

    Dated: October 21, 2010.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-27158 Filed 10-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 239 (Thursday, December 14, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 86726-86727]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27458]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2023-0024]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Hearing

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 11 individuals from the
hearing requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs) to operate a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate
commerce. The exemptions enable these hard of hearing and deaf
individuals to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: The exemptions are applicable on December 11, 2023. The
exemptions expire on December 11, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division, FMCSA, DOT, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room
W64-224, Washington, DC 20590-0001,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected]. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have questions
regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Dockets
Operations,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Viewing Comments

    To view comments go to www.regulations.gov. Insert the docket
number (FMCSA-2023-0024) in the keyword box and click ``Search.'' Next,
sort the results by ``Posted (Older-Newer),'' choose the first notice
listed, and click ``Browse Comments.'' If you do not have access to the
internet, you may view the docket online by visiting Dockets Operations
in on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. To be sure someone is there to
help you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting
Dockets Operations.

B. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(6), DOT solicits comments
from the public on the exemption requests. DOT posts these comments,
without edit, including any personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov. As described in the system of records
notice DOT/ALL 14 (Federal Docket Management System), which can be
reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/individuals/privacy/privacy-act-system-records-notices, the comments are searchable by the name of
the submitter.

II. Background

    On November 1, 2023, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt of
applications from 11 individuals requesting an exemption from the
hearing requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (88 FR
75088). The public comment period ended on December 1, 2023, and five
comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that granting exemptions to these individuals would likely
achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the
level that would be achieved by complying with Sec.  391.41(b)(11).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding hearing
found in Sec.  391.41(b)(11) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person first perceives a forced
whispered voice in the better ear at not less than 5 feet with or
without the use of a hearing aid or, if tested by use of an audiometric
device, does not have an average hearing loss in the better ear greater
than 40 decibels at 500 Hz, 1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz with or without a
hearing aid when the audiometric device is calibrated to American
National Standard (formerly ASA Standard) Z24.5--1951.

    This standard was adopted in 1970 and was revised in 1971 to allow
drivers to be qualified under this standard while wearing a hearing aid
(35 FR 6458, 6463 (Apr. 22, 1970) and 36 FR 12857 (July 8, 1971),
respectively).

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received five comments in this proceeding. Of the five
comments received, four commenters are in support of all applicants in
this notice being granted the exemption and one commenter is
specifically in support of Francis McBride being granted the exemption.
The commenters, in general, also strongly urged FMCSA to remove or
reconsider the Federal hearing standard. They indicated that hard of
hearing and deaf drivers are likely as safe, if not safer, than CMV
drivers that meet the Federal hearing standard and that there is recent
information that supports this position.
    FMCSA's basis for granting an exemption is stated in the next
section of this notice, referencing relevant scientific information and
literature. However, FMCSA is currently conducting research to
investigate the safety of CMV operation by hard of hearing and deaf
drivers. This research includes a thorough literature review of the
topic to identify the most current information available on this topic.
More information regarding this research can be viewed at https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safety/research-and-analysis/investigating-safety-commercial-motor-vehicle-operation-deaf-and-hard.

IV. Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the FMCSRs for no longer than a 5-year period if it finds such
exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to,
or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such
exemption. The statutes also allow the Agency to renew exemptions at
the end of the 5-year period. However, FMCSA grants medical exemptions
from the FMCSRs for a 2-year period to align with the maximum duration
of a driver's medical certification.
    The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is
based on relevant scientific information and literature, and the 2008
Evidence Report, ``Executive Summary on Hearing, Vestibular Function
and Commercial Motor Driving Safety.'' The evidence report reached two
conclusions regarding the matter of hearing loss and CMV driver safety:
(1) no studies that examined the relationship between hearing loss and
crash risk exclusively among CMV drivers were identified; and (2)
evidence from studies of the private driver's license holder population
does not support the contention that individuals with hearing
impairment are at an increased risk for a crash. In addition, the
Agency reviewed each applicant's driving record found in the Commercial
Driver's License Information System, for commercial driver's license
(CDL) holders, and inspections recorded in the Motor Carrier Management
Information System. For non-CDL holders, the Agency reviewed the
driving records from the State Driver's Licensing Agency. Each
applicant's record demonstrated a safe driving history. Based on an
individual assessment of each applicant that focused on whether an
equal or greater level of safety would likely be achieved by permitting
each of these drivers to drive in interstate commerce, the Agency finds
the drivers granted this exemption have demonstrated that they do not
pose a risk to public safety.
    Consequently, FMCSA finds further that in each case exempting these
applicants from the hearing standard in Sec.  391.41(b)(11) would
likely achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the
exemption, consistent with the applicable standard in 49 U.S.C.
31315(b)(1).

V. Conditions and Requirements

    The terms and conditions of the exemption are provided to the
applicants in the exemption document and include the following: (1)
each driver must report any crashes or accidents as defined in Sec.
390.5T; (2) each driver must report all citations and convictions for
disqualifying offenses under 49 CFR parts 383 and 391 to FMCSA; and (3)
each driver is prohibited from operating a motorcoach or bus with
passengers in interstate commerce. The driver must also have a copy of
the exemption when driving, for presentation to a duly authorized
Federal, State, or local enforcement official. In addition, the
exemption does not exempt the individual from meeting the applicable
CDL testing requirements.

VI. Preemption

    During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall
enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with
respect to a person operating under the exemption.

VII. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the 11 exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts the following drivers from the hearing standard; in Sec.
391.41(b)(11), subject to the requirements cited above:

Melissa Bartlett (LA)
Jeromy Brand (AL)
Bryan Elzy (LA)
Brian Greco (NM)
Bradley Hess (WA)
Tony Jones (TX)
Alexander Lindsay (OH)
Francis McBride (NC)
Ray Perry (TX)
Lakeisha Rosbia (AR)
Anthony Scott (AL)

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b), each exemption will be valid
for 2 years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) the person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136, 49
U.S.C. chapter 313, or the FMCSRs.

Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-27458 Filed 12-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[ Federal Register: January 12, 2000 ( Volume 65, Number 8)] [ Rules and Regulations] [ Page 1814 1817] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [ wais. access. gpo. gov] [ DOCID: fr12ja00 21]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 257 and 258 [ FRL 6521 4]

Adequacy of State Permit Programs Under RCRA Subtitle D AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to streamline the approval process for specific state permit programs for solid waste disposal facilities other than municipal solid waste landfills ( MSWLF) that receive conditionally exempt small quantity generator ( CESQG) hazardous waste. States whose Subtitle D MSWLF permit programs or Subtitle C hazardous waste management programs have been reviewed and approved or authorized by EPA are eligible for this streamlined approval process if their state programs require the disposal of CESQG hazardous waste in suitable facilities. EPA is issuing an adequacy determination to the state programs for Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Elsewhere in the proposed rule section of today's Federal Register, EPA is proposing the program adequacy of these states and soliciting comment on this decision. If relevant adverse comments are received, EPA will withdraw this direct final rule of program adequacy and address the comments in a subsequent final rule. EPA will not give additional opportunity for comment. If EPA receives relevant adverse comment concerning the adequacy of only certain state programs, the Agency's withdrawal of the direct final rule will only apply to those state programs. Comments on the inclusion or exclusion of one state permit program will not affect the timing of the decision on the other state permit programs.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective on April 11, 2000 unless the Agency receives timely relevant adverse comments by February 11, 2000. Should the Agency receive such relevant adverse comments, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of this direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Send or hand deliver an original and one copy of your comments referencing docket number R7/ ARTD/ SWPP 00 01 to: Region VII Information Resource Center, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 901 N. 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. Comments may also be submitted electronically through the Internet to: r7 library@ epa. gov. Comments in electronic format should also be identified by the docket number listed above. All electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of encryption. You can view and copy documents pertaining to this regulatory docket in the Region VII Information Resource Center ( Library), located on the Plaza Level at the address noted above. The Library is open from 9 a. m. to 3 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information, call ( 913) 551 7241 or TTY ( 913) 321 9516. For information on accessing paper and electronic copies of documents or supporting materials relating to the direct final rule, or for information on specific aspects of this rule, contact Wes Bartley, U. S. EPA Region VII, ARTD/ SWPP, 901 N. 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101,

[[ Page 1815]]

phone ( 913) 551 7632, or by e mail at bartley. wes@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The official record for this action will be kept in paper form. Therefore, EPA will transfer all comments received electronically into paper form and place them in the official record, which will also include all comments submitted directly in writing. The official record is the paper record kept at the address in ADDRESSES at the beginning of this document. Responses to comments, whether the comments are written or electronic, will be in a document in the Federal Register as outlined in DATES above or in a response to comments document placed in the official record for this rulemaking. EPA will not immediately reply to commenters electronically other than to seek clarification of electronic comments that may be garbled in transmission or during conversion to paper form, as discussed above.

A. Background Section 4010( c) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( RCRA) requires EPA to revise the criteria for facilities that accept household hazardous waste and CESQG hazardous waste, or both. On October 9, 1991, EPA issued Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills ( 40 CFR part 258). These criteria include location restrictions and standards for design, operation, ground water monitoring, corrective action, financial assurance, and closure/ postclosure care for MSWLF. MSWLF typically receive both household hazardous waste and CESQG hazardous waste. On July 1, 1996, EPA issued the revised Criteria for Classification of Solid Waste Disposal Facilities and Practices to address solid waste disposal facilities other than MSWLF that receive CESQG waste ( 40 CFR part 257, subpart B). These criteria include location restrictions, ground water monitoring, and corrective action standards. The 40 CFR part 257, subpart B, criteria and the 40 CFR part 258 criteria, referred to collectively as the `` Subtitle D federal revised criteria,'' establish minimum federal standards to ensure that all Subtitle D facilities that may receive CESQG wastes are designed and managed in a manner that is protective of human health and the environment. RCRA section 4005, as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, requires states to develop permitting programs or other systems of prior approvals and conditions to ensure that solid waste disposal units that receive household hazardous waste and CESQG hazardous waste, or both, comply with the federal revised criteria. Section 4005 also requires EPA to determine the adequacy of these state permit programs. To fulfill this need, the Agency issued the State Implementation Rule ( SIR) on October 23, 1998 ( 63 FR 57026) to give a process for approving state municipal solid waste permit programs. The SIR specifies the criteria that state MSWLF permit programs must satisfy to be determined adequate. The SIR also addresses the processes that should be used for approving state programs for non MSWLF that receive CESQG hazardous waste. Throughout this direct final rule, the term `` approved state'' refers only to a state that has received approval for its MSWLF permit program under Subtitle D ( 40 CFR part 258) and the term `` authorized state'' refers only to a state that has an authorized hazardous waste permit program under Subtitle C ( 40 CFR part 264). Today's final adequacy determination is intended to give a streamlined approval process to address specific state programs that require the disposal of CESQG hazardous waste in suitable facilities and whose Subtitle D MSWLF permit programs or Subtitle C hazardous waste management programs have been reviewed and approved or authorized by the Agency. Today's direct final rule applies to the state programs for Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. Programs developed by these states for permitting either hazardous waste facilities or MSWLFs have been reviewed and approved or authorized by the Agency. The regulatory programs are more comprehensive and/ or more stringent than the part 257, subpart B, criteria. The Agency has determined that the above states have submitted the documentation that would have been needed for the determination of permit program adequacy under 40 CFR part 257, subpart B. Further, the Agency has determined that the technical review conducted for either `` approval'' of MSWLF permitting programs or `` authorization'' of hazardous waste permitting programs can substitute for the technical review of the standards for 40 CFR part 257, subpart B, and their implementation by the states. The states that are today receiving a final determination of adequacy had previously submitted documentation of state statutory authorities and requirements that regulate solid waste disposal units that may receive CESQG waste. In each case, state statutes, regulations, and/ or internal policies and practices were reviewed and found to serve as the basis for ensuring that the state permit program or other system of prior approvals and conditions had adequate authority to ensure compliance with the hazardous waste or MSWLF regulations, as appropriate. The technical requirements for part 257, subpart B, are location restrictions and requirements for ground water monitoring, corrective action, and recordkeeping. These requirements have been met by the state programs listed in today's final determination. The three states considered in today's determination are `` authorized'' states that have authorized hazardous waste permit programs under Subtitle C ( 40 CFR part 264). These states have laws, regulations, or guidance in place providing that CESQG hazardous waste may be lawfully managed in a RCRA Subtitle C facility ( see 61 FR 34264). Also, these states are `` approved'' states for MSWLF permit programs under Subtitle D ( 40 CFR part 258). However, only Kansas and Nebraska have laws, regulations, or guidance in place providing that CESQG hazardous waste may be lawfully managed in a MSWLF meeting or exceeding the requirements of 40 CFR part 258 ( see 61 FR 34264). Management of CESQG hazardous waste is allowed in the three states only at facilities as described above. For all states, the state regulations have been reviewed by EPA, found to be equal to or more stringent than 40 CFR part 257, subpart B, and approved. Most state program regulations contain additional requirements and are more stringent than the federal requirements. The states covered by today's approval have permit programs or other systems of prior approval for all waste disposal units in their jurisdictions that may receive CESQG hazardous waste. These states provide for public participation in permit issuance and enforcement as specified in the SIR rule. Finally, EPA believes that these states have sufficient compliance monitoring and enforcement authorities to take action against any owner or operator that fails to comply with regulations applicable to waste disposal units that may receive CESQG hazardous waste.

B. Decision After reviewing the states' previous submissions for approval under Subtitle D ( 40 CFR part 258) and authorization under Subtitle C ( 40 CFR part 264), the Agency concludes that the above states meet all of the statutory and regulatory requirements established by RCRA. Accordingly, the above states are granted a final determination of adequacy for all portions of their permit program for solid waste disposal units [[ Page 1816]]

that may receive CESQG hazardous waste. RCRA section 4005( a) provides that citizens may use the citizen suit provisions of RCRA section 7002 to enforce the Federal Criteria for Classification of Solid Waste Disposal Facilities and Practices in 40 CFR part 257, subpart B, independent of any state enforcement program. As explained in the preamble to 40 CFR part 257, subpart B, EPA expects that any owner or operator complying with the provisions of a state program approved by EPA requiring that CESQG hazardous waste be disposed of in either a Subtitle C facility or a Subtitle D MSWLF would be in compliance with the federal criteria. See 61 FR 34264 ( July 1, 1996). Today's action will become effective on April 11, 2000 if no adverse comments are received.

Related Acts of Congress and Executive Orders A. 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.'' It has been determined that this rule is not a `` significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not subject to OMB review.

B. 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 that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The 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. The following discussion explains EPA's determination. This rule does not impose any new burdens on small entities. It merely confirms existing needs for the disposal of CESQG waste under state law. This proposal does not impose any new cost burdens. I hereby certify that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This rule, therefore, does not need a regulatory flexibility analysis. C. The Paperwork Reduction Act Today's proposal is in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq. We found that no information is being collected from the states for this direct final rule, so we do not need to prepare an Information Collection Request.

D. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 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 promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of 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 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 by EPA of regulatory proposals with significant federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements. The Agency's analysis of compliance with UMRA found that today's rule imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments or the private sector; thus today's rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of UMRA.

E. 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. 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 it does not involve decisions based on environmental health or safety risks.

F. 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 [[ Page 1817]]

provide explanations to Congress, through OMB, when the Agency decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This proposed rulemaking does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

G. Executive Order 13132 Executive Order 13132 ( Federalism, 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces Executive Order 12612 ( Federalism) and Executive Order 12875 ( Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by state and local governments, or EPA consults with state and local officials early in the process of developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation that has federalism implications and that preempts state law unless the Agency consults with state and local officials early in the process of developing the proposed regulation. This direct final rule 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. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.

H. Executive Order 13084 Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to provide OMB, in a separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other representatives of Indian tribal governments `` to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.'' Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal governments. There is no impact to tribal governments as a result of the state plan approvals. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3( b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.

I. Executive Order 12898 EPA is committed to addressing environmental justice concerns and is assuming a leadership role in environmental justice initiatives to enhance environmental quality for all residents of the United States. The Agency's goals are to ensure that no segment of the population, regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, bears disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects as a result of EPA's policies, programs, and activities, and all people live in clean and sustainable communities. The Agency does not believe that today's rule granting state permit program approval will have a disproportionately high and adverse environmental or economic impact on any minority or low income group, or on any other type of affected community.

J. The Congressional Review Act The Congressional Review Act, 5 U. S. C. 801 et seq., as added by the 1996 SBREFA, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit 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 action is not a `` major rule'' as defined by 5 U. S. C. 804( 2). This rule will be effective April 11, 2000.

Authority: This document is issued under the authority of sections 2002 and 4005 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended, 42 U. S. C. 6912 and 6945.

Dated: December 29, 1999. Dennis Grams, Regional Administrator, Region VII. [ FR Doc. 00 614 Filed 1 11 00; 8: 45 am] BILLING CODE 6560 50 P


[Federal Register: September 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 181)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 53766-53768]
[DOCID:fr17se08-36]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0991; Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-054-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Model
DA 42 Airplanes

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory
continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation
authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as:

    In-service experience indicates that the powder coating of the
rear right hand (RH) engine support bracket degrades over time,
leading to a reduced torque of the engine mountings bolts. In some
cases, bolts had fully unscrewed and fell into the engine cowling.
One case was reported where the pilot had to shut down an engine in
flight because of a failed V-belt, the cause of failure assumed to
be one of these bolts. This condition, if not corrected, may lead to
further cases of loose bolts and subsequent damage to the engine or
accessories in the engine compartment, possibly resulting in in-
flight engine shut-down and reduced control of the aircraft.

The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the
unsafe condition described in the MCAI.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 17,
2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace
Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas
City, Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2008-0991;
Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-054-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued AD
No. 2008-0139, dated July 24, 2008 (referred to after this as ``the
MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The
MCAI states:

    In-service experience indicates that the powder coating of the
rear right hand (RH) engine support bracket degrades over time,
leading to a reduced torque of the engine mountings bolts. In some
cases, bolts had fully unscrewed and fell into the engine cowling.
One case was reported where the pilot had to shut down an engine in
flight because of a failed V-belt, the cause of failure assumed to
be one of these bolts. This condition, if not corrected, may lead to
further cases of loose bolts and subsequent damage to the engine or
accessories in the engine compartment, possibly resulting in in-
flight engine shut-down and reduced control of the aircraft.
    To address and correct this situation, DAI has published MSB-42-
058, providing instructions to accomplish repetitive inspections and
correction of the fastening torque of the affected engine mounting
bolts and replacement of the bolts with wire-secured bolts Part
Number (P/N) D60-9071-26-01, after which the repetitive torque
checks are no longer required.
    For the reasons described above, this EASA AD requires the
accomplishment of repetitive torque checks of the affected engine
mounting bolts and replacement of the bolts with wire-secured bolts.

You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH has issued Mandatory Service
Bulletin No. MSB-42-058, dated May 21, 2008; and Work Instruction WI-
MSB-42-058, dated March 12, 2008. The actions described in this service
information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in
the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they
have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and
service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because
we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe

condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of
the same type design.

Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service
Information

    We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in
general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it
necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the
AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these
changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information
provided in the MCAI and related service information.
    We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those
in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are
highlighted in a Note within the proposed AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD will affect 157 products of U.S.
registry. We also estimate that it would take about 1.5 work-hours per
product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The
average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Required parts would cost
about $0 per product. Where the service information lists required
parts costs that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there
will be no charge for these costs. As we do not control warranty
coverage for affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than
estimated here.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on
U.S. operators to be $18,840, or $120 per product.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH: Docket No. FAA-2008-0991;
Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-054-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by October 17, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Model DA 42 airplanes, all serial
numbers, certificated in any category, that have Thielert TAE125-01
engines installed, except those airplanes with engines identified by
serial number in Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Mandatory Service
Bulletin No. MSB-42-058, dated May 21, 2008, that have been
installed on the aircraft with wedge locking washers and bonded-in
bolts and are therefore not affected by this AD.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 71: Power
Plant.

Reason

    (e) The mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI)
states:

    In-service experience indicates that the powder coating of the
rear right hand (RH) engine support bracket degrades over time,
leading to a reduced torque of the engine mountings bolts. In some
cases, bolts had fully unscrewed and fell into the engine cowling.
One case was reported where the pilot had to shut down an engine in
flight because of a failed V-belt, the cause of failure assumed to
be one of these bolts. This condition, if not corrected, may lead to
further cases of loose bolts and subsequent damage to the engine or
accessories in the engine compartment, possibly resulting in in-
flight engine shut-down and reduced control of the aircraft.
    To address and correct this situation, DAI has published MSB-42-
058, providing instructions to accomplish repetitive inspections and
correction of the fastening torque of the affected engine mounting
bolts and replacement of the bolts with wire-secured bolts Part
Number (P/N) D60-9071-26-01, after which the repetitive torque
checks are no longer required.
    For the reasons described above, this EASA AD requires the
accomplishment of repetitive torque checks of the affected engine
mounting bolts and replacement of the bolts with wire-secured bolts.

Actions and Compliance

    (f) Unless already done, do the following actions:
    (1) Within 100 hours time-in-service (TIS) after the effective
date of this AD and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 hours
TIS, do the inspection and correction of the fastening torque of the
RH rear engine support bracket mounting bolts following Diamond
Aircraft Industries GmbH Mandatory Service Bulletin No. MSB-42-058,
dated May 21, 2008; and Action 1 of Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH
Work Instruction WI-MSB-42-058, dated March 12, 2008.
    (2) Within 6 months after the effective date of this AD, replace
all RH rear engine support bracket mounting bolts with wire-secured
bolts, P/N D60-9071-26-01, following Diamond Aircraft Industries
GmbH Mandatory Service Bulletin No. MSB-42-058, dated May 21, 2008;
and Action 2 of Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Work Instruction
WI-MSB-42-058, dated March 12, 2008.
    (3) After installation of the wire-secured bolts, P/N D60-9071-
26-01, as required by paragraph (f)(2) of this AD, the repetitive
torque inspections required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD are no
longer required.
    (4) As of 6 months after the effective date of this AD, no
person shall install spare RH rear engine support bracket mounting
bolts as replacement parts on any aircraft to which this AD applies,
except wire-secured bolts identified by P/N D60-9071-26-01.

FAA AD Differences

    Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information
as follows: No differences.

Other FAA AD Provisions

    (g) The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to ATTN: Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
    (3) Reporting Requirements: For any reporting requirement in
this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection requirements and has assigned
OMB Control Number 2120-0056.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD No.
2008-0139, dated July 24, 2008; Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH
Mandatory Service Bulletin No. MSB-42-058, dated May 21, 2008; and
Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Work Instruction WI-MSB-42-058,
dated March 12, 2008, for related information.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on September 10, 2008.
James E. Jackson,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-21701 Filed 9-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: August 18, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 159)]
[Notices]
[Page 51040-51041]
[DOCID:fr18au10-89]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0576; FRL-8840-8]

Issuance of an Experimental Use Permit by the State of Florida

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The State of Florida has granted an experimental use permit
(EUP) to the following pesticide applicant, SpringStar, Inc. EPA
Company Number 66433, P.O. Box 2622, Woodinville, WA 98072. An EUP
permits use of a pesticide for experimental or research purposes only
in accordance with the limitations in the permit. EPA is publishing
this document, pursuant to 40 CFR 172.26(a)(3). Notice of receipt of
this permit does not imply a decision by the Agency on the permit.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Sweeney, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Florida state contact: Dennis F. Howard, Chief, Bureau of
Pesticides; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. Although this
action may be of particular interest to those persons who conduct or
sponsor research on pesticides, the Agency has not attempted to
describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.
If you have any questions regarding the information in this action,
consult the people listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information?

    EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0576. Publicly available
docket materials are available either in the electronic docket at
http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard copy, at the
Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-
4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington,
VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket
Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. State of Florida EUP

    The State of Florida has issued the following EUP:
    EUP number FL10-EUP-01. Issuance. Florida Department of Agriculture
and

Consumer Services, Bureau of Pesticides, 3125 Conner Blvd., Bldg. 6 (MS
L6), Tallahassee, FL 32399-1650. This EUP allows the use of 80
milligrams (mg) of the insecticide 2-methyl [1,1'-biphenyl]-3-yl)
methyl-3-(2-chloro-3,3,3,-trifluoro-1-propenyl)-2,2 on 1 acre of
residential areas to determine if the addition of mosquito ovitrap
strips (Trap-N-Kill\TM\), impregnated with bifenthrin to existing
mosquito management practices, will significantly reduce the abundance
of the dengue mosquito vector, Aedes aegypti, in Key West, Florida. The
program is authorized only in the State of Florida. The EUP is
effective until December 31, 2010.

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136c.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Experimental use permits.

    Dated: August 5, 2010.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 2010-20320 Filed 8-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 110 (Wednesday, June 8, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 34867]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12330]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP01-382-032.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Northern Natural Gas Company submits Carlton
Reimbursement Report.
    Filed Date: 6/1/22.
    Accession Number: 20220601-5353.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/13/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-262-002.
    Applicants: Hardy Storage Company, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Amended Stipulation and Settlement
Agreement to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 6/1/22.
    Accession Number: 20220601-5178.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/13/22.

    Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP22-960-000.
    Applicants: Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Fuel Retention & Cash Out
Adjustment 2022 to be effective 7/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/1/22.
    Accession Number: 20220601-5065.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/13/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-961-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gulf Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate and Non-
Conforming Agreement Housekeeping to be effective 7/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/1/22.
    Accession Number: 20220601-5073.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/13/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-962-000.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Cap Rel Neg Rate Agmt (Osaka
46428 to TotalEnergies 55364) to be effective 6/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/1/22.
    Accession Number: 20220601-5080.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/13/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-963-000.
    Applicants: TransCameron Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Normal filing 2022 June to be
effective 6/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/1/22.
    Accession Number: 20220601-5210.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/13/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-964-000.
    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Agreement
Update (Conoco June 2, 2022) to be effective 6/2/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/1/22.
    Accession Number: 20220601-5215.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/13/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-965-000.
    Applicants: TransCameron Pipeline, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Normal filing 2022 July to be
effective 7/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/1/22.
    Accession Number: 20220601-5223.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/13/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-966-000.
    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Capacity
Release Agreements--6/1/2022 to be effective 6/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/1/22.
    Accession Number: 20220601-5261.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/13/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-967-000.
    Applicants: Alliance Pipeline L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rates--Various June
1 2022 Capacity Releases to be effective 6/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 6/1/22.
    Accession Number: 20220601-5301.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 6/13/22.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 2, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-12330 Filed 6-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 226 (Monday, November 27, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56016-56017]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25566]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0007; FRL-9968-48]

Pesticide Product Registration; Receipt of Applications for New
Active Ingredients

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA has received applications to register pesticide products
containing active ingredients not included in any currently registered
pesticide products. Pursuant to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), EPA is hereby providing notice of receipt and
opportunity to comment on these applications.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 27, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by the Docket
Identification (ID) Number and the File Symbol of interest as show in
the body of this document, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html. Additional
instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert McNally, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), main telephone number: (703)
305-7090; email address: [email protected]; or Michael Goodis,
Registration Division (7505P), main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email address: [email protected]. The mailing address for each
contact person is: Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001. As part of the mailing address, include the contact person's
name, division, and mail code. The division to contact is listed at the
end of each application summary.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting
your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

II. Registration Applications

    EPA has received applications to register pesticide products
containing active ingredients not included in any currently registered
pesticide products. Pursuant to the provisions of FIFRA section 3(c)(4)
(7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(4)), EPA is hereby providing notice of receipt and
opportunity to comment on these applications. Notice of receipt of
these applications does not imply a decision by the Agency on these
applications.

III. New Active Ingredients

    1. File symbol: 279-GAGR and 279-GAGN. Docket ID number: EPA-HQ-
OPP-2017-0417. Applicant: FMC Corporation, 1735 Market Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103. Product names: Valifenalate Technical and
F9177-2 WG. Active ingredient: Fungicide and Valifenalate at 98.4%
(Valifenalate Technical) and 10% (F9177-2 WG). Proposed use:
Classification/Use Bulb vegetable crop group 3-07, cucurbit vegetable
crop group 9, fruiting vegetable crop group 8, celery, and potatoes.
Contact: RD.
    2. File Symbol: 87645-G. Docket ID number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0461.
Applicant: Envera, LLC, 220 Garfield Ave., West Chester, PA 19380.
Product name: ENV503 Biofungicide MUP. Active ingredient: Fungicide and
Bactericide--Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain ENV503 at 1.30%.
Proposed use: Manufacturing use. Contact: BPPD.
    3. File Symbol: 87645-U. Docket ID number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2017-0461.
Applicant: Envera, LLC, 220 Garfield Ave., West Chester, PA 19380.
Product name: ENV503 Biofungicide Wettable Powder. Active ingredient:
Fungicide and Bactericide--Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain ENV503 at
0.15%. Proposed use: Broad-spectrum,

preventative biofungicide for control or suppression of fungal and
bacterial plant diseases in agricultural, field, nursery, and forested
areas and as a seed treatment. Contact: BPPD.

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: October 2, 2017.
Delores Barber,
Director, Information Technology and Resources Management Division,
Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2017-25566 Filed 11-24-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 144 (Friday, July 26, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36149-36151]
[FR Doc No: 2019-15874]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-86423; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2019-50]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Adopt a New Rule
9.21-O, Delete Current Rules 9.21-O through 9.25-O, and Amend Rule
10.9551

July 22, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1 )\1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on July 9, 2019, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C.78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to (1) adopt a new Rule 9.21-O
(Communications with the Public) based on NYSE American Rule 991, (2)
delete current Rules 9.21-O through 9.25-O, and (3) amend Rule 10.9551
to add references to proposed Rule 9.21-O. The proposed rule change is
available on the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to (1) adopt a new Rule 9.21-O
(Communications with the Public) based on NYSE American Rule 991
(Options Communications), (2) delete Rules 9.21-O through 9.25-O, and
(3) amend Rule 10.9551 to add references to proposed Rule 9.21-O.
Background and Proposed Rule Filing
    The Exchange recently adopted a new set of rules governing
investigations, discipline of ETP Holders, OTP Holders, OTP Firms, and
covered persons, sanctions, cease and desist authority, and other
procedural rules modeled on the rules of the Exchange's affiliates, New
York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'') and NYSE American LLC (``NYSE
American''), as well as those of the Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'').\4\ The new disciplinary rules became
effective on May 27, 2019.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-85639 (April 12,
2019), 84 FR 16346 (April 18, 2019) (SR-NYSEARCA-2019-15) (Notice)
(``Disciplinary Rules Adoption'').
    \5\ See NYSE Arca Options Regulatory Bulletin 19-02 (April 26,
2019), available at https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse-arca/rule-interpretations/2019/Regulatory%20Bulletin%20re%20Arca%20Disciplinary%20Rules.%20revised%2004.25.19%20V2.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In that filing, the Exchange adopted Rule 10.9551 (Failure to
Comply with Public Communication Standards), which permits the
Exchange's regulatory staff to issue a written notice requiring an ETP
Holder, OTP Holder or OTP Firm to file communications with FINRA's
Advertising Regulation Department at least 10 days prior to use if the
staff determined that the ETP Holder had departed from the standards of
Rule 9.21-E (Communications with the Public) and ``any applicable
options rule.'' \6\ As the filing noted, the Exchange did not have a
rule comparable to Rule 9.21-E for the options market and undertook to
submit a rule filing to adopt a new Rule 9.21-O based on NYSE American
Rule 991 and to amend Rule 10.9551.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Disciplinary Rules Adoption, 84 FR at 16370.
    \7\ See id., at n. 62.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange accordingly proposes to adopt a new Rule 9.21-O titled
``Communications with the Public.'' Except for references to OTP Firm
and OTP Holder, proposed Rule 9.21-O is substantially the same as NYSE
American Rule 991, which was in turn based on FINRA Rule 2220.\8\ The
Exchange proposes to delete its current Rules 9.21-O through 9.25-O
governing communications with the public as obsolete.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61499 (February 4,
2010), 75 FR 6738 (February 10, 2010) (SR-NYSEAmex-2010-04);
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 82402 (December 26, 2017), 83 FR
179 (January 2, 2018) (SR-NYSEAmex-2017-39).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes non-substantive conforming changes in Rule
10.9551(a) and (d) to replace the phrase ``and any applicable options
rule'' following ``Pursuant to Rule 9.21-E(c)(5)(B)'' with ``Rule 9.21-
O(c)(2).''
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Act,\9\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of
the Act,\10\ in particular, in that it is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed changes will provide greater harmonization among SROs
resulting in less burdensome and more efficient regulatory compliance
for common members of the Exchange, the Exchange's affiliates, and
FINRA. As previously noted, the proposed rule text is substantially the
same as NYSE American Rule 991, which was in turn modeled on FINRA
rules. As such, the proposed rule change would foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in
securities and would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of
a free and open market and a national market system. The Exchange
further believes that adopting NYSE American's rule governing options
communications with the public will provide its permit holders with a
clearer, consistent, and more comprehensive regulatory scheme by
harmonizing the Exchange's rule concerning options communications with
NYSE American's rule and the FINRA rule in the same subject matter. The
proposed rule change would continue to ensure a uniform regulatory
approach and would reduce any potential risks or inefficiencies in
rules. The Exchange further notes that the changes proposed herein are
neither novel nor controversial and are modeled on existing FINRA
rules.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposal to use the terms ``OTP
Firm'' and ``OTP Holder'' instead of ``ATP Holder'' would remove
impediments to, and perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market
and a national market system and, in general, protect investors and the
public interest because the proposed change would reflect the
Exchange's membership and terminology used in the Exchange's rulebook,
thereby reducing any potential ambiguity and providing clarify to the
Exchange's rules. The proposed use of the terms ``OTP Firm'' and ``OTP
Holder'' would be consistent with the NYSE American term ``ATP
Holder.''
    The Exchange believes that deleting the Exchange's current options
communications with the public as obsolete would remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system and, in general, protect investors and the public
interest because it would eliminate rules that are now obsolete or that
do not have any substantive content. Eliminating obsolete rules would
reduce potential confusion and add transparency and clarity to the
Exchange's rules, thereby ensuring that members, regulators, and the
public can more easily navigate and understand the Exchange's rulebook.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that the proposed conforming changes
to Rule 10.9551(a) would remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system by
ensuring that market participants can more easily navigate, understand
and comply with its rules, thereby reducing potential investor or
market participant confusion.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
not designed to address any competitive issues. Rather, the proposed
change is designed to further harmonize the Exchange's rule regarding
options communications with the comparable rule of the Exchange's
affiliate NYSE American and to make conforming changes to the
Exchange's disciplinary rules.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \13\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2019-50 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to: Secretary,
Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2019-50. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2019-50 and
should be submitted on or before August 16, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-15874 Filed 7-25-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 177)]
[Notices]
[Page 54051-54052]
[DOCID:fr13se06-78]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Dominion Virginia Power; Project No. 906-006; Notice of
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene and
Protests

August 29, 2006.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: New Major License.
    b. Project No.: P-906-006.
    c. Date Filed: June 12, 2006.

    d. Applicant: Virginia Electric and Power Company, doing business
as Dominion Virginia Power.
    e. Name of Project: Cushaw Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On the James River in near Glasgow, Virginia, in
Bedford and Amherst Counties, Virginia. The project occupies 4.1 acres
of United States Forest Service lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: James Thornton, Dominion Virginia Power, 5000
Dominion Boulevard, 1 NE., Glen Allen, VA 23060,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Kristen Murphy,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    j. Deadline for filing motions to intervene and protests: October
28, 2006.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The Commissions Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person whose name appears on the official service
list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or
documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that
may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they
must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    Motions to intervene and protests may be filed electronically via
the Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings. See CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on
the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``eFiling''

link.
    k. This application has been accepted for filing, but is not ready
for environmental analysis at this time.
    l. Description of Project: The Cushaw Project consists of the
following: (1) A 1,550-foot-long and 27-foot-high reinforced concrete
dam extending diagonally across the James River; (2) a 138-acre
reservoir with a surface elevation of 656 feet mean sea level; (3) an
integral powerhouse with the dam containing five generating units with
a total installed capacity of 7,500 kilowatts; (4) a 2.3-kVcable
connecting the powerhouse to the Cushaw substation; and (5) appurtenant
facilities. The project is operated in a run-of-river mode, and the
average annual electrical generation is approximately 16,971,000
kilowatthours.
    m. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''

link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact
FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-
866-208-3676, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is also available for
inspection and reproduction at the address in item h. above.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm
 to be notified via e-mail of new filings and

issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    n. Anyone may submit a protest or a motion to intervene in
accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18
CFR 385.210, 385.211, and 385.214. In determining the appropriate
action to take, the Commission will consider all protests filed, but
only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any protests
or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
deadline date for the particular application.
    All filings must: (1) Bear in all capital letters the title
``PROTEST'' or ``MOTION TO INTERVENE''; (2) set forth in the heading
the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005.
Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the
applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served
upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application.
    o. Procedural schedule and final amendments: The application will
be processed according to the following Hydro Licensing Schedule.
Revisions to the schedule will be made as appropriate. The Commission
staff proposes to issue one environmental assessment rather than issue
a draft and final EA. Comments, terms and conditions, recommendations,
prescriptions, and reply comments, if any, will be addressed in the EA.
Staff intends to give at least 30 days for entities to comment on the
EA before final action is taken on the license application.
    Notice application ready for environmental analysis: December 2006.
    Notice of the availability of the EA: April 2007.
    Ready for Commission's decision on the Application: June 2007.
    Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice
of ready for environmental analysis.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-15141 Filed 9-12-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P