[Federal Register: October 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 207)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 65985-65987]
[DOCID:fr27oc10-7]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0901]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone: Epic Roasthouse Private Party Firework Display, San
Francisco, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in the
navigable waters of San Francisco Bay 1,000 yards off Epic Roasthouse
Restaurant, San Francisco, CA during a fireworks display in support of
the Epic Roasthouse Private Party. This safety zone is established to
ensure the safety of participants and spectators from the dangers
associated with the pyrotechnics. Unauthorized persons and vessels are
prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or remaining in the
safety zone without permission from the Captain of the Port or her
designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 10:45 a.m. through 9:30 p.m. on
November 5, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2010-0901 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2010-0901 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or e-mail Ensign Liz Ellerson, U.S. Coast Guard
Sector San Francisco; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail D11-PF-
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that it
would be impracticable to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) with respect to this rule because the event would occur before
the rulemaking process would be completed. Because of the dangers posed
by the pyrotechnics used in this fireworks display, the safety zone is
necessary to provide for the safety of event participants, spectators,
spectator craft, and other vessels transiting the event area. For the
safety concerns noted, it is in the public interest to have these
regulations in effect during the event.

Basis and Purpose

    The Epic Roasthouse Private Party is scheduled to take place on
November 5, 2010, on the navigable waters of San Francisco Bay, 1,000
yards off Epic Roasthouse Restaurant, San Francisco, CA. The fireworks
display is meant for entertainment purposes. This safety zone is issued
to establish a temporary restricted area on the waters surrounding the
fireworks launch site during loading of the pyrotechnics, and during
the fireworks display. This restricted area around the launch site is
necessary to protect spectators, vessels, and other property from the
hazards associated with the pyrotechnics on the fireworks barges. The
Coast Guard has granted the event sponsor a marine event permit for the
fireworks display.

Discussion of Rule

    During the set up of the fireworks and until the start of the
fireworks display, the temporary safety zone applies to the navigable
waters around the fireworks site within a radius of 100 feet. From 8:45
p.m. until 9:30 p.m., the area to which the temporary safety zone
applies will increase in size to encompass the navigable waters around
the fireworks site within a radius of 1,000 feet.
    The effect of the temporary safety zone will be to restrict
navigation in the vicinity of the fireworks site while the fireworks
are set up, and until the conclusion of the scheduled display. Except
for persons or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander,
no person or vessel may enter or remain in the restricted area. These
regulations are needed to keep spectators and vessels away from the
immediate vicinity of the fireworks barge to ensure

the safety of participants, spectators, and transiting vessels.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes and executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
    Although this rule restricts access to the waters encompassed by
the safety zone, the effect of this rule will not be significant
because the local waterway users will be notified via public Broadcast
Notice to Mariners to ensure the safety zone will result in minimum
impact. The entities most likely to be affected are pleasure craft
engaged in recreational activities.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    This rule may affect owners and operators of pleasure craft engaged
in recreational activities and sightseeing. This rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
for several reasons: (i) Vessel traffic can pass safely around the
area, (ii) vessels engaged in recreational activities and sightseeing
have ample space outside of the effected portion of the areas off San
Francisco, CA to engage in these activities, (iii) this rule will
encompass only a small portion of the waterway for a limited period of
time, and (iv) the maritime public will be advised in advance of this
safety zone via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of
the Instruction. This rule involves establishing, disestablishing, or
changing Regulated Navigation Areas and security or safety zones. An
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add temporary Sec.  165.T11-367 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-367  Safety zone; Epic Roasthouse Private Party, San
Francisco, CA.

    (a) Location. This temporary safety zone is established for the
waters of San Francisco Bay 1,000 yards off Epic Roasthouse Restaurant,
San Francisco, CA. The fireworks launch site will be located in
position 37[deg] 46'35.30'' N, 122[deg] 23'13.33'' W (NAD 83).
    From 10:45 a.m. until 8:45 p.m. on November 5, 2010, the temporary
safety zone applies to the navigable waters around the fireworks site
within a radius of 100 feet. From 8:45 p.m. until 9:30 p.m. on November
5, 2010, the area to which the temporary safety zone applies will
increase in size to encompass the navigable waters around the fireworks
site within a radius of 1,000 feet.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, ``designated
representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a
Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer on a Coast Guard
vessel or a Federal, State, or local officer designated by or assisting
the Captain of the Port San Francisco (COTP) in the enforcement of the
safety zone.
    (c) Regulations.
    (1) Under the general regulations in Sec.  165.23 of this title,
entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative.
    (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the COTP or a designated representative.
    (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the COTP or a designated representative to obtain
permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or
operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to
them by the COTP or the designated representative. Persons and vessels
may request permission to enter the safety zone on VHF-16 or through
the 24-hour Command Center at telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (d) Effective period. This section is effective from 10:45 a.m.
through 9:30 p.m. on November 5, 2010.

    Dated: October 15, 2010.
C.L. Stowe,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2010-27114 Filed 10-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 161 (Tuesday, August 22, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57018-57020]
[FR Doc No: 2023-17986]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2023-0403; FRL-11259-01-R7]

Air Plan Approval; MO; Control of Emissions From Volatile Organic
Liquid Storage

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions to the Missouri State Implementation Plan (SIP)
related to the control of emissions from volatile organic liquid
storage. The revisions to this rule include adding incorporations by
reference to other state rules, adding definitions specific to the
rule, revising unnecessarily restrictive or duplicative language, and
making administrative wording changes. These revisions do not impact
the stringency of the SIP or have an adverse effect on air quality. The
EPA's proposed approval of this rule revision is being done in
accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 21, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2023-0403 to www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID
No. for this rulemaking. Comments received will be posted without
change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Written Comments''
heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bethany Olson, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Permitting and Planning Branch,
11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number: (913)
551-7905; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Written Comments
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
IV. What action is the EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Written Comments

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2023-
0403, at www.regulations.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited
or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit
www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

II. What is being addressed in this document?

    The EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Missouri SIP
received on February 15, 2019, and June 10, 2021, and a supplemental
submission on April 24, 2023. The revisions are to Title 10, Division
10 of the Code of State Regulations (CSR), 10 CSR 10-5.500 ``Control of
Emissions from Volatile Organic Liquid Storage.'' The purpose of the
state regulation is to limit the volatile organic compound (VOC)
emissions from installations with volatile organic liquid storage
vessels in the St. Louis 1997 eight (8)-hour ozone nonattainment area
by incorporating reasonably available control technology (RACT) as
required by the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990. Missouri made
multiple revisions to the rule. These proposed revisions add
incorporations by reference to other state rules, add definitions
specific to the rule, revise unnecessarily restrictive or duplicative
language, and make administrative wording changes. EPA proposes to find
that these revisions meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act, do not
impact the stringency of the SIP, and do not adversely impact air
quality. The full text of the rule revisions as well as EPA's analysis
of the revisions can be found in the technical support document (TSD)
included in this docket.

III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?

    The State submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission also
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. The
State provided public notice on the first SIP revision from June 15,
2018, to September 6, 2018, and held a public hearing on August 30,
2018. Missouri received ten comments from two sources during the
comment period on 10 CSR 10-5.500. The EPA provided nine comments.
Missouri responded to all comments and revised the rule based on public
comments prior to submitting to EPA, as noted in the State submission
included in the docket for this action. The State provided public
notice on the second SIP revision from November 15, 2019, to February
6, 2020, and held a public hearing on January 30, 2018. Missouri
received one comment from a staff member during the comment period. The
State revised the rule purpose statement based on the comment prior to
submitting to EPA. As explained above and in more detail in the
technical support document which is part of this document, the
revisions meet the substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including
section 110 and implementing regulations.

IV. What action is the EPA taking?

    The EPA is proposing to amend the Missouri SIP by approving the
State's request to revise 10 CSR 10-5.500 ``Control of Emissions from
Volatile Organic Liquid Storage.'' We are processing this as a proposed
action because we are soliciting comments on this proposed action.
Final rulemaking will occur after consideration of any comments.

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, the EPA is proposing to include regulatory text
in an EPA final rule that includes incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to
finalize the incorporation by reference of the Missouri rule 10 CSR 10-
5.500, with a state effective date of July 30, 2020, which regulates
emissions from volatile organic liquid storage. The EPA has made, and
will continue to make, these materials generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 7 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Clean Air Act
and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it approves a state program;
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act.
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean that
``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.''
    The Missouri Department of Natural Resources did not evaluate
environmental justice considerations as part of its SIP submittal; the
CAA and applicable implementing regulations neither prohibit nor
require such an evaluation. EPA did not perform an EJ analysis and did
not consider EJ in this action. Due to the nature of the action being
taken here, this action is expected to have a neutral to positive
impact on the air quality of the affected area. Consideration of EJ is
not required as part of this action, and there is no information in the
record inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of achieving
environmental justice for people of color, low-income populations, and
Indigenous peoples.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: August 16, 2023.
Meghan A. McCollister,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart AA--Missouri

0
2. In Sec.  52.1320, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entry ``10-5.500'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1320  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                        EPA-Approved Missouri Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        State
    Missouri  citation              Title          effective date     EPA approval date         Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Missouri Department of Natural Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Chapter 5--Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the St. Louis Metropolitan Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
10-5.500.................  Control of Emissions         7/30/2020  [Date of publication    Section (2)(N)4 is
                            From Volatile Organic                   of the final rule in    not SIP-approved.
                            Liquid Storage.                         the Federal             Section (5)(F)
                                                                    Register], [Federal     retains a previously
                                                                    Register citation of    approved version of
                                                                    the final rule].        the state rule text.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-17986 Filed 8-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: October 7, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 195)]
[Notices]
[Page 58701-58702]
[DOCID:fr07oc08-130]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Civil Supersonic Aircraft Panel Discussion

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting participation.

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

SUMMARY: This notice advises interested persons that the FAA is
participating in a panel session on civil supersonic aircraft research.
The session will include presentations on current research programs and
a question and answer session for attendees. The FAA is seeking to
raise public awareness of the continuing technological advances in
supersonic aircraft technology aimed at reducing the intensity of sonic
boom.

DATES: The public session will take place on October 24, 2008. The
panel discussion is from 2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. in Rosemont, IL.

ADDRESSES: The symposium is sponsored by the O'Hare Noise Compatibility
Commission (ONCC) and will be held at the Hyatt Rosemont Hotel, 6350 N.
River Road, Rosemont, IL. Attendance is open to all interested parties,
and there are no fees to attend. The FAA panel discussion is the last
item on the symposium agenda.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laurette Fisher, Office of Environment
and Energy (AEE-100), Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>, telephone
(202) 267-3561.
    Background: Since March 1973, supersonic flight over land by civil
aircraft has been prohibited in the United States. The Concorde was the
only civil supersonic airplane that offered service to the United
States, but that airplane is no longer in service.
    The interest in supersonic aircraft technology has not disappeared.
Current research is dedicated toward reducing the impact of sonic booms
as they reach the ground, in an effort to make overland flight
acceptable. Recent research has produced promising results for low boom
intensity, and has renewed interest in developing supersonic civil
aircraft that could be

considered environmentally acceptable for supersonic flight over land.
    The FAA is leading a panel discussion entitled, ``State of the Art
of Supersonics Aircraft Technology--What has progressed in science
since 1973?'' The purpose of this panel session is to raise public
awareness on advances in supersonic technology, and for the FAA, the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and industry to
get feedback from interested persons.
    Public involvement is essential in any future definition of an
acceptable new standard that would allow supersonic flights over land.
We anticipate that this will be the first of many meetings informing
the public on developments in the research of shaped sonic booms and
other technical and environmental challenges that need to be addressed
in developing a new supersonic airplane.
    The FAA's presentation and panel discussion will take place on
Friday, October 24, 2008, as part of the O'Hare Noise Compatibility
Commission Symposium. It will be held at the Hyatt Rosemont Hotel, 6350
N. River Road, Rosemont, Illinois.
    More information about the O'Hare Noise Compatibility Commission
can be found at its Web site, www.oharenoise.org.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 24, 2008.
Lynne Pickard,
Acting Director of Environment and Energy.
 [FR Doc. E8-22898 Filed 10-6-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register: January 16, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 11)]
[Notices]
[Page 2978-2979]
[DOCID:fr16ja08-127]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), notice is hereby given that the Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) received a request for a waiver of compliance with certain
requirements of its safety standards. The individual petition is
described below, including the party seeking relief, the regulatory
provisions involved, the nature of the relief being requested, and the
petitioner's arguments in favor of relief.

Electro-Motive Diesels, Inc.

(Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-2007-0031)

    The Electric-Motive Diesels, Inc. (EMD) seeks a temporary waiver of
compliance from certain provisions of 49 CFR Part 232, Brake System
Safety Standards for Freight and Other Non-Passenger Trains and
Equipment. Specifically, the requirements for equipping new locomotives
with the ability to display in ``real-time'' in the cab of the
controlling (lead) locomotive the total train dynamic brake retarding
force available in the train, as prescribed in Sec.  232.309(g)(2).
    EMD is making this request due to a shortage of a critical
component required for the system. This will affect up to 40
locomotives that EMD will be delivering to BNSF Railway during January
and February, 2008, that will not have the ability to communicate
dynamic brake status with other locomotives in the consist. EMD states
that this non-compliant condition will be corrected within 184 days, at
the locomotive's second quarterly inspection. EMD states that they will
provide the specific locomotive road numbers to FRA after the
locomotives are shipped and will follow-up with notification when they
are brought into compliance. In support of the waiver request, EMD
notes that all of these units are equipped to display the train
deceleration rate presently allowed as an alternative for rebuilt
locomotives as prescribed in Sec.  232.109(h)(2).
    Communications received within 15 days of the date of this notice
will be considered by FRA before final action is taken. Comments
received after that date will be considered as far as practicable.
Since this portion of the regulations did not become effective until
late 2007, and only applies to new locomotives placed in service after
October 2007, FRA reserves the right to grant temporary relief prior to
the expiration of the comment period so that EMD may meet existing
contracts. FRA expects the railroads to operate these non-compliant
locomotives under the same requirements as prescribed in Sec.  232.109,
Dynamic Brake Requirements, for locomotives not equipped with the
ability to display this real-time dynamic brake information to the
locomotive engineer.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver Petition Docket Number FRA-
2007-0031) and may be submitted by any of the following methods:
    Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online

instructions for submitting comments.
    Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
    Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    All written communications concerning these proceedings are
available for examination during regular business hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.)
at the above facility. All documents in the public docket are also
available for inspection and copying on the Internet at the docket
facility's Web site at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 9, 2008.
Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program
Development.
[FR Doc. E8-685 Filed 1-15-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


            Pesticide Reregistration Performance Measures and Goals;
                            Annual Progress Report;
                               Fiscal Year 2016
           Docket identification (ID) number:  EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0125

I.  Introduction
      The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136a et seq.) requires EPA to publish information about EPA's annual achievements in meeting its performance measures and goals for pesticide reregistration.  This report addresses EPA's achievements in this area during fiscal year 2016.  This report discusses the integration of tolerance reassessment with the reregistration process, and describes the status of various regulatory activities associated with reregistration and tolerance reassessment.  The report also presents total numbers of products reregistered and products registered under the "fast-track" provisions of FIFRA.
II.  Background
      EPA must establish and publish in the Federal Register its annual performance measures and goals for pesticide reregistration, tolerance reassessment, and expedited registration, under section 4(l) of FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136a-1(l).  Specifically, such measures and goals are to include:
 The status of reregistration.
 The number of products reregistered, canceled, or amended.
 The number and type of data requests of Data Call-In (DCI) notices under FIFRA section 3(c)(2)(B) issued to support product reregistration by active ingredient.
 Progress in reducing the number of unreviewed, required reregistration studies.
 The aggregate status of tolerances reassessed.
 The number of applications for registration submitted under FIFRA section 4(k)(3) (which provides for expedited processing and review of certain applications) that were approved or disapproved.
 The future schedule for reregistrations in the current and succeeding fiscal year.
 The projected year of completion of the reregistrations under FIFRA section 4.
	FIFRA required EPA to conduct a comprehensive pesticide reregistration program -- a complete review of the human health and environmental effects of older pesticides originally registered before November 1, 1984.  Pesticides meeting today's scientific and regulatory standards could be declared "eligible" for reregistration.  To be eligible, an older pesticide must have a substantially complete data base, and must not cause unreasonable adverse effects to human health or the environment when used according to Agency approved label directions and precautions.
	In addition, all pesticides with food uses must meet the safety standard of section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) 21 U.S.C. 346a.  Under FFDCA, EPA must make a determination that pesticide residues remaining in or on food are "safe"; that is , "that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue" from dietary and other sources.  In determining allowable levels of pesticide residues in food, EPA must, among other requirements, perform a comprehensive assessment of each pesticide's risks, considering:
 Aggregate exposure (from food, drinking water, and residential uses).
 Cumulative effects from all pesticides sharing a common mechanism of toxicity.
 Possible increased susceptibility of infants and children.
 Possible endocrine or estrogenic effects.
	The 1996 FFDCA amendments also required the reassessment of all existing tolerances (pesticide residue limits in food) and tolerance exemptions within 10 years, to ensure that they met the safety standard of the law.  EPA was directed to give priority to the review of those pesticides that appeared to pose the greatest risk to public health.  The Agency completed the last of 9,721 required tolerance reassessment decisions in September 2007, ensuring that all pesticides used on food in the United States meet the law's safety standard.  EPA's approach to tolerance reassessment under FFDCA was described fully in the Agency's document, "Raw and Processed Food Schedule for Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment" (62 FR 42020, August 4, 1997) (FRL-5734-6).
	The Pesticide Registration Improvement Act (PRIA) of 2003 became effective on March 23, 2004 (Pub. Law 108-199, Div. G, Title V, Sec. 501, 118 Stat. 419).  Among other things, PRIA amended FIFRA section 4(g)(2) to require EPA to complete Reregistration Eligibility Decisions (REDs) for pesticides with food uses/tolerances by August 3, 2006, and to complete all non-food use REDs by October 3, 2008.  The Agency completed REDs for the last of 613 reregistration pesticide cases in September 2008, meeting the PRIA deadline.  REDs are available on the Agency's Pesticide Chemical Search web page at https://iaspub.epa.gov/apex/pesticides/f?p=chemicalsearch:1.
III.  Program Accountability
	Through this summary of performance measures and goals for pesticide reregistration, tolerance reassessment, and expedited registration, EPA describes progress made during 2016 in each of the program areas specified in FIFRA section 4(l).
A.  Status of Reregistration
	The last reregistration eligibility decisions for 613 reregistration cases (representing pesticide active ingredients or groups of pesticide active ingredients) were completed in FY 2008.  Product reregistration was not complete in FY 2016; the Agency's progress towards completion is discussed in detail below.  During FY 2016, as in the intervening years, the Agency focused on implementing the reregistration eligibility decisions as applicable to individual pesticide products.
B.  Product Reregistration; Numbers of Products Reregistered, Canceled, and Amended
	At the end of the reregistration process, after EPA has issued a RED and declared a pesticide reregistration case eligible for reregistration, individual end-use products that contain pesticide active ingredients included in the case still must be reregistered.  This concluding part of the reregistration process is called "product reregistration."
	In issuing a completed RED document, EPA sends registrants a DCI notice requesting any product-specific data and specific revised labeling needed to complete reregistration for each of the individual pesticide products covered by the RED.  Based on the results of EPA's review of these data and labeling, products found to meet FIFRA and FFDCA standards may be reregistered.
	A variety of outcomes are possible for pesticide products completing this final phase of the reregistration process.  Ideally, in response to the DCI, the pesticide producer, or registrant, will submit the required product-specific data and revised labeling, which EPA will review and find acceptable.  At that point, the Agency may reregister the pesticide product.  However, some products contain multiple active ingredients and receive multiple DCIs issued at different times.  Products containing multiple active ingredients may require more than one round of label revisions depending on the timing of the REDs and DCIs.  A product with multiple active ingredients could not be fully reregistered until the last active ingredient in its formulation was determined to be eligible for reregistration and all requirements of the applicable REDs satisfied (e.g., label changes, data requirements).  In other situations, the Agency may temporarily suspend a product's registration if the registrant has not submitted required product-specific studies within the time frame specified. The Agency may cancel a product's registration because the registrant did not pay the required registration maintenance fee.  Alternatively, the registrant may request a voluntary cancellation of their end-use product registration.
	1.  Product reregistration actions in FY 2016.  EPA counts each of the post-RED product outcomes described above as a product reregistration action.  A single pesticide product may be the subject of several product reregistration actions within the same year.  For example, a product's registration initially may be amended, then the product may be reregistered, or the product may first be suspended and later it may be voluntarily canceled.  During FY 2016, with a goal of 600 total product reregistration actions, the EPA completed the product reregistration actions detailed in Table 1.

        TABLE 1. -- PRODUCT REREGISTRATION ACTIONS COMPLETED IN FY 2016
                          (AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2016)

                                    Actions
                                                                        FY 2016
Product reregistration actions
                                                                             14
Product amendment actions
                                                                             65
Product cancellation actions
                                                                            404
Product suspension actions
                                                                              0
Total actions
                                                                            483

	2.  Status of the product reregistration universe for FY 2016.  EPA also keeps track of the status of the universe of products subject to reregistration, that is, the overall number of products reregistered, amended, canceled, and sent for suspension, as well as the number of products with actions pending, as of the end of the fiscal year.  This overall status information is not "cumulative" -- it is not derived from summing up a series of annual actions.  Adding annual actions would result in a larger overall number since each individual product is subject to multiple actions -- it can be amended, reregistered, and/or canceled, over time.  Instead, the "big picture" status information in Table 2 should be considered a snapshot in time.  As registrants and EPA make marketing and regulatory decisions in the future, the status of individual products may change, and numbers in this table are expected to fluctuate.
TABLE 2. -- STATUS OF THE UNIVERSE OF PRODUCTS SUBJECT TO PRODUCT REREGISTRATION, FOR FY 2016 (AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2016)

                                    Status
                                                                        FY 2016
Products reregistered
                                                                         5,121
Products amended
                                                                          3,491
Products canceled
                                                                         11,702
Products sent for suspension
                                                                             40
Total products with actions completed
                                                                         20,354
Products with actions pending
                                                                          4,621
Total products in product reregistration universe
                                                                         24,975

      At the end of FY 2016, 4,621 products had product reregistration decisions pending.  Some pending products awaited science reviews, label reviews, or reregistration decisions by EPA.  Others were not yet ready for product reregistration actions, but were associated with more recently completed REDs.  Their product-specific data were not yet due to be submitted to or reviewed by the Agency.
	The universe of products in product reregistration has increased in some years and decreased in other years.  Generally, an increase or decrease can be due to fluctuations in numbers of products associated with product-specific Data Call-Ins (PDCIs).
	3.  Product reregistration goal in FY 2017.  EPA's goal is to complete 600 product reregistration actions during FY 2017.  Additional information is available on EPA's Reregistration and Other Review Programs Predating Pesticide Registration Review web page at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation/reregistration-and-other-review-programs-predating-pesticide-registration.
C.  Applications for Registration Requiring Expedited Processing; Numbers Approved and Disapproved

	By law, EPA must expedite its processing of certain types of applications for pesticide product registration, i.e., applications for end-use products that would be identical or substantially similar to a currently registered product (me-too products); amendments to current product registrations that do not require review of scientific data; and products for public health pesticide uses.  During FY 2016, EPA considered and approved the numbers of applications for registration requiring expedited processing (also known as "fast track" applications) shown in Table 3.
                       TABLE 3. -- FAST TRACK APPLICATIONS APPROVED IN FY 2016
                               Application Type
                                                                        FY 2016
Me-too product registrations/Fast track
                                                                            242
Amendments/Fast track
                                                                          2,180
Total applications processed by fast track means
                                                                          2,422

	For those applications not approved, the Agency generally notifies the registrant of any deficiencies in the application that need to be corrected or addressed before the application can be approved.  Applications may have been withdrawn after discussions with the Agency, and 4 (RD=3, BPPD=1) were formally "denied" during FY 2016.
	On a financial accounting basis, EPA devoted 24 full-time equivalents (FTEs) in FY 2016 to reviewing and processing applications for fast track me-too product registrations and label amendments.  The Agency spent approximately $3.4 million in FY 2016 in direct costs (i.e., time on task, not including administrative expenses, computer systems, management overhead, and other indirect costs) on expedited processing and reviews.
D.  Projected Year of Completion of Reregistrations
	EPA completed the last reregistration eligibility decisions in FY 2008.  The Agency plans to complete product reregistration for conventional pesticides in FY 2019 and antimicrobial pesticides in FY 2024.
IV. Can I Comment on this Report?
      EPA does not expect these reports to lead to any particular action and therefore is not seeking particular public comment.  However, EPA welcomes input from stakeholders and the general public.  Written comments, identified by the docket identification number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0125, and received by EPA on or before 60 days after date of publication in the Federal Register, will be taken into consideration in the event that EPA determines that further action in warranted.
      Submit your comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0125, by one of the following methods:
      ::  Federal eRulemaking Portal:  http://www.regulations.gov.  Follow the on-line 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:  Office of Pesticide Programs (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/where-send-comments-epa-dockets.
      Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
V.  For Further Information Contact
      Ramé Cromwell, Antimicrobials Division (7510P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>


MEMORANDUM  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1

TO:		Melanie King, EPA OAQPS/SPPD/ESG

FROM:	Bradley Nelson, EC/R, Inc.

DATE:		January 19, 2010

SUBJECT:	Summary of the November 19, 2009 Teleconference with the Engine
Manufacturers Association and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
to Discuss Crankcase Emissions from Stationary Compression Ignition
Engines

1.0	INTRODUCTION

EPA requested this meeting with the Engine Manufacturers Association
(EMA) to discuss control options for crankcase emissions from existing
stationary compression ignition (CI) engines to be regulated under 40
CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ.  This meeting summary will be available in
the docket for this rulemaking (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0708).
The proposed rule for existing stationary RICE was published in the
Federal Register on March 5, 2009 (74 FR 9698).

2.0	ATTENDEES

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Melanie King, OAQPS/SPPD/ESG

Michael Horowitz, OGC

Engine Manufacturers Association

Joe Suchecki, EMA

Brady Winkleman, Caterpillar

Bob Stachowicz, Dresser

Matthew Fisher, Wartsila

Brian Schwandt, Cummins

Guy Moret, Cummins

Scott Heckel, Cummins

Gordon Gerber, Caterpillar

Mike Brand, Cummins

EC/R Incorporated

Bradley Nelson

3.0	SUMMARY OF MEETING

EPA assembled the meeting to discuss control options for crankcase
emissions from existing stationary CI engines.  EPA asked EMA if closed
crankcase ventilation would be a suitable option for reducing metallic
HAP from existing stationary CI engines.  EMA said that only Korea
requires crankcase ventilation systems and the requirements are only for
mobile sources.  Further, EMA stated that in the U.S. pre-2007 emission
requirements do not require the use of closed crankcase ventilation.
According to EMA, older engines have higher blowby emissions, due to
wearing of the piston rings and seals.  In addition, installation of a
closed crankcase ventilation system reduces fuel economy by
approximately 3-5% and can reduce the rated power of the engine, EMA
said.  Other issues with the installation of closed crankcase
ventilation include condensation of the collected blowby gases, freezing
of the ventilation system in cold climates, and the system cannot be
used on larger engines, according to EMA.  EMA stated that several of
the engine manufacturing companies have open or closed crankcase
ventilation products that can be used on 1993-2004 model year engines.

EMA stated that it would discuss the options that are available with EMA
members and send a recommendation to EPA.

E C/R Incorporated	Providing Environmental Technical Support Since 1989

  PAGE   \* MERGEFORMAT  2


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 99 (Friday, May 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 29701]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12465]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2677-028]

City of Kaukauna; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and
Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Request for Extension of Time.
    b. Project No: 2677-028.
    c. Date Filed: February 13, 2015.
    d. Applicant: Kaukauna Utilities (licensee).
    e. Name of Project: Badger-Rapide Croche Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: Outagamie County, Wisconsin.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a--825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Jeffery Feldt, General Manager--Kaukauna
Utilities, 777 Island Street, Kaukauna, WI 54130,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Mr. Michael T. Calloway,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests
is June 15, 2015.
    All documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See, 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. If unable to be
filed electronically, documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an
original and seven copies should be mailed to: Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters,
without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and
contact information at the end of your comments.
    Please include the project number (P-2677-028) on any comments,
motions, or recommendations filed.
    k. Description of Request: The licensee is requesting a three year
extension of time, pursuant to Article 408 of the project license
issued May 18, 2011, and Condition 9 of the Wisconsin section 401 Clean
Water Certification, to build a new boat launch area on the southern
shoreline of the Rapide Croche impoundment to include an access road,
boat ramp, parking area, pier, and an accessible ADA compliant fishing
pier with signage and lighting. This request was made so the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources can consider whether introducing
invasive species via the boat ramp may lead them to amend the state
water quality certification to remove the requirement to build a boat
ramp.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed on
the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in
the docket number field to access the document. You may also register
online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be
notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call<PHONE_NUMBER> or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is also
available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item (h)
above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS''; ``PROTESTS'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR
4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate
to project works which are the subject of the extension of time.
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. If an intervener 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. A copy of all other
filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof
of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the
Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and
385.2010.

    Dated: May 15, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-12465 Filed 5-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 60 (Tuesday, March 29, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 17422]
[FR Doc No: 2016-07084]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0034; FRL-9943-67]

Receipt of a Pesticide Petition Filed for Residues of Pesticide
Chemicals in or on Various Commodities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of filing of petition and request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces EPA's receipt of an initial filing of
a pesticide petition requesting the establishment or modification of
regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various
commodities.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 28, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0034, 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), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
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.
    3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental
justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group,
including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, EPA
seeks information on any groups or segments of the population who, as a
result of their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may
have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human health
impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticides
discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

II. What action is the agency taking?

    EPA is announcing receipt of a pesticide petition filed under
section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21
U.S.C. 346a, requesting the establishment or modification of
regulations in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in
or on various food commodities. EPA is taking public comment on the
request before responding to the petitioner. EPA is not proposing any
particular action at this time. EPA has determined that the pesticide
petition described in this document contains data or information
prescribed in FFDCA section 408(d)(2), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(2); however,
EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at
this time or whether the data supports granting of the pesticide
petition. After considering the public comments, EPA intends to
evaluate whether and what action may be warranted. Additional data may
be needed before EPA can make a final determination on this pesticide
petition.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of the petition that is the
subject of this document, prepared by the petitioner, is included in a
docket EPA has created for this rulemaking. The docket for this
petition is available at http://www.regulations.gov.
    As specified in FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), EPA
is publishing notice of the petition so that the public has an
opportunity to comment on this request for the establishment or
modification of regulations for residues of pesticides in or on food
commodities. Further information on the petition may be obtained
through the petition summary referenced in this unit.
    PP 5F8418. Southern Gardens Citrus, 1820 County Road 833,
Clewiston, FL 33440, requests to establish an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues of the microbial pesticides
Citrus tristeza virus expressing spinach defensin proteins 2, 7, and 8
alone or in various combinations (GE CTV-SoD) in or on citrus fruit
(Citrus spp., Fortunella spp., Crop Group 10-10). The petitioner
believes no analytical method is needed because an exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance is being sought.

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a.

    Dated: March 22, 2016.
Mark A. Hartman,
Acting Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division,
Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2016-07084 Filed 3-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12431-12434]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04898]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0126; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-236-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
The Boeing Company Model airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by
reports of latently failed fuel shutoff valves discovered during fuel
filter replacement. This proposed AD would require revising the
maintenance or inspection program to include new airworthiness
limitations. We are proposing this AD to detect and correct latent
failures of the fuel shutoff valve to the engine, which could result in
the inability to shut off fuel to the engine and, in case of certain
engine fires, an uncontrollable fire that could lead to wing failure.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by April 21, 2014.

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 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: Deliver to Mail address above 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 by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2014-
0126; 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 (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebel Nichols, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; phone: (425) 917-
6509; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2014-0126;
Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-236-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

    We have received reports of latently failed fuel shutoff valves
discovered during fuel filter replacement. Deficiencies in the valve
actuator design have resulted in latent failures of the fuel shutoff
valve to the engine. This condition, if not detected and corrected,
could result in latent failures of the fuel shutoff valve to the
engine, which could result in the inability to shut off fuel to the
engine and, in case of certain engine fires, an uncontrollable fire
that could lead to wing failure.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require revising the maintenance or
inspection program to include new airworthiness limitations. The
airworthiness limitations would allow an operator to perform the
operational check as either a maintenance action or a flightcrew
action. The flightcrew or maintenance crew would monitor the engine
spar valve lights for a few seconds immediately after moving the engine
fuel condition levers. Flightcrews can perform this operational check
while starting the engine or while shutting down the engine.
Maintenance crews can do this operational check as a separate action
that does not require actual starting of the engine.
    This proposed AD would require revisions to certain operator
maintenance documents to include new inspections. Compliance with these
inspections is required by section 91.403(c) of the Federal Aviation
Regulations (14 CFR 91.403(c)). For airplanes that have been previously
modified, altered, or repaired in the areas addressed by these
inspections, an operator might not be able to accomplish the
inspections described in the revisions. In this situation, to comply
with 14 CFR 91.403(c), the operator must request approval of an
alternative method of compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the
provisions of paragraph (i) of this proposed AD. The request should
include a description of changes to the proposed inspections that will
ensure the continued operational safety of the airplane.

Interim Action

    We consider this proposed AD interim action. The manufacturer is
currently developing a modification that will address the unsafe
condition identified in this proposed AD. Once this modification is
developed, approved, and available, we might consider additional
rulemaking.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 590 airplanes of U.S.
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per       Cost on U.S.
              Action                        Labor cost            Parts cost        product         operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorporating Airworthiness         1 work-hour x $85 per                  $0              $85          $50,150
 Limitation.                         hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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. Amend Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA-2014-0126; Directorate Identifier
2013-NM-236-AD.

(a) Comments Due Date

    We must receive comments by April 21, 2014.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to all The Boeing Company Model 757-200, -200PF,
-200CB, and -300 series airplanes, certificated in any category.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 2823, Fuel Selector/
Shut-off Valve.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by reports of latently failed fuel shutoff
valves discovered during fuel filter replacement. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct latent failures of the fuel shutoff
valve to the engine, which could result in the inability to shut off
fuel to the engine and, in case of certain engine fires, an
uncontrollable fire that could lead to wing failure.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Revision of Maintenance or Inspection Program

    Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, revise the
maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to add
airworthiness limitation numbers 28-AWL-ENG and 28-AWL-APU, by
incorporating the information specified in Figure 1 and Figure 2 to
paragraph (g) of this AD into the Airworthiness Limitations Section
of the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness. The initial
compliance time for accomplishing the actions specified in Figure 1
and Figure 2 to paragraph (g) of this AD is within 7 days after
accomplishing the

maintenance or inspection program revision required by this
paragraph.

  Figure 1 to Paragraph (g) of This AD: Engine Shut-Off Valve (Fuel Spar Valve) Position Indication Operational
                                                      Check
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     AWL No.          Task       Interval     Applicability                       Description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
28-AWL-ENG.......  ALI......  DAILY........  ALL............  Engine Shut-Off Valve (Fuel Spar Valve) Position
                                                               Indication Operational Check
                                                              Concern: The MOV actuator design can result in
                                                               airplanes operating with a failed MOV actuator
                                                               that is not reported. A latently failed MOV
                                                               actuator could prevent fuel shutoff to an engine.
                                                               In the event of certain engine fires, the
                                                               potential exists for an engine fire to be
                                                               uncontrollable.
                                                              Perform one of the following operational checks of
                                                               the Fuel Spar Valve position indication (unless
                                                               checked by the flight crew in a manner approved
                                                               by the principal operations inspector):
                                                              A. Operational Check during engine shutdown
                                                              1. Do an operational check of the left engine fuel
                                                               spar valve actuator.
                                                              a. As the L FUEL CONTROL switch on the quadrant
                                                               control stand is moved to the CUTOFF position,
                                                               verify the left SPAR VALVE disagreement light on
                                                               the quadrant control stand illuminates and then
                                                               goes off.
                                                              b. If the test fails (light fails to illuminate),
                                                               before further flight, repair faults as required
                                                               (refer to Boeing Airplane Maintenance Manual
                                                               (AMM) 28-22-11).
                                                              2. Do an operational check of the right engine
                                                               fuel spar valve actuator.
                                                              a. As the R FUEL CONTROL switch on the quadrant
                                                               control stand is moved to the CUTOFF position,
                                                               verify the right SPAR VALVE disagreement light on
                                                               the quadrant control stand illuminates and then
                                                               goes off.
                                                              b. If the test fails (light fails to illuminate),
                                                               before further flight, repair faults as required
                                                               (refer to Boeing AMM 28-22-11).
                                                              B. Operational check during engine start
                                                              1. Do an operational check of the left engine fuel
                                                               spar valve actuator.
                                                              a. As the L FUEL CONTROL switch on the quadrant
                                                               control stand is moved to the RUN position,
                                                               verify the left SPAR VALVE disagreement light on
                                                               the quadrant control stand illuminates and then
                                                               goes off.
                                                              b. If the test fails (light fails to illuminate),
                                                               before further flight, repair faults as required
                                                               (refer to Boeing AMM 28-22-11).
                                                              2. Do an operational check of the right engine
                                                               fuel spar valve actuator.
                                                              a. As the R FUEL CONTROL switch on the quadrant
                                                               control stand is moved to the RUN position,
                                                               verify the right SPAR VALVE disagreement light on
                                                               the quadrant control stand illuminates and then
                                                               goes off.
                                                              b. If the test fails (light fails to illuminate),
                                                               before further flight, repair faults as required
                                                               (refer to Boeing AMM 28-22-11).
                                                              C. Operational check without engine operation
                                                              1. Make sure all fuel pump switches on the
                                                               Overhead Panel are in the OFF position.
                                                              2. If the APU is running, open and collar the L
                                                               FWD FUEL BOOST PUMP (C00372) circuit breaker on
                                                               the Main Power Distribution Panel.
                                                              3. Make sure LEFT and RIGHT ENG FIRE switches on
                                                               the Aft Aisle Stand are in the NORMAL (IN)
                                                               position.
                                                              4. Make sure L and R Engine Start Selector
                                                               Switches on the Overhead Panel are in the OFF
                                                               position.
                                                              5. Do an operational check of the left engine fuel
                                                               spar valve actuator.
                                                              a. Move L FUEL CONTROL switch on the quadrant
                                                               control stand to the RUN position and wait 10
                                                               seconds.
                                                              NOTE: It is normal under this test condition for
                                                               the ENG VALVE disagreement light on the quadrant
                                                               control stand to stay illuminated.
                                                              b. Move L FUEL CONTROL switch on the quadrant
                                                               control stand to the CUTOFF position.
                                                              c. Verify the left SPAR VALVE disagreement light
                                                               on the quadrant control stand illuminates and
                                                               then goes off.
                                                              d. If the test fails (light fails to illuminate),
                                                               before further flight, repair faults as required
                                                               (refer to Boeing AMM 28-22-11).
                                                              6. Do an operational check of the right engine
                                                               fuel spar valve actuator.
                                                              a. Move R FUEL CONTROL switch on the quadrant
                                                               control stand to the RUN position and wait 10
                                                               seconds.
                                                              NOTE: It is normal under this test condition for
                                                               the ENG VALVE disagreement light on the quadrant
                                                               control stand to stay illuminated.
                                                              b. Move R FUEL CONTROL switch on the quadrant
                                                               control stand to the CUTOFF position.
                                                              c. Verify the right SPAR VALVE disagreement light
                                                               on the quadrant control stand illuminates and
                                                               then goes off.
                                                              d. If the test fails, (light fails to illuminate),
                                                               before further flight, repair faults as required
                                                               (refer to Boeing AMM 28-22-11).
                                                              7. If the L FWD FUEL BOOST PUMP circuit breaker
                                                               was collared in step C.2., remove collar and
                                                               close.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

           Figure 2 to Paragraph (g) of This AD: APU Fuel Valve Position Indication Operational Check
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     AWL No.          Task       Interval     Applicability                       Description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
28-AWL-APU.......  ALI......  10 DAYS......  ALL............  APU Fuel Valve Position Indication Operational
                                                               Check
                                                              Concern: The MOV actuator design can result in
                                                               airplanes operating with a failed MOV actuator
                                                               that is not reported. A latently failed MOV
                                                               actuator could prevent fuel shutoff to the APU.
                                                               In the event of certain APU fires, the potential
                                                               exists for an APU fire to be uncontrollable.
                                                              Perform the operational check of the APU Fuel
                                                               Valve position indication (unless checked by the
                                                               flight crew in a manner approved by the principal
                                                               operations inspector).
                                                              A. Operational check of the APU Fuel Valve
                                                               position indication
                                                              1. If the APU is running, unload and shut down the
                                                               APU using standard practices.
                                                              2. Make sure the APU FIRE switch on the Aft Aisle
                                                               Stand is in the NORMAL (IN) position.
                                                              3. Make sure there is at least 700 lbs (300 kgs)
                                                               of fuel in the Left Main Tank.
                                                              4. Move APU Selector switch on the Overhead Panel
                                                               to the ON position and wait 10 seconds.
                                                              5. Move APU Selector switch on the Overhead Panel
                                                               to the OFF position.
                                                              6. Verify the APU FAULT light on the Overhead
                                                               Panel illuminates and then goes off.
                                                              7. If the test fails (light fails to illuminate),
                                                               before further flight requiring APU availability,
                                                               repair faults as required (refer to Boeing AMM 28-
                                                               25-11).
                                                              NOTE: Dispatch may be permitted per MMEL 28-25-02
                                                               if APU is not required for flight.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(h) No Alternative Actions and Intervals

    After accomplishment of the maintenance or inspection program
revision required by paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative
actions (e.g., inspections) or intervals may be used unless the
actions or intervals are approved as an alternative method of
compliance (AMOC) in accordance with the procedures specified in
paragraph (i)(1) of this AD.

(i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO)
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (j) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(j) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Rebel Nichols,
Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, FAA, Seattle
Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA
98057-3356; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Issued in Renton, Washington, on February 21, 2014.
John P. Piccola,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2014-04898 Filed 3-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P