[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 138 (Thursday, July 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 46790]
[FR Doc No: 2023-15424]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 5867-054]

Alice Falls Hydro, LLC; Notice of Settlement Agreement and
Soliciting Comments

    Take notice that the following settlement agreement has been filed
with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Settlement Agreement.
    b. Project No.: 5867-054.
    c. Date Filed: July 7, 2023.
    d. Applicant: Alice Falls Hydro, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: Alice Falls Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The existing project is located on the Ausable River
in Clinton and Essex counties, New York.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Rule 602 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.602.
    h. Applicant Contact: David Fox, Senior Director, Regulatory
Affairs. Alice Falls Hydro, LLC, Eagle Creek Renewable Energy, LLC,
7315 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1100W, Bethesda, Maryland;<PHONE_NUMBER>
or [email protected].
    i. FERC Contact: Kelly Wolcott,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing comments: August 13, 2023. Reply comments
due August 28, 2023.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments using the Commission's eFiling system at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/FERCOnline.aspx. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/QuickComment.aspx. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a paper copy.
Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via
any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville,
Maryland 20852. The first page of any filing should include docket
number P-5867-054.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing
documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each
person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an
intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to
the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a
particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document
on that resource agency.
    k. Alice Falls Hydro, LLC filed the Settlement Agreement for the
project's relicense proceeding, on behalf of itself; the U.S.
Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; the New
York State Department of Environmental Conservation; and the New York
State Council of Trout Unlimited. The purpose of the Settlement
Agreement is to resolve, among the signatories, relicensing issues
related to project operation, fisheries, wildlife, water quality, and
recreation. The Settlement Agreement includes proposed terms and
conditions for run-of-river operation, minimum flow requirements,
operation compliance monitoring, downstream fish passage and exclusion,
sediment management, project recreation, an Invasive Species Management
Plan, and a Bat and Eagle Protection Plan. Alice Falls Hydro, LLC
requests that any license issued by the Commission for the Alice Falls
Hydroelectric Project contain conditions consistent with the provisions
of the Settlement Agreement and within the scope of its regulatory
authority.
    l. A copy of the Settlement Agreement may be viewed on the
Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits, in the
docket number field to access the document (i.e., P-5867). At this
time, the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room. For assistance, contact FERC at
[email protected] or call toll free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY
(202) 502-8659.
    You may also register online at https://www.ferc.gov/ferc-online/overview to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related
to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online
Support.
    m. The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes. For
public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: July 14, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-15424 Filed 7-19-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Linda Chappell/ RTP/ USEPA/ US 06/ 08/ 2005 05: 40 PM To Arthur_ G._ Fraas@ omb. eop. gov, Amy_ E._ Flynn@ omb. eop. gov, Keith_ B._ Belton@ omb. eop. gov, Margo_ Schwab@ omb. eop. gov, Edmond_ Toy@ omb. eop. gov cc Jeff Holmstead/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Bill Wehrum/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Rob Brenner/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Lydia Wegman/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Joe Paisie/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Ron Evans/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Kathy Kaufman/ RTP/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Stephanie Daigle/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Al McGartland/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Chris Dockins/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA, Brian Heninger/ DC/ USEPA/ US@ EPA Subject BART RIA Hi Art, Amy, Keith, Margo, and Edmond,

A revised draft of the BART RIA is attached. This draft incorporates those changes we discussed prior to April 15. Since our interactions during the week of April 15 were a bit hurried, there is the some possibility that minor last minute changes discussed may not be fully complete. Please know our intent was to make all edits that were agreed upon during our discussions. The document also modifies the labels of the regulatory alternatives from ' option' to ' scenario' as requested and incorporates other changes discussed by Edmond and Larry Sorrels. One additional appendix is currently being generated. Appendix G includes details of the additional non EGU alternative scenarios of $ 2000 and $ 3000 per ton cost caps analyzed since April 15. This appendix should be complete tomorrow and will be sent to you in a separate email.

If you have questions, comments, or need additional information, please contact me.

Have a lovely evening, Linda ______________________ Linda M. Chappell PhD US EPA MC C 339 01 RTP, NC 27711 telephone 919.541.2864 fax 919.541.0839


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 93 (Monday, May 14, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28238-28240]
[FR Doc No: 2012-11027]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0998; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-046-AD;
Amendment 39-17042; AD 2012-09-07]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Airbus Model A319-111, -112, and -132 airplanes; Model A320-111, -211,
-212, -214 and -232 airplanes; and Model A321-111, -211, -212, and -231
airplanes. This AD was prompted by reports that corrosion was found on
the overwing refueling aperture on the top wing skin, and that for
certain airplanes, repairs made using primer coating may prevent proper
electrical bonding provision between the overwing refueling cap adaptor
and the wing skin. This AD requires performing an electrical bonding
test between the gravity fill re-fuel adaptor and the top skin panels
on the left-hand and right-hand wings, and if necessary performing a
general visual inspection for corrosion of the component interface and
adjacent area, and repairing the gravity fuel adaptor if any corrosion
is found. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct corrosion and
improper bonding, which in combination with a lightning strike in this
area, could create a source of ignition in a fuel tank, resulting in a
fire or explosion, and consequent loss of the airplane.

DATES: This AD becomes effective June 18, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of June 18,
2012.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1405; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on October 5, 2011 (76
FR 61641). That NPRM proposed to require correct an unsafe condition
for the specified products. The MCAI states:

    Cases of corrosion findings have been reported on the overwing
refueling aperture (used to fill the fuel tank by gravity) on the
wing top skin. The reported corrosion was on the mating surface of
the aperture flange, underneath the refuel adaptor. Corrosion
findings have been repaired on a case by case basis in accordance
with approved data.
    For certain aeroplanes (identified by MSN in the applicability
section of this [European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)] AD, the
provided repair contained instructions to apply primer coating on
the mating surface. Since doing those repairs, it has been found
that this primer coating may prevent proper electrical bonding
provision between the overwing refuelling cap adaptor and the wing
skin.
    This condition, if not corrected, could, in combination with a
lightning strike in this area, create a source of ignition in a fuel
tank, possibly resulting in a fire or explosion and consequent loss
of the aeroplane.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires a one-
time electrical bonding check between the gravity fill re-fuel
adaptor and the top skin panels on the affected aeroplanes and, in
case of findings [a general visual inspection for corrosion of the
component interface and adjacent area], the application of the
associated corrective actions [i.e. repair].

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

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We have considered the comments received.

Request To Permit a Ferry Flight

    US Airways stated that there currently is no fly-back allowance in
the NPRM (76 FR 61641, October 5, 2011). US Airways also stated that
this makes it difficult for airlines to schedule the inspection
quickly, which is the most desirable situation.
    We infer that US Airways is requesting a ferry flight permit. We
partially agree with this request. Unless otherwise specified in the
AD, special flight permits are currently allowed under section 39.23 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39.23). No change is therefore
necessary to the AD regarding this issue.

Request That the FAA Accept Published Service Repair Manual (SRM)
Repairs as an FAA-Approved Corrective Action for Compliance With the AD

    US Airways stated that it asked Airbus to provide an SRM repair for
expected findings, and that it has been informed by Airbus that a
repair design was expected to be published in the February 2012
revision of the SRM. US Airways requested that a statement in the final
rule be added to acknowledge that published SRM repairs are a FAA-
approved corrective action for the proposed AD (76 FR 61641, October 5,
2011).
    We partially agree with US Airways' request. We understand US
Airways' concern regarding the unavailability of repair procedures and
its effect on their scheduling of repairs since a discrepancy requires
repair before further flight. However, we cannot provide approval of
future SRM repairs in an AD by using the phrase, ``or later FAA-
approved revisions,'' because it violates the Office of the Federal
Register regulations for approving materials that are incorporated by
reference. However, we consider that service information (including SRM
repair) approved by EASA (or its delegated agent) is equivalent to FAA-
approved corrective action for this AD, if it meets the certification
basis of the affected airplanes and mitigates the unsafe condition
addressed in this AD. We have not changed this AD in this regard.

Request To Revise the Costs of Compliance

    United Airlines requested that the ``Costs of Compliance'' section
of the NPRM (76 FR 61641, October 5, 2011) be revised. United Airlines
stated that under the ``Costs of Compliance'' section in the NPRM, an
estimate of 6 work-hours is specified to comply with the NPRM. United
Airlines stated that Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1152, dated June
14, 2010, specifies a total of 12.5 work-hours to accomplish this
inspection. United Airlines stated that Airbus Service Bulletin A320-
57-1152, dated June 14, 2010, provides a more accurate representation
of the work-hours required for this task, and it requests that the FAA
justify its proposed estimate of 6 work-hours required to comply with
the NPRM.
    In addition, United Airlines stated that, when accomplishing
paragraph (g)(2) of the NPRM (76 FR 61641, October 5, 2011), which
requires performing a general visual inspection for corrosion if the
resistance value is greater than 10 milliOhms, the operator is directed
to section. 3.C.(2) of the Accomplishment Instructions, Subtask 571152-
832-401-001--Removal of Primer--Inspection for Corrosion, of Airbus
Service Bulletin A320-57-1152, dated June 14, 2010. United Airlines
stated that this subtask's ``Manpower Resources'' chart specifies that
it takes ``5 man-hours and 2.5 hours elapsed time'' to complete that
part of that service bulletin, and that under this subtask, Step (a),
among other actions, requires defueling and venting of the two fuel
tanks. United Airlines also stated that operator experience has shown
that this procedure alone takes about ``8 man-hours and 4 hours of
elapsed time.'' United Airlines stated it understands that it is not
standard practice to propose manufacturers' service bulletin changes
through the FAA, but it would like to offer a more accurate estimate of
at least ``10 man-hours and 6 hours elapsed time,'' in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-
1152, dated June 14, 2010.
    We agree with United Airlines' request to revise the ``Costs of
Compliance'' section of this AD. We have clarified the ``Costs of
Compliance'' section by estimating that it would take about 2 work-
hours to perform the initial action (electrical bonding test). In
addition, we have estimated that it would take about 12 work-hours to
perform the follow-on actions (inspection for corrosion and repair). We
have changed this AD accordingly.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comments received,
and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
the AD as proposed-except for minor editorial changes. We have
determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (76 FR 61641, October 5, 2011) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (76 FR 61641, October 5, 2011).

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 67 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take about 2 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements (electrical bonding test) of this
AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of this AD to the U.S. operators to be
$11,390, or $170 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions
(inspection for corrosion and repair) would take about 12 work-hours
and require parts costing $0, for a cost of $1,020 per product. We have
no way of determining the number of products that may need these
actions.

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

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations office
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket

contains the NPRM (76 FR 61641, October 5, 2011), the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is
in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket
shortly after receipt.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2012-09-07 Airbus: Amendment 39-17042. Docket No. FAA-2011-0998;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-046-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective June 18,
2012.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Airbus Model A319-111, -112, and -132
airplanes; Model A320-111, -211, -212, -214 and -232 airplanes; and
Model A321-111, -211, -212, and -231 airplanes; certificated in any
category; having manufacturer serial numbers 0039, 0078, 0109, 0118,
0120, 0153, 0174, 0187, 0203, 0215, 0218, 0226, 0227, 0228, 0236,
0237, 0269, 0270, 0278, 0285, 0286, 0287, 0288, 0294, 0301, 0337,
0377, 0462, 0463, 0464, 0465, 0520, 0523, 0528, 0876, 0888, 0921,
0935, 0974, 1014, 1102, 1130, 1160, 1162, 1177, 1215, 1250, 1287,
1336, 1388, 1404, 1444, 1449, 1476, 1505, 1524, 1564, 1605, 1616,
1622, 1640, 1645, 1658, 1677, 1691, 1729, and 1905.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57: Wings.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports that corrosion was found on the
overwing refueling aperture on the top wing skin, and that for
certain airplanes, repairs made using primer coating may prevent
proper electrical bonding provision between the overwing refueling
cap adaptor and the wing skin. We are issuing this AD to detect and
correct corrosion and improper bonding, which in combination with a
lightning strike in this area, could create a source of ignition in
a fuel tank, resulting in a fire or explosion, and consequent loss
of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Electrical Bonding Test and General Visual Inspection if Necessary

    Within 24 months after the effective date of this AD, do an
electrical bonding test to check for bonding between the re-fuel
adaptor of the gravity fill and the top skin panels on the left-hand
and right-hand wings, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1152, dated June 14,
2010.
    (1) If the resistance value is 10 milliOhms or less at the left-
hand and right-hand wing, no further action is required.
    (2) If the resistance value is greater than 10 milliOhms at the
left-hand or right-hand wing, before further flight, do a general
visual inspection for corrosion of the component interface and
adjacent area, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1152, dated June 14, 2010. If any
corrosion is found during the inspection, before further flight,
repair the gravity fill fuel adaptor, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1152,
dated June 14, 2010; except where Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-
1152, dated June 14, 2010, specifies to contact Airbus, before
further flight, repair using a method approved by the Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA;
or the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) (or its delegated
agent).

(h) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR
39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your
principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly to the International
Branch, send it to ATTN: Sanjay Ralhan, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1405; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any approved AMOC, notify
your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal
inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district
office/certificate holding district office. The AMOC approval letter
must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(i) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI EASA Airworthiness Directive 2011-0034, dated
March 2, 2011; and Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1152, dated June
14, 2010; for related information.

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) You must use the following service information to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. The
Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference (IBR) of the following service information under 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51:
    (i) Airbus Service Bulletin A320-57-1152, dated June 14, 2010.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Airbus, Airworthiness Office--EAS, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte,
31707 Blagnac Cedex, France; telephone +33 5 61 93 36 96; fax +33 5
61 93 44 51; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.airbus.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at an NARA facility, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 30, 2012.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-11027 Filed 5-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:A 75 day comment period is insufficient time for the vaping industry and the wider vaping community to comment on the proposed deeming regulations. I would respectfully request that the period for comment be extended to 180 days. Also, while I have complete faith is the people that I get (my) nicotine juice from, I recognize the fact that there should be some regulation as to ingredients. However, most of them are smaller operations that would fold if required to meet expensive and extravagant application costs. My quality of life has improved dramatically since discovering vaping after being a smoker for 25 years. All I ask is that whatever regulations you put forth, keep the small business owners in mind, but especially keep me in mind. I was a slave to cigarettes for a long time and I don't want to do so again. One more thing, one of you proposals included regulation of mechanical devices used for vaping. Wouldn't the be like you guys regulating what type of cigarette lighters people used?


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 200 (Monday, October 17, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 64174]
[FR Doc No: 2011-26756]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2011-0149]

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

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

ACTION: Meeting Notice--National Emergency Medical Services Advisory
Council.

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

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

DATES: The meeting will be held on December 13, 2011, from 1 p.m. to 5
p.m. E.S.T., and on December 14, 2011, from 8 a.m. to 12 p.m. E.S.T. A
public comment period will take place on December 13, 2011, between
3:30 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. E.S.T. Written comments or requests to make
oral presentations must be received by December 8, 2011.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Key Bridge Marriott at 1401
Lee Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22209.
    Written comments and requests to make oral presentations at the
meeting should reach Drew Dawson or Noah Smith at the address listed
below and should be received by December 8, 2011. All submissions
received may be submitted by either one of the following methods: (1)
You may submit comments by e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or (2) you may submit comments by fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Drew Dawson, Director, U.S. Department
of Transportation, Office of Emergency Medical Services, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., NTI-140, Washington, DC 20590, telephone number
202-366-9966; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of this meeting is given under the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C.
App.). The NEMSAC will meet on Tuesday and Wednesday, December 13-14,
2011, at the Key Bridge Marriott at 1401 Lee Highway, Arlington,
Virginia 22209.

Agenda of National EMS Advisory Council Meeting, December 13-14, 2011

    The tentative agenda includes the following:

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

(1) Opening Remarks.
(2) Introduction of Members and All in Attendance.
(3) Review and Approval of Minutes of Last Meeting.
(4) Update from NHTSA Office of EMS.
(5) Presentation of the Draft Culture of Safety Strategy.
(6) Federal Partner Update.
(7) Public Comment Period.
(8) Business of the Council.

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

(1) Presentations from NEMSAC Committees.
(2) Deliberations of Committee Documents.
(3) Discussion of New and Emerging Issues.
(4) Unfinished Business/Continued Discussion from Previous Day.
(5) Next Steps and Adjourn.
    A public comment period will take place on December 13, 2011,
between 3:30 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. E.S.T.
    Public Attendance: This meeting will be open to the public. There
will not be a teleconference option for this meeting. Individuals
wishing to attend must provide their name, affiliation, phone number,
and e-mail address to Noah Smith by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> no later than December 8, 2011.
    Members of the public who wish to make comments on Tuesday,
December 13, 2011, between 3:30 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. E.S.T. are requested
to register in advance. In order to allow as many people as possible to
speak, speakers are requested to limit their remarks to 5 minutes. For
those wishing to submit written comments, please follow the procedure
noted above.
    Minutes of the NEMSAC Meeting will be available to the public
online through http://www.ems.gov.

    Issued on: October 12, 2011.
Jeffrey P. Michael,
Associate Administrator for Research and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2011-26756 Filed 10-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 211 (Thursday, October 31, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65176-65178]
[FR Doc No: 2013-25305]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1311; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-204-AD;
Amendment 39-17636; AD 2013-22-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Bombardier, Inc. Model DHC-8-102, -103, and -106 airplanes; and Model
DHC-8-200, -300, and -400 series airplanes. This AD was prompted by
reports of excessive wear found in the clevis (bolt) hole where the rod
assembly attaches to the rudder/brake pedal bellcrank, due to prolonged
fretting. This AD requires measuring the bellcrank clevis holes,
inspecting for cracking of the bellcrank, and re-working the clevis
holes with steel bushings, or replacing the bellcrank. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct a worn or cracked clevis hole, which
could cause failure of the bellcrank on one side, with subsequent
asymmetric braking and consequent runway excursion.

DATES: This AD becomes effective December 5, 2013.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of December 5,
2013.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=FAA-2012-1311; or in person at the
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Bombardier,
Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt Boulevard, Toronto,
Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet http://www.bombardier.com. You may view this referenced service information at
the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luke Walker, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe and Mechanical Systems Branch, ANE-171, FAA, New York Aircraft
Certification Office, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, New
York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to the specified products. The
NPRM was published in the Federal Register on December 26, 2012 (77 FR
75906). The NPRM proposed to correct an unsafe condition for the
specified products. Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is
the aviation authority for Canada, issued Canadian Airworthiness
Directive CF-2011-32, dated August 15, 2011 (referred to after this as
the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''),
to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI
states:

    There have been several in-service reports of excessive wear
found in the bolt [clevis] hole where the rod assembly, Part Numbers
(P/N) 82710795-001 or 82710024-003, is attached to the rudder/brake
pedal bellcrank. An investigation revealed that the wear was
attributed to prolonged fretting.
    Failure of the bellcrank on one side could lead to asymmetric
braking and may lead to runway excursion.
    This [Canadian] directive mandates [measuring clevis holes for
length, and, for certain bellcranks, doing a liquid penetrant
inspection for cracking, and] the re-work [by installing steel
bushings] or replacement of each bellcrank, P/N 82710022-001/-002,
82710029-001/-002, 82710813-001/-002 and 82710814-001/-002, found
with a worn [or cracked] bolt hole.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2012-1311-0002.

Revised Service Information

    Bombardier, Inc. has issued Service Bulletin 84-27-55, Revision A,
dated February 22, 2012. The NPRM (77 FR 75906, December 26, 2012)
referred to Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-27-55, dated June 15, 2011,
in paragraphs (h) and (i) of the NPRM. In this final rule, we have
revised the service bulletin references in those paragraphs
accordingly, and have added new paragraph (j) to this final rule to
give credit for actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-27-55, dated June 15,
2011 (and redesignated subsequent paragraphs accordingly).

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We have considered the comments received.

Request To Allow Use of Serviceable Parts

    An anonymous commenter requested that the references to ``new
bellcrank'' in the NPRM (77 FR 75906, December 26, 2012) be changed to
allow operators to install ``serviceable'' bellcranks (new bellcranks
or ones that have been modified according to the applicable service
information), thus giving equal safety, yet providing more flexibility
and less recordkeeping for operators.
    We agree with the commenter's request for the reasons given. We
have revised paragraphs (g)(2), (h)(2), (h)(3), (h)(4), (i)(2), (i)(3),
and (i)(4) of this AD by specifying to replace the bellcrank with a new
bellcrank ``or with a serviceable bellcrank with bushings having part
number 82710297-101 installed.'' We have also clarified paragraphs
(h)(1) and (i)(1) of this final rule by specifying to replace the
bellcrank ``with a new or with a serviceable bellcrank with bushings
having part number 82710297-101 installed.''

Request To Add Eddy Current Inspection Option

    The same anonymous commenter requested that we include an eddy
current inspection option in this final rule to agree with parallel
actions specified in Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-27-55, Revision A,
dated February 22, 2012.
    We agree with the commenter's request because Bombardier added that
inspection option in Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-27-55, Revision A,
dated February 22, 2012. Accordingly, we have added the option in
paragraphs (h) and (i) of this final rule.

Request To Clarify Compliance Times

    The same anonymous commenter, in an incomplete request, stated that
the replacement times in paragraph (h) of the NPRM (77 FR 75906,
December 26, 2012) do not sufficiently remove the identified unsafe
condition. From the truncated statement, we cannot infer what part of
paragraph (h) the commenter requested that we change. We have made no
change to this final rule in this regard.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the available data, including the comments received,
and

determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting
this AD with the changes described previously and minor editorial
changes. We have determined that these changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (77 FR 75906, December 26, 2012) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (77 FR 75906, December 26, 2012).

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 178 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it will take 5 work-hours per product to comply
with the basic requirements of this AD. The average labor rate is $85
per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD
to the U.S. operators to be $75,650, or $425 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would
take about 16 work-hours and require parts costing up to $2,532, for a
cost of $3,892 per product. Where the service information lists
required parts costs that are covered under warranty, we have assumed
that there will be no charge for these parts. As we do not control
warranty coverage for affected parties, some parties may incur costs
higher than estimated here. We have no way of determining the number of
products that may need these actions.

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

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2012-1311-0002; or in
person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains
this AD, the MCAI, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received,
and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations
office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new AD:

2013-22-04 Bombardier, Inc.: Amendment 39-17636. Docket No. FAA-
2012-1311; Directorate Identifier 2011-NM-204-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective December 5,
2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Bombardier, Inc. airplanes, certificated in
any category, as specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this
AD.
    (1) Model DHC-8-102, -103, -106, -201, -202, -301, -311, and -
315 airplanes: Serial numbers 003 through 672 inclusive.
    (2) Model DHC-8-400, -401, and -402 airplanes: Serial numbers
4003 through 4372 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 27: Flight
controls.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by reports of excessive wear found in the
clevis (bolt) hole where the rod assembly attaches to the rudder/
brake pedal bellcrank, due to prolonged fretting. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct a worn or cracked clevis hole, which
could cause failure of the bellcrank on one side, with subsequent
asymmetric braking and consequent runway excursion.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Actions for Model DHC-8-100, -200, and -300 Series Airplanes

    For Model DHC-8-102, -103, -106, -201, -202, -301, -311, and -
315 airplanes: Within 6,000 flight hours or 24 months after the
effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, inspect each
bellcrank for cracking using liquid penetrant, in accordance with
the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 8-27-
111, dated June 15, 2011.
    (1) If no cracking is found: Before further flight, rework the
bellcrank, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Bombardier Service Bulletin 8-27-111, dated June 15, 2011.
    (2) If any clevis hole is greater than 0.218 inch (measured
edge-to-edge), or if any cracking is found: Before further flight,
replace the bellcrank with a new bellcrank, or with a serviceable
bellcrank with bushings having part number 82710297-101 installed,
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier
Service Bulletin 8-27-111, dated June 15, 2011.

(h) Actions for Certain Model DHC-8-400 Series Airplanes

    For Model DHC-8-400, -401, and -402 airplanes that have
accumulated less than or equal to 15,000 total flight hours as of
the effective date of this AD: Within 6,000 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD, but not to exceed 15,600 total flight
hours, measure the edge-to-edge length of the clevis holes of each
bellcrank, and inspect each bellcrank for cracking using liquid
penetrant or eddy current inspection method; in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-27-55,
Revision A, dated February 22, 2012.

    (1) If no cracking is found, and the edge-to-edge length of all
clevis holes is less than or equal to 0.218 inch: Within 6,000
flight hours after the effective date of this AD, but not to exceed
15,600 total flight hours, rework the bellcrank, or replace the
bellcrank with a new bellcrank or with a serviceable bellcrank with
bushings having part number 82710297-101 installed, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin
84-27-55, Revision A, dated February 22, 2012.
    (2) If no cracking is found, and any clevis hole edge-to-edge
length is greater than 0.218 inch, but is less than or equal to
0.248 inch: Within 6,000 flight hours after the effective date of
this AD, replace the bellcrank with a new bellcrank, or with a
serviceable bellcrank with bushings having part number 82710297-101
installed, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-27-55, Revision A, dated February 22,
2012.
    (3) If no cracking is found, and any clevis hole edge-to-edge
length is greater than 0.248 inch, but is less than or equal to
0.278 inch: Within 1,200 flight hours after doing the measurement/
inspection required by paragraph (h) of this AD, replace the
bellcrank with a new bellcrank, or with a serviceable bellcrank with
bushings having part number 82710297-101 installed, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin
84-27-55, Revision A, dated February 22, 2012.
    (4) If any cracking is found, or if any clevis hole edge-to-edge
length exceeds 0.278 inch: Before further flight, replace the
bellcrank with a new bellcrank, or with a serviceable bellcrank with
bushings having part number 82710297-101 installed, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin
84-27-55, Revision A, dated February 22, 2012.

(i) Actions for Certain Other Model DHC-8-400 Series Airplanes

    For Model DHC-8-400, -401, and -402 airplanes that have
accumulated more than 15,000 total flight hours as of the effective
date of this AD: Within 600 flight hours after the effective date of
this AD, measure the edge-to-edge length of the clevis holes of each
bellcrank, and inspect each bellcrank for cracking using liquid
penetrant or eddy current inspection method; in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-27-55,
Revision A, dated February 22, 2012.
    (1) If no cracking is found, and the edge-to-edge length of all
clevis holes is less than or equal to 0.218 inch: Within 1,200
flight hours after the effective date of this AD, rework the
bellcrank, or replace the bellcrank with a new bellcrank or with a
serviceable bellcrank with bushings having part number 82710297-101
installed, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-27-55, Revision A, dated February 22,
2012.
    (2) If no cracking is found, and any clevis hole edge-to-edge
length is greater than 0.218, inch but is less than or equal to
0.248 inch: Within 6,000 flight hours after the effective date of
this AD, replace the bellcrank with a new bellcrank, or with a
serviceable bellcrank with bushings having part number 82710297-101
installed, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-27-55, Revision A, dated February 22,
2012.
    (3) If no cracking is found, and any clevis hole edge-to-edge
length is greater than 0.248 inch, but is less than or equal to
0.278 inch: Within 1,200 flight hours after the effective date of
this AD, replace the bellcrank with a new bellcrank, or with a
serviceable bellcrank with bushings having part number 82710297-101
installed, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-27-55, Revision A, dated February 22,
2012.
    (4) If any cracking is found, or any clevis hole edge-to-edge
length exceeds 0.278 inch: Before further flight, replace the
bellcrank with a new bellcrank, or with a serviceable bellcrank with
bushings having part number 82710297-101 installed, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin
84-27-55, Revision A, dated February 22, 2012.

(j) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the actions specified in
paragraphs (h) and (i) of this AD, if those actions were performed
before the effective date of this AD using the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-27-55, dated June 15,
2011.

(k) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager, New
York Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), ANE-170, 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 ACO, send it to ATTN: Program Manager, Continuing
Operational Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite
410, Westbury, New York 11590; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (516)
794-5531. Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office. The AMOC approval letter must specifically
reference this AD.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority
(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(l) Related Information

    (1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) Canadian Airworthiness Directive CF-2011-32, dated August 15,
2011, for related information. The MCAI can be found in the AD
docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2012-1311-0002.
    (2) Service information identified in this AD that is not
incorporated by reference may be obtained at the addresses specified
in paragraphs (m)(3) and (m)(4) of this AD.

(m) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 8-27-111, dated June 15, 2011.
    (ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 84-27-55, Revision A, dated
February 22, 2012.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Bombardier, Inc., Q-Series Technical Help Desk, 123 Garratt
Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
http://www.bombardier.com.
    (4) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA.
For information on the availability of this material at the FAA,
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 30, 2013.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-25305 Filed 10-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 107 (Tuesday, June 6, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25962-25964]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11621]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2017-0300]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Upper Mississippi River, Minneapolis and St. Paul,
MN

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
Upper Mississippi River (UMR) between miles 846 and 847. This action is
necessary to provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters
near Minneapolis and St. Paul, MN during a rope pull event on June 10,
2017. This temporary safety zone is necessary to protect persons and
property from potential damage and safety hazards during a rope pull
event across the UMR. During the period of enforcement, entry into the
safety zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain
of the Port Upper Mississippi River (COTP) or a designated
representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. on June 10, 2017.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2017-0300 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
rulemaking, call or email LCDR Sean Peterson, Chief of Prevention, U.S.
Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code
UMR Upper Mississippi River

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary 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 good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. We must
establish this safety zone by June 10, 2017 and lack sufficient time to
provide a reasonable comment period and then consider those comments
before issuing the rule.

    During the hours of 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. on June 10, 2017, the
sponsors of the ``Pulling Together'' event will be stretching a rope
across the UMR from Minneapolis, MN to St. Paul, MN at river mile 846.5
for multiple tug-of-war competitions. After full review of the details
for event, the Coast Guard determined action is needed to protect
people and property from the safety hazards associated with the rope
pull event across the UMR in Minneapolis and St. Paul, MN.
    We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast
Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective
date of the rule is contrary to the public interest as it would delay
the security measures necessary to respond to potential safety hazards
associated with the planned rope pull event.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The COTP has determined that potential hazards associated with
the rope pull event will be a safety concern before, during, and after
the event. The purpose of this rule is to ensure safety of vessels,
people and property on the navigable waters in the safety zone before,
during, and after the scheduled event.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. on June
10, 2017. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters between miles
846 and 847 on the Upper Mississippi River (UMR) in Minneapolis and St.
Paul, MN. Exact times of the closures and any changes to the planned
schedule will be communicated to mariners using Broadcast and Local
Notice to Mariners. There are at least two planned intermissions to the
event, during which an event boat will be tending the rope to allow for
vessel traffic to pass through the area of the closure, thus limiting
the impact to vessel traffic affected by the closure. The safety zone
is intended to ensure the safety of vessels on these navigable waters
before, during and after the rope pull event. No vessel or person will
be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from
the Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi River (COTP) or a designated
representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive Orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive Orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. These rules have not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, they have not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
    This temporary final rule establishes a safety zone impacting a one
mile area on the UMR for a limited time period of five hours. During
the enforcement period, vessels are prohibited from entering into or
remaining within the safety zone unless specifically authorized by the
COTP or other designated representative. Based on the location, limited
safety zone area, and short duration of the enforcement period, this
rule does not pose a significant regulatory impact. Additionally,
notice of the safety zone or any changes in the planned schedule will
be made via Broadcast and Local Notice to Mariners. Entry into this
safety zone may be requested from the COTP or other designated
representative and will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A. above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding these rules. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    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.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has 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. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, 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. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. 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.

F. 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 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that
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 involves a safety zone lasting five hours that will prohibit entry
from mile 846 to 847 on the UMR on June 10, 2017. It is categorically
excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the
Commandant Instruction. A Record of Environmental Consideration are
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

    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. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0300 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0300  Safety Zone; Upper Mississippi River, Minneapolis
and St. Paul, MN.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters of the Upper Mississippi River between miles 846 and 847,
Minneapolis and St. Paul, MN.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, a designated
representative means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast
Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard
vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or
assisting the Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi River (COTP) in the
enforcement of the safety zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in
Sec.  165.23 of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described
in paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative.
    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's
representative via VHF-FM channel 16, or through Coast Guard Sector
Upper Mississippi River at<PHONE_NUMBER>. Those in the safety zone must
comply with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP
or the COTP's designated representative.
    (d) Effective period. This section will be effective from 10 a.m.
to 3 p.m. on June 10, 2017.
    (e) Informational broadcasts. The COTP or a designated
representative will inform the public through broadcast notices to
mariners of the enforcement period for the safety zone as well as any
changes in the dates and times of enforcement.

    Dated: May 31, 2017.
M.L. Malloy,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Upper
Mississippi.
[FR Doc. 2017-11621 Filed 6-5-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: July 15, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 134)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 34239-34241]
[DOCID:fr15jy09-15]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[USCG-2009-0233]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Manasquan River, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is removing the existing drawbridge operation
regulation for the Route 70 Bridge, mile 3.4, across Manasquan River at
Riviera Beach, NJ. The existing bridge has been modified by permit from
a movable bridge to a fixed bridge. Since the bridge is no longer a
movable bridge, the regulation controlling the opening and closing of
the bridge in no longer necessary.

DATES: This rule is effective July 15, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket, are part of docket USCG-2009-0233 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, selecting the Advanced Docket
Search option on the right side of the screen, inserting USCG-2009-0233
in the Docket ID box, pressing Enter, and then clicking on the item in
the Docket ID column. This material is 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 rule,
call Waverly W. Gregory, Jr., Bridge Administrator, Fifth Coast Guard
District, at<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard is issuing this 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 good cause exists for not publishing a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect to this rule because the bridge
that the regulation governed has been modified from a movable bridge to
a fixed bridge and does not open for the passage of vessels.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective in less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register because this rule removes the
regulation used for the operation of a movable bridge that has been
modified to become a fixed bridge. The modification has already taken
place and the removal of the regulation will not affect mariners.

Background and Purpose

    On September 23, 2005, a Coast Guard Bridge Permit (2-05-5) was
issued to the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT) to
replace the existing single-leaf bascule bridge, which carries Route 70
over Manasquan River at Riviera Beach, NJ, with a new fixed bridge.
NJDOT completed construction for a new fixed bridge in December 2008.

    Since the bridge has been modified to a fixed bridge, a special
operating regulation for a movable bridge is unnecessary. This final
rule removes the operating regulation regarding the Route 70 Bridge.

Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is changing the regulation in 33 CFR 117 without
publishing an NPRM. The change removes the regulation governing a
movable bridge that was modified to a fixed bridge that does not open
for the passage of 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 or 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. This rule is not ``significant'' under
the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS). We expect the economic impact of this rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under the regulatory policies
and procedures of DHS is unnessary. This rule merely removes an
operating regulation for a movable bridge that was modified to a fixed
bridge and no longer opens for the passage of vessels. Therefore, the
operating regulation is unnecessary and its removal will not have a de
minimis economic impact.

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. Since the bridge is no longer a movable bridge, the
regulation controlling the opening and closing of the bridge is no
longer necessary. Hence this action removing the operating regulation
of the bridge will have no economic impact on small entities.

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 could 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 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 affect 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,
eliminates 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 would not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
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 would 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 M16475.1D which
guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
that this action is one of a category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e) of the Instruction.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are not required for this rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

Sec.  117.727  [Amended]

0
2. Section 117.727 is removed.

    Dated: June 15, 2009.
Fred M. Rosa, Jr.,
Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard Commander, Fifth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. E9-16833 Filed 7-14-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 56 (Monday, March 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15995-15996]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06374]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9908-40-OCFO]

Environmental Financial Advisory Board (EFAB) Charter Renewal

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Charter Renewal.

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

    The Charter for the Environmental Protection Agency's Environmental
Financial Advisory Board (EFAB) will be renewed for an additional two-
year period, as a necessary committee which is in the public interest,
in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2. The purpose of EFAB is to provide advice and
recommendations to the Administrator of EPA on issues associated with
environmental financing. It is determined that EFAB is in the public
interest in connection with

the performance of duties imposed on the Agency by law.
    Inquiries may be directed to Vanessa Bowie, Staff Director, Center
for Environmental Finance, U.S. EPA, William Jefferson Clinton Federal
Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460 (Mailcode
2731A), Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: March 12, 2014.
David Bloom,
Acting Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Office of the Chief Financial
Officer.
[FR Doc. 2014-06374 Filed 3-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 88 (Wednesday, May 7, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 26244]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10424]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project Nos. 2183-072]

Grand River Dam Authority; Notice of Availability of
Environmental Assessment

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
regulations, 18 CFR part 380, the Office of Energy Projects has
reviewed a shoreline management plan submitted by Grand River Dam
Authority (GRDA or licensee) pursuant to article 406 of the project
license (FERC No. 2183). An environmental assessment (EA) has been
prepared as part of staff's review of the proposal. The project is
located on the Grand River in Mayes County, Oklahoma.
    The proposed shoreline management plan provides for consistent land
management policies and permitting decisions on project lands in the
short term and over the life of the project license. The document
serves to guide GRDA in protecting and enhancing the project's
environmental, recreational, and other values. It also provides the
background to support permitting decisions and other activities
undertaken by GRDA within the project boundary. The EA contains
Commission staff's analysis of the probable environmental impacts of
implementation of the proposed shoreline management plan, and concludes
that approval of the proposed plan would not constitute a major federal
action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
    The EA is attached to a Commission order titled ``Order Modifying
and Approving Shoreline Management Plan Under Article 406,'' which was
issued April 30, 2014, and is available for review and reproduction at
the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street
NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426. The EA may also be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number (P-2183) in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659.

    Dated: April 30, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-10424 Filed 5-6-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P