[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 201 (Tuesday, October 18, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71631-71633]
[FR Doc No: 2016-24912]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0522; FRL-9954-21-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Removal of Gasoline Vapor Recovery
Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving, as a
revision under the Clean Air Act (CAA) to the Ohio state implementation
plan (SIP), submittals from the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(Ohio EPA) dated July 15, 2015, and February 29, 2016. The revision
addresses the state's Stage II vapor recovery (Stage II) program for
the Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Dayton ozone areas in Ohio. The revision
removes Stage II requirements for the three areas as a component of the
Ohio ozone SIP. The revision also includes a demonstration that
addresses emission

impacts associated with the removal of the Stage II program. EPA
proposed to approve the state's submittal on June 30, 2016, and
received no comments.

DATES: This final rule is effective on November 17, 2016.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0522. All documents in the docket are listed in
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not
placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either through
http://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francisco J. Acevedo, Mobile Source
Program Manager, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

I. What is being addressed by this document?

    On June 30, 2016, at 81 FR 42597, EPA proposed to approve
amendments to OAC 3745-21-09 (DDD) that remove Stage II requirements
from the Ohio ozone SIP and allow gasoline dispensing facilities
currently implementing Stage II in the Cleveland, Cincinnati and Dayton
areas to decommission their systems by 2017. The revision included
amended copies of OAC 3745-21-09 (DDD), as adopted on April 29, 2013,
and January 17, 2014; a summary of Ohio-specific calculations, based on
EPA guidance, used to calculate program benefits and demonstrate
widespread use of onboard refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) in Ohio; and
a CAA section 110(l) demonstration that includes documentation that
analyzes the period, 2013-2017, when Stage II requirements were waived
in Ohio but widespread use of ORVR has not yet occurred.

II. What comments did we receive on the proposed SIP revision?

    EPA provided a 30-day review and comment period on the proposed
action. The comment period closed on August 1, 2016. EPA received no
comments.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving revisions to the Ohio ozone SIP submitted by the
state dated July 15, 2015, and February 29, 2016, for the state's Stage
II program in Ohio. EPA finds that the revisions will not interfere
with any applicable requirement concerning attainment, reasonable
further progress or any other applicable CAA requirement.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Ohio
Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
below. Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for
inclusion in the SIP, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into
that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113
of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's
approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the
Federal Register in the next update to the SIP compilation.\1\ EPA has
made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available
through www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region 5 Office (please
contact the person identified in the For Further Information Contact
section of this preamble for more information).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA 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 CAA. 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 Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     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 an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     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 CAA; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    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).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate

circuit by December 19, 2016. Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of
this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the
time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This
action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: October 5, 2016.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

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.

0
2. In Sec.  52.1870 the table in paragraph (c) is amended under
``Chapter 3745-21 Carbon Monoxide, Ozone, Hydrocarbon Air Quality
Standards, and Related Emission Requirements'' by revising the entry
for 3745-21-09 ``Control of Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds
from Stationary Sources and Perchloroethylene from Dry Cleaning
Facilities'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1870  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                          EPA-Approved Ohio Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Ohio effective
      Ohio citation             Title/subject              date         EPA approval date           Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Chapter 3745-21 Carbon Monoxide, Ozone, Hydrocarbon Air Quality Standards, and Related Emission Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
3745-21-09..............  Control of Emissions of         1/17/2014   10/18/2016, [Insert   except (U)(1)(h).
                           Volatile Organic                            Federal Register
                           Compounds from                              citation].
                           Stationary Sources and
                           Perchloroethylene from
                           Dry Cleaning Facilities.

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-24912 Filed 10-17-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 211 (Thursday, October 31, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58440-58441]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23754]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2019-0109]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Hearing

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 29 individuals from the
hearing requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs) to operate a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate
commerce. The exemptions enable these hard of hearing and deaf
individuals to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: The exemptions were applicable on October 10, 2019. The
exemptions expire on October 10, 2021.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Viewing Documents and Comments

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FMCSA-2019-0109 and choose the document to review. If you do
not have access to the internet, you may view the docket online by
visiting the Docket Operations in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of
the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

B. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On August 28, 2019, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt of
applications from 29 individuals requesting an exemption from the
hearing requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (84 FR
47048). The public comment period ended on October 7, 2019, and no
comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that granting exemptions to these individuals would achieve
a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would
be achieved by complying with Sec.  391.41(b)(11).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding hearing
found in Sec.  391.41(b)(11) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person first perceives a forced
whispered voice in the better ear at not less than 5 feet with or
without the use of a hearing aid or, if tested by use of an audiometric
device, does not have an average hearing loss in the better ear greater
than 40 decibels at 500 Hz, 1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz with or without a
hearing aid when the audiometric device is calibrated to American
National Standard (formerly ASA Standard) Z24.5--1951.
    This standard was adopted in 1970 and was revised in 1971 to allow
drivers to be qualified under this standard while wearing a hearing
aid, 35 FR 6458, 6463 (April 22, 1970) and 36 FR 12857 (July 3, 1971).

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

IV. Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315(b), FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the FMCSRs for no longer than a 5-year period if it finds such
exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to,
or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such
exemption. The statute also allows the Agency to renew exemptions at
the end of the 5-year period. FMCSA grants medical exemptions from the
FMCSRs for a 2-year period to align with the maximum

duration of a driver's medical certification.
    The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is
based on current medical information and literature, and the 2008
Evidence Report, ``Executive Summary on Hearing, Vestibular Function
and Commercial Motor Driving Safety.'' The evidence report reached two
conclusions regarding the matter of hearing loss and CMV driver safety:
(1) No studies that examined the relationship between hearing loss and
crash risk exclusively among CMV drivers were identified; and (2)
evidence from studies of the private driver's license holder population
does not support the contention that individuals with hearing
impairment are at an increased risk for a crash. In addition, the
Agency reviewed each applicant's driving record found in the Commercial
Driver's License Information System, for commercial driver's license
(CDL) holders, and inspections recorded in the Motor Carrier Management
Information System. For non-CDL holders, the Agency reviewed the
driving records from the State Driver's Licensing Agency. Each
applicant's record demonstrated a safe driving history. Based on an
individual assessment of each applicant that focused on whether an
equal or greater level of safety is likely to be achieved by permitting
each of these drivers to drive in interstate commerce as opposed to
restricting him or her to driving in intrastate commerce, the Agency
believes the drivers granted this exemption have demonstrated that they
do not pose a risk to public safety.
    Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these
applicants from the hearing standard in Sec.  391.41(b)(11) is likely
to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the
exemption.

V. Conditions and Requirements

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

VI. Preemption

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

VII. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the 29 exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts the following drivers from the hearing standard, Sec.
391.41(b)(11), subject to the requirements cited above.

Erin Barnes (OK)
Alicia Batiste (TX)
Jeremy Benoit (LA)
Kurt Bernabei (IL)
Jessica L. Driver (TX)
Donald P. Dunten (IN)
Steven Edwards (KS)
Debbie Gaskill (GA)
Steven J. Gandee (PA)
Daniel S. Geathers (VA)
Gregory A. Hale (AZ)
Richard Harrison (MO)
Charles Hine (MD)
Robert B. Mahan (OK)
Michael Penn (IN)
Ernest Pratt (PA)
James R. Quinn (TN)
Matthew Ramirez (SC)
Steven Robelia (WI)
Timothy Roberts (TN)
Willis O. Ryan (GA)
Kerry Stewart (IN)
Mark J. Tabangcora (CA)
Yenter Tu (TX)
Alan Vandermeulen (IA)
Yvon Victor (NJ)
Bret E. Wanner (PA)
Rodney Warfield (MD)
David Whisman (GA)

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

     Issued on: October 24, 2019.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-23754 Filed 10-30-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 59 (Wednesday, March 27, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18615-18616]
[FR Doc No: 2013-07155]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0194]

Navigation Safety Advisory Council

AGENCY: United States Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of Federal advisory committee meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Navigation Safety Advisory Council (NAVSAC) will meet
April 10-11, 2013, in Arlington, Virginia to discuss matters relating
to maritime collisions, rammings, groundings; Inland and International
Rules of the Road; navigation regulations and equipment; routing
measures; marine information; diving safety; and aids to navigation
systems. The meeting will be open to the public.

DATES: NAVSAC will meet Wednesday, April 10, 2013, from 8 a.m. to 5
p.m., and Thursday, April 11, 2013, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Please note
that the meeting may close early if the committee has completed its
business. Pre-registration and written comments are due April 1, 2013.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Navy League Building, Coast
Guard Recruiting Command, 5th floor conference room, 2300 Wilson
Boulevard, Suite 500, Arlington, Virginia 20598. All visitors to the
Navy League Building must pre-register to be admitted to the building.
You may pre-register by contacting Mr. Burt Lahn listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below.
    For information on facilities or services for individuals with
disabilities or to request special assistance at the meeting, contact
Mr. Burt Lahn listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
below as soon as possible.
    To facilitate public participation, we are inviting public comment
on the issues to be considered by the committee prior to the
formulation of recommendations as listed in the ``Agenda'' section
below. You may submit written comments no later than April 1, 2013, and
must be identified by USCG-2013-0194 using one of the following
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments (preferred method to
avoid delays in processing).
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department
of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the words
``Department of Homeland Security'' and the docket number for this
action. Comments received will be posted without alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. You
may review a Privacy Act notice regarding our public dockets in the
January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).
    Docket: For access to the docket to read documents or comments
related to this notice, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
    A public comment period will be held during the meeting on April
10, 2013, from 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. and April 11, 2013, from 11:00
a.m. until the close of the meeting. Public presentations may also be
given. Speakers are requested to limit their presentation and comments
to 10 minutes. Please note that the public comment period may end
before the time indicated, following the last call for comments. To
register as a speaker, contact Mr. Burt Lahn listed

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
meeting, please contact Mr. Mike Sollosi, the NAVSAC Alternate
Designated Federal Officer (ADFO), by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or via
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Mr. Burt Lahn, NAVSAC meeting
coordinator, at telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
If you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket,
call Barbara Hairston, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of this meeting is given under the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. (Pub. L. 92-463).
    The NAVSAC is an advisory committee authorized by 33 U.S.C. 2073
and chartered under the provisions of the FACA. NAVSAC provides advice
and recommendations to the Secretary, through the Commandant of the
U.S. Coast Guard, on matters relating to prevention of maritime
collisions, rammings, and groundings; Inland and International Rules of
the Road; navigation regulations and equipment; routing measures;
marine information; diving safety; and aids to navigation systems.
    The meeting will be held at the Navy League Building, Coast Guard
Recruiting Command, 5th floor conference room, 2300 Wilson Boulevard,
Suite 500, Arlington, Virginia 20598. http://maps.google.com/
maps?hl=en&gbv=2&um=1&ie=UTF-
8&q=navy+league+building+arlington+va&fb=1≷=us&hq=navy+league+building
&hnear=0x89b7b69d7ba7a70f:0xf8cf6fc845f6b093,Arlington,+VA&cid=0,0,16025
978759884607342&sa=X&ei=c-4YUcGuKcy50AH0nYGgDQ&ved=0CCIQtQMwAg.
    Agenda: The NAVSAC will meet to review, discuss and formulate
recommendations on the following topics: Wednesday, April 10, 2013:
    (1) Update on all past Resolutions to the Council. The Council will
receive an update on the status of all outstanding resolutions and open
action items.
    (2) Risk assessment updates. The Coast Guard is currently
conducting formal risk assessments for several U.S. ports/waterways.
The Council will receive a briefing on why the risk assessments were
initiated, how they are being conducted, what the risk assessments will
produce, and how the Coast Guard will act on the results.
    (3) E-Navigation Strategy. Under the auspices of the Committee on
the Marine Transportation System, the Coast Guard and other agencies
have developed a National e-Navigation Strategy that will establish a
framework for data exchange between and among ships and shore
facilities. The Council will receive an update on how the use of the
Automatic Identification System (AIS) and the Physical Oceanographic
Real Time System support the E-Navigation Strategy.
    (4) Atlantic Coast Ports Access Route Study (ACPARS). The Council
will receive an update on the ACPARS undertaken to accommodate offshore
wind energy development. The update will include a presentation on how
AIS track data is being included as a Geospatial Information System
component of the study.
    (5) In response to a statement made by a member of the public
during the April 2012 meeting, the Council will receive an update on
requirements for encoding information into shipboard AIS devices.
    Following the above presentations, the Council will form working
groups to discuss and provide recommendations on the following tasks as
appropriate:
    (1) NAVSAC Task 05-05--Lights for Public Safety and Law Enforcement
Vessels. At the November 2012 NAVSAC meeting, the Council briefly
discussed the task and its ongoing work, and in response to task
statement 05-05, provided Resolution 12-07, concerning lights on
vessels engaged in defined public safety activities. The Council will
be asked to continue discussions on this task and provide an update to
Resolution 12-07 that includes recommendations for lights on law
enforcement vessels engaged in law enforcement activities.
    (2) NAVSAC Task 12-03--Unmanned vehicles/vessels (UV). The Council
was asked to review current UV standards of operation, consider whether
the latest generation of these vessels should employ AIS, and propose
additional rules/standards of operation for both unmanned underwater
vehicles, and unmanned surface vessels. NAVSAC was asked to provide a
Resolution to this task at the spring 2013 meeting. At the November
2012 NAVSAC meeting, the Council briefly discussed the task and its
ongoing work, and in response to task statement 12-03, provided
Resolution 12-08 on recommendations for unmanned underwater vehicles.
The Council will be asked to continue discussions on this task and
provide an update to Resolution 12-08 that includes recommendations for
rules/standards of operation for unmanned surface vessels.
    (3) NAVSAC Task 13-01--Special Distinctive Lights for Small
Passenger Vessels. Various port and government authorities, in
conjunction with operators of small passenger vessels, have designed
and installed distinctive lights for their vessels. The Council will be
briefed on some of these lighting schemes and asked to consider whether
a change to the navigation rules is needed to standardize these
lighting schemes nationwide.
    Public comments or questions will be taken during the meeting after
the Council discusses each issue and prior to the Council formulating
recommendations on each issue. There will also be a public comment
period at the end of the meeting.
    Thursday, April 11, 2013:

(1) Working Group Discussions continued from April 10.
(2) Working Group Reports presented to the Council.
(3) New Business:
    a. Summary of NAVSAC Action Items.
    b. Schedule Next Meeting Date--Fall 2013.
    c. Council discussions and summary of new tasks and pending action
items.

    A public comment period will be held after the discussion of new
tasks. Speakers' comments are limited to 10 minutes each. Public
comments or questions may also be taken during the discussion and
recommendations, and new business portions of the meeting.

    Dated: March 22, 2013.
P.F. Cook,
Acting Director, Marine Transportation Systems, Captain, U.S. Coast
Guard.
[FR Doc. 2013-07155 Filed 3-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: October 22, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 205)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 62940-62942]
[DOCID:fr22oc08-24]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0873; Airspace Docket No. 08-AGL-7]

Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Branson, MO

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish Class E2 and E5 airspace at
Branson Regional Airport, Branson, MO. The establishment of an air
traffic control tower and a new Standard Instrument Approach Procedure
(SIAP) have made it necessary for the safety of Instrument Flight Rule
(IFR) operations at Branson Regional Airport.

DATES: 0901 UTC. Comments must be received on or before December 8,
2008.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. You
must identify the docket number FAA-2008-0873/Airspace Docket No. 08-
AGL-7, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments
through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the
public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any
final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office
(telephone 1-800-647-5527) is on the ground floor of the building at
the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Area,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76193-0530; telephone: (817)
222-5582.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2008-0873/
Airspace Docket No. 08-AGL-7.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRM's

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://
www.faa.gov or the Superintendent of Document's Web page at http://
www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
    Additionally, any person may obtain a copy of this notice by
submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),
Office of Air Traffic Airspace Management, ATA-400, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Communications must identify both docket numbers for this notice.
Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRM's
should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), Part 71 by establishing Class E2 and E5 airspace for IFR
operations at Branson Regional Airport, Branson, MO. This area would be
depicted on appropriate aeronautical charts.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6002, and 6005,
respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9R, dated August 15, 2007, and
effective September 15, 2007, which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR 71.1. The Class E area designations listed in this document would
be published subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to
issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S.
Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA
Administrator Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail
the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated
under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I,
Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing
regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the
safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation
is within the scope of that authority as it would establish controlled
airspace at Branson Regional Airport, Branson, MO.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9R, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 15, 2007, and effective September 15,
2007, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Designated as Surface Areas.

* * * * *

ACE MO E2 Branson, MO [New]

Branson Regional Airport, TX
    (Lat. 36[deg]21'56'' N., long. 93[deg]12'02'' W.)

    Within a 4.1-mile radius of Branson Regional Airport. This Class
E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times
established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and
time will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/
Facility Directory.

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

* * * * *

ACE MO E5 Branson, MO [New]

Branson Regional Airport , MO
    (Lat. 36[deg]21'56'' N., long. 93[deg]12'02'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.6-mile radius of Branson Regional Airport.
* * * * *

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX on October 10, 2008.
Walter Tweedy,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
 [FR Doc. E8-25049 Filed 10-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


(2) The Agency determines after review that the genetic material
that encodes the pesticidal substance or leads to the production of the
pesticidal substance:
    (i) Encodes a protein that is minimally modified from a coat
protein from a virus that naturally infects plants, or
    (ii) Produces no protein.
    (d)(1) Records to support exemption determinations made by the
developer of a PVCP-PIP under paragraphs (a)(1), (b)(1), or (c)(1) of
this section; to support a submission of information under paragraphs
(a)(2), (b)(2), or (c)(2) of this section; or to support a
certification made by the developer that a PVCP-PIP meets Sec.
174.21(b) and/or Sec.  174.21(c) must be maintained by the developer of
the product for the duration of time that the PVCP-PIP is sold or
distributed. Such records must be made available for inspection and
copying, or otherwise submitted to the Agency for review upon request
by EPA or its duly authorized representative.
    (2) Information adequate to support claims for an Agency-determined
exemption must be submitted for review to the Office of Pesticide
Programs, Attention: PVCP-PIP Exemption.
    (3) A statement notifying the Agency and certifying the accuracy of
any determination made by the developer that a PVCP-PIP meets Sec.
174.21(b), Sec.  174.21(c), paragraph (a)(1) of this section, paragraph
(b)(1) of this section, and/or paragraph (c)(1) of this section must be
signed by the developer and submitted to the Office of Pesticide
Programs, Attention: PVCP-PIP Exemption. Any such statement must be
submitted at the time of a first submission, if any, of information
under paragraph (d)(2) of this section for a particular PVCP-PIP. If a
PVCP-PIP satisfies paragraphs (a)(1), (b)(1), and (c)(1)) of this
section and Sec. Sec.  174.21(b) and (c), the developer must submit a
notification to the Agency of that determination and certify that the
PVCP-PIP qualifies for exemption under FIFRA, i.e., that the PVCP-PIP
meets Sec. Sec.  174.21(a), (b), and (c).This certification must
contain:
    (i) The name of the crop (including genus and species) containing
the PVCP-PIP.
    (ii) The name of the virus from which the coat protein gene was
derived.
    (iii) The name of the virus(es) to which resistance is conferred.
    (iv) When available, a unique identifier.
    5. By revising Sec.  174.480 to read as follows:

Sec.  174.480  Scope and purpose.

    This subpart lists the inert ingredients that may be used in a
plant-incorporated protectant listed in subpart B of this part and
whose residues are either exempted from the requirement of a tolerance
under FFDCA or no tolerance would otherwise be required.
    6. By adding Sec.  174.486 to read as follows:

Sec.  174.486  Inert ingredients that may be used with PIPs in certain
plants.

    The following must be used in a plant that satisfies Sec.
174.27(a) in order to be exempt from the requirements of FIFRA.
    (a) Beta-D-glucuronidase (GUS) from Escherichia coli and the
genetic material necessary for its production.
    (b) Neomycin phosphotransferase II (NPTII) and the genetic material
necessary for its production.
    (c) Phosphomannose isomerase (PMI) and the genetic material
necessary for its production.
    (d) CP4 enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate (CP4 EPSPS) and the
genetic material necessary for its production.
    (e) Glyphosate oxidoreductase (GOX or GOXv247) and the genetic
material necessary for its production.
    (f) Phosphinothricin acetyltransferase (PAT) and the genetic
material necessary for its production.
    (g) Partial tetracycline resistance gene under the control of a
bacterial promoter as present in papaya line 55-1.

[FR Doc. E7-7297 Filed 4-17-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 193 (Wednesday, October 5, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61712-61713]
[FR Doc No: 2011-25680]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0165]

Deborah Martinez Seldon: Debarment Order

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing an order
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act)
permanently debarring Deborah Martinez Seldon from providing services
in any capacity to a person that has an approved or pending drug
product application. FDA bases this order on a finding that Ms. Seldon
was convicted of multiple felonies under Federal law for conduct
relating to the regulation of a drug product under the FD&C Act. Ms.
Seldon was given notice of the proposed permanent debarment and an
opportunity to request a hearing within the timeframe prescribed by
regulation. Ms. Seldon failed to respond. Ms. Seldon's failure to
respond constitutes a waiver of her right to a hearing concerning this
action.

DATES: This order is effective October 5, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit applications for special termination of debarment to
the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenny Shade, Division of Compliance
Policy (HFC-230), Office of Regulatory Affairs, Food and Drug
Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Section 306(a)(2)(B) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 335a(a)(2)(B))
requires debarment of an individual if FDA finds that the individual
has been convicted of a felony under Federal law for conduct relating
to the regulation of any drug product under the FD&C Act.
    On March 27, 2009, judgment was entered against Ms. Seldon in the
United States District Court for the District of Nevada for mail fraud,
in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1341, aiding and abetting, in violation of 18
U.S.C. 2, and misbranding a drug while held for sale, in violation of
21 U.S.C. 331(k) and 333(a)(2).
    The FDA's finding that debarment is appropriate is based on the
felony convictions referenced herein for conduct relating to the
regulation of a drug product. The factual basis for those convictions
is as follows: Ms. Seldon was the manager of her husband's medical
practice called A New You Medical Aesthetics (A New You) in Las Vegas,
Nevada. As the office manager of A New You, Ms. Seldon was responsible
for ordering supplies, paying bills, managing personnel, and managing
the bank accounts.
    From, on or about, October 15, 2003, until on or about September
16, 2005, in the State and Federal District of Nevada, Ms. Seldon and
her husband, aided and abetted by each other, devised a scheme and
artifice to fraudulently obtain money from patients by substituting the
cheaper, non-FDA approved product marketed by Toxin Research
International that purported to be Botulinum Neurotoxin Type A (TRI-
toxin) in treatments provided to patients at A New You, while falsely
and fraudulently representing to the patients that they were receiving
injections of the FDA-approved BOTOX product marketed by Allergan,
Inc..
    As part of the scheme Ms. Seldon ordered and caused to be ordered
38 vials of TRI-toxin between October 2003 and September 2004 while at
the same time the practice stopped purchasing the approved BOTOX in
October 2003. In January 2005, as part of the scheme and artifice, Ms.
Seldon arranged for a secret purchase of, and received 132 vials of
TRI-toxin for use at A New You.
    Ms. Seldon and her husband defrauded patients by misleading them to
believe that they were receiving the FDA-approved drug BOTOX, when, in
fact, the patients were receiving TRI-toxin, which was not approved,
thereby exposing patients to severe health risk. On or about January
12, 2005, Ms. Seldon caused to be falsified computerized medical
records by deleting references to BOTOX and changing these entries to
the generic notation ``Cosmetic Procedure.'' In furtherance of their
scheme, Ms. Seldon and Dr. Seldon caused 28 vials of TRI-toxin to be
returned to the FDA, seeking to create the misleading impression that
they were returning 28 of the original 38 vials they had purchased. In
fact, all of the original TRI-toxin had been used on patients at A New
You, and Ms. Seldon was returning vials that were part of the secret
132 vial purchase.
    Ms. Seldon and her husband also caused advertisements to be placed
in local magazines offering BOTOX, creating the false impression that
the office was using approved BOTOX when, in fact, patients were being
injected with unapproved TRI-toxin. Ms. Seldon also caused patients to
sign consent forms that fraudulently represented that Dr. Seldon would
be injecting approved BOTOX when she knew her husband was injecting
them with TRI-toxin.
    As a result of her convictions, on May 23, 2011, FDA sent Ms.
Seldon a notice by certified mail proposing to permanently debar her
from providing services in any capacity to a person that has an
approved or pending drug product application. The proposal was based on
a finding, under section 306(a)(2)(B) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
335a(a)(2)(B)), that Ms. Seldon was convicted of felonies under Federal
law for conduct relating to the regulation of a drug product under the
FD&C Act. The proposal also offered Ms. Seldon an opportunity to
request a hearing, providing her 30 days from the date of receipt of
the letter in which to file the request, and advised her that failure
to

request a hearing constituted a waiver of the opportunity for a hearing
and of any contentions concerning this action. Ms. Seldon received the
proposal on May 27, 2011, and failed to respond within the timeframe
prescribed by regulation. She therefore has waived her opportunity for
a hearing and any contentions concerning her debarment (21 CFR part
12).

II. Findings and Order

    Therefore, the Director, Office of Enforcement, Office of
Regulatory Affairs, under section 306(a)(2)(B) of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 335a(a)(2)(B)), under authority delegated to him (Staff Manual
Guide 1410.35), finds that Deborah Martinez Seldon has been convicted
of a felony under Federal law for conduct relating to the regulation of
a drug product under the FD&C Act.
    As a result of the foregoing finding, Ms. Seldon is permanently
debarred from providing services in any capacity to a person with an
approved or pending drug product application under sections 505, 512,
or 802 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 355, 360b, or 382), or under section
351 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262), effective (see
DATES), (see section 306(c)(1)(B), (c)(2)(A)(ii), and 201(dd) of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 335a(c)(1)(B), (c)(2)(A)(ii), and 321(dd))). Any
person with an approved or pending drug product application who
knowingly employs or retains as a consultant or contractor, or
otherwise uses the services of Ms. Seldon in any capacity during Ms.
Seldon's debarment, will be subject to civil money penalties (section
307(a)(6) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 335b(a)(6))). If Ms. Seldon
provides services in any capacity to a person with an approved or
pending drug product application during her period of debarment she
will be subject to civil money penalties (section 307(a)(7) of the FD&C
Act) (21 U.S.C. 335b(a)(7)). In addition, FDA will not accept or review
any abbreviated new drug applications submitted by or with the
assistance of Deborah Martinez Seldon during her period of debarment
(section 306(c)(1)(A) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 335a(c)(1)(A)).
    Any application by Deborah Martinez Seldon for special termination
of debarment under section 306(d)(4) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
335a(d)(4)) should be identified with Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0165 and
sent to the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). All such
submissions are to be filed in four copies. The public availability of
information in these submissions is governed by 21 CFR 10.20(j).
    Publicly available submissions may be seen in the Division of
Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    Dated: September 6, 2011.
Armando Zamora,
Acting Director, Office of Enforcement, Office of Regulatory Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2011-25680 Filed 10-4-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

	This Settlement Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into by Public
Service Company of Oklahoma (“PSO”), the Secretary of the
Environment on behalf of the State of Oklahoma (“Secretary”), the
Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (“ODEQ”), the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), and the Sierra Club.
 PSO, the Secretary, ODEQ, EPA, and the Sierra Club are hereinafter
collectively referred to as “the Parties” for purposes of this
Agreement.

RECITALS

A.	On December 28, 2011, EPA issued a final rule entitled, “Approval
and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Oklahoma; Federal
Implementation Plan for Interstate Transport of Pollution Affecting
Visibility and Best Available Retrofit Technology Determinations,” 76
Fed. Reg. 81,728 (Dec. 28, 2011) (the “Final Rule”).

B.	The Final Rule partially approved and partially disapproved
Oklahoma’s state implementation plan (“SIP”) submitted under the
“visibility” and “interstate transport” provisions of the Clean
Air Act (“CAA”), 42 U.S.C. § 7410, 7491, and 7492.  The Final Rule
included a federal implementation plan (“FIP”) establishing Best
Available Retrofit Technology (“BART”) emission limitations on
sulfur dioxide (“SO2”) for Units 3 and 4 of PSO’s Northeastern
plant (“PSO’s Units”) to address the visibility and interstate
transport provisions of the CAA.

C.	PSO desires to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to
comply with its obligations with respect to the visibility and
interstate transport provisions of the CAA as well as its other
obligations with respect to the CAA in a coordinated manner.

D.	PSO intends to install low NOx combustion technologies on both of its
Units, retire one of its Units, and install and operate on its other
Unit a dry sorbent injection system and baghouse in order to achieve
emissions rates that comply with the terms of this Agreement and with
its obligations with respect to the visibility provisions of the CAA.

E.	PSO intends to retire one of its Units and install and operate on its
other Unit a dry sorbent injection system, a baghouse, and activated
carbon injection to achieve emissions rates that comply with the Mercury
& Air Toxics Standard that became effective April 16, 2012, 40 C.F.R. §
 63.9984 (“the MATS Rule”).  Properly designed and operated air
pollution control systems consisting of dry sorbent injection system,
baghouse, and activated carbon injection can achieve the MATS Rule
emission limits.  An EPA letter to the ODEQ and PSO dated July 18, 2012,
expresses EPA’s support of PSO’s comprehensive strategy to use the
technologies described in the Regional Haze Agreement referenced in
Attachment A to this Agreement to achieve the emission limitations
prescribed by the MATS Rule.  The letter is attached to this Agreement
as Attachment B.

F.	On February 24, 2011, PSO timely filed a Petition for Review,
challenging the issuance of the Final Rule in Public Service Company of
Oklahoma v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, et al., No. 12-9524.
On March 26, 2012, Sierra Club filed a timely motion to intervene.  The
motion was granted March 27, 2012.

G.	The CAA and EPA’s regulations require States to develop SIPs to
implement the CAA’s provisions, including the CAA’s visibility and
interstate transport provisions.  See 42 U.S.C. §§
7410(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), (J), 7491(b)(2); 40 C.F.R. § 50.300(a).  ODEQ is
the administrative agency in the State of Oklahoma responsible for
developing and proposing such SIPs.  See 27A O.S. §§ 2-5-105(3), (20),
1-3-101(B)(8), 2-3-101(B)(2).  The Secretary, as the Governor’s
designee for the State of Oklahoma, is responsible for submitting SIPs
to EPA for review.  See 40 C.F.R. Part 51, Appendix V, Section 2.1(a);
40 C.F.R. § 51.103(a).  Because this Agreement requires ODEQ to develop
and propose and the Secretary to submit SIP revisions to EPA under the
visibility and interstate transport provisions of the CAA, and ODEQ and
the Secretary prefer to regulate PSO under such SIP revisions rather
than EPA’s FIP, ODEQ and the Secretary have an interest in and are
essential parties to this Settlement Agreement.

H.	The Parties have negotiated in good faith and have determined that
the settlement reflected in this Agreement is in the public interest.
If approved and implemented as set forth herein, this Agreement will
resolve PSO’s Petition for Review.

I. 	This Agreement will not impact any other provisions of the Final
Rule, and/or any other applicable federal, state, and local laws and
regulations.  No other claims will be affected by the resolution of the
issues related to PSO’s Units as set forth herein.

AGREEMENT

1.	PSO, Sierra Club, and EPA agree that within ten (10) days after this
Agreement is executed by the Parties (i.e., signed), but before
finalization pursuant to Paragraph 16 of this Agreement, they will
jointly move the Court for an order holding in abeyance PSO’s Petition
for Review pending implementation of the terms of the Agreement.

2. 	Within thirty (30) days of the effective date of this Agreement, PSO
shall submit to ODEQ final and complete versions of all information and
documentation (including technical supporting documentation for PSO’s
Units) necessary for the development of the SIP revisions referenced in
Paragraphs 3 and 4.

3.  	No later than one hundred-twenty (120) days after PSO provides ODEQ
with the information and documentation required in Paragraph 2, ODEQ
will develop and propose a SIP revision under the visibility provisions
of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7491, and EPA’s regional haze regulations, 40
C.F.R. § 51.308, that addresses PSO’s Units (“Regional Haze SIP
revision”) in accordance with the provisions of Attachment A.

4.	No later than one hundred-twenty (120) days after PSO provides ODEQ
with the information and documentation required in Paragraph 2, ODEQ
will develop and propose a SIP revision under the interstate transport
provisions of the CAA, 42 U.S.C.                  §
7410(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), that addresses PSO’s Units (“Interstate
Transport SIP revision”) in accordance with the provisions of
Attachment A.

5.	No later than one hundred-twenty (120) days after PSO provides ODEQ
with the information and documentation required in Paragraph 2, the
Secretary shall provide the proposed SIP revisions required in
Paragraphs 3 and 4 to EPA and request parallel processing of the SIP
revisions from EPA pursuant to 40 C.F.R. Part 51, App. V, Section 2.3.

6.	If ODEQ determines, at any time subsequent to PSO’s submittal of
all information and documentation for PSO’s Units as required in
Paragraph 2, that additional information and/or documentation is
necessary in order to develop the SIP revisions referenced in Paragraphs
3 and 4, ODEQ shall provide PSO with a written request for such
additional information and/or documentation with a copy to all Parties.
The deadlines associated with the obligations under Paragraphs 3-5 of
this Agreement shall be tolled during the period of time between the
issuance of the written request and ODEQ’s receipt of the requested
information and/or documentation.

7.	After the opportunity for public hearing and the close of
Oklahoma’s notice-and-comment period for the Regional Haze and
Interstate Transport SIP revisions, but no later than ninety (90) days
after the Secretary submits the request for parallel processing
referenced in Paragraph 5, ODEQ will consider and if appropriate adopt
the Regional Haze and Interstate Transport SIP revisions referred to in
Paragraphs 3 and 4.  If adopted, the Secretary will submit to EPA those
SIP revisions.

8.	The Regional Haze and Interstate Transport SIP revisions adopted and
submitted to EPA under Paragraph 7 will include the provisions described
in Attachment A to this Agreement unless the Parties, by written mutual
agreement, amend the provisions described in Attachment A.  If the
Regional Haze and Interstate Transport SIP revisions adopted and
submitted to EPA by the Secretary do not include the provisions
described in Attachment A to this Agreement, PSO may file a motion to
dissolve the stay of PSO’s petition for review and request that a
briefing schedule be set.  PSO may also pursue any opportunities for
administrative or judicial review of the Regional Haze and Interstate
Transport SIP revisions adopted by ODEQ and submitted by the Secretary.

9.	Within sixty (60) days of EPA’s receipt of the final Regional Haze
and Interstate Transport SIP revisions EPA will determine whether the
revisions meet the requirements of the CAA consistent with 42 U.S.C. §
7410(k)(1)(B) (“completeness finding”).

10.	EPA will take final action on the Regional Haze and the Interstate
Transport SIP revisions as soon as possible, but no later than six (6)
months from the date of the completeness finding referred to in
Paragraph 9 consistent with 42 U.S.C. § 7410(k)(2).

11.	If EPA promulgates a final action approving the provisions of the
Regional Haze and Interstate Transport SIP revisions included in
Attachment A, as adopted and submitted to EPA by Oklahoma, PSO, the
Sierra Club, and EPA will promptly file a joint stipulation of dismissal
of PSO’s Petition for Review.  The Parties agree that they will not
challenge that portion of any final action issued by EPA that fully
approves the Regional Haze and Interstate Transport SIP revisions as
adopted and submitted to EPA by the Secretary that contain the
provisions in Attachment A affecting PSO’s Units.

12.	Separately from the SIP process, PSO will report biannually to EPA
(beginning in 2017 for the period 2015-2016, and every second year
thereafter through the end of 2025 or 2026, whenever the last
Northeastern unit is retired) on the energy produced by PSO’s units
and the sources of energy secured under PSO’s long-term purchased
power contracts.  The initial report will include similar information
for calendar years 2013-2014.  Requests for proposals (“RFPs”) for
long-term purchase power contracts issued between 2013 and the date the
reporting obligation ends will specifically seek bids for energy
supplied by natural gas and renewable resources.  The biannual reports
will include copies of any RFPs issued during the reporting period, and
a summary of the capacity or energy secured through any long-term power
purchase agreements executed during the reporting period, including the
unit(s) providing the purchased power, the amount of capacity or energy
secured under the agreement, and the term of each agreement.

13.	The Parties may, by written mutual agreement, extend the dates in
Paragraphs 2-5, 7, and 9-10 by which actions must be taken to fulfill
the Parties’ respective obligations under this Agreement.

14.	Nothing in the Regional Haze and Interstate Transport SIP revisions
as adopted and submitted to EPA by Oklahoma or in this Agreement shall
relieve PSO from its obligations to comply with all applicable federal,
state, and local laws and regulations, including laws, regulations, and
compliance deadlines that become applicable after the date of any
revisions to Oklahoma’s Regional Haze SIP that may be approved by EPA.
 Such laws and regulations include, but are not limited to, any EPA rule
imposing requirements relevant to interstate transport under 42 U.S.C.
§ 7410(a)(2)(D) and the MATS Rule.  Nothing in Oklahoma’s Regional
Haze SIP revision, including the BART determination for PSO’s Units,
should be construed to provide any relief from the emissions limits or
deadlines specified in such regulations, including, but not limited to,
deadlines for the installation of pollution controls required by any
such regulations.

15.	If EPA does not take final action approving those aspects of the
Regional Haze and Interstate Transport SIP revisions that contain the
provisions of Attachment A, as adopted and submitted to EPA by Oklahoma,
PSO may file a motion to dissolve the stay of PSO’s Petition for
Review, and to request that a briefing schedule be set.  EPA does not
waive or limit any defense relating to such litigation.  This shall be
the only remedy for EPA’s failure to fulfill its obligations under
this Agreement.  PSO and Sierra Club agree that contempt of court is not
an available remedy under this Agreement.

16.	The Parties agree and acknowledge that before this Agreement is
final, EPA must provide notice in the Federal Register and an
opportunity for public comment pursuant to CAA section 113(g), 42 U.S.C.
§ 7413(g).  EPA shall promptly submit said notice of this Agreement to
the Federal Register after this Agreement is executed by the Parties
(i.e., signed).  After this Agreement has undergone an opportunity for
notice and comment, the Administrator or the Attorney General, as
appropriate, shall promptly consider any such written comments in
determining whether to withdraw or withhold their consent to the
Agreement, in accordance with section 113(g) of the CAA.

If the United States elects not to withdraw or withhold its consent to
this Agreement, EPA shall provide written notice to the Parties as
expeditiously as possible.  This Agreement shall become final and
effective on the date that EPA provides such written notice to the
Parties.  If EPA does not provide such written notice within sixty (60)
days after the notice of the Agreement is published in the Federal
Register, the sole remedy shall be the right to file a motion to
dissolve the stay of the Petition for Review, and to request that a
briefing schedule be set.  EPA does not waive or limit any defense
relating to such litigation.  PSO and Sierra Club agree that contempt of
court is not an available remedy under this Agreement.

17.	No provision of this Agreement shall be interpreted as or constitute
a commitment or requirement that the United States or any of its
departments or agencies obligate or pay funds in contravention of the
Anti-Deficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. § 1341 et seq., or in violation of any
other statue, law, or regulation.

18.	Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to limit or modify the
discretion accorded to EPA, ODEQ, or the Secretary by statute, or by
general principles of administrative law.

19.	Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to limit or modify the
rights of PSO or Sierra Club to seek reconsideration or judicial review
of any altered, amended or revised provisions of any final action that
ODEQ or EPA may take that differ in any material respect from the
provisions described in Attachment A (or as amended by mutual written
agreement of the Parties pursuant to Paragraph 8).

20.	The undersigned hereby certify that they are duly authorized to bind
the Party on whose behalf this Agreement is executed to the terms of
this Agreement.

21.	The provisions of this Agreement shall apply to and be binding on
the Parties, their successors and assigns.

22.	This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, and such counterpart
signatures shall be given full force and effect.

						FOR PETITIONER PSO:

Dated:__________				__________________________________________

FOR STATE OF OKLAHOMA:

SECRETARY OF THE ENVIRONMENT FOR THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA

Dated:__________				__________________________________________

FOR OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY:

Dated:___________				__________________________________________

						FOR U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY:

						IGNACIA S. MORENO

						Assistant Attorney General

						Environment and Natural Resources Division

Dated:__________			By:	__________________________________________

						STEPHANIE J. TALBERT

						Environmental Defense Section

						Environment and Natural Resources Division

						U.S. Department of Justice

						P.O. BOX 7611

						Washington, DC 20044<PHONE_NUMBER>

						Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

						FOR INTERVENOR SIERRA CLUB:

Dated:__________				__________________________________________

ATTACHMENT A

	Oklahoma, through the Secretary, will submit to EPA a Regional Haze SIP
revision that addresses PSO’s Units and includes, among other things,
the following elements:

Oklahoma’s SIP revision will include a Regional Haze Agreement
(“RHA”) entered into by ODEQ and PSO to effectuate the BART
determination.

The RHA will require that by no later than December 31, 2013, PSO will
complete installation of low NOx combustion technologies and achieve a
nitrogen oxide (“NOx”) emission rate of 0.23 lb/MMBtu on a 30-day
rolling average at each of PSO’s Units.

The RHA will require that beginning on January 31, 2014, PSO will comply
with a new SO2 emission rate at each of PSO’s Units of 0.65 lb/MMBtu
on a 30-day rolling average, and beginning on December 31, 2014, PSO
will comply with a new SO2 emission rate of 0.60 lb/MMBtu on a 12-month
rolling average at each of PSO’s Units.  PSO will maintain those
emission rates until controls are installed at one unit as provided in
subparagraph (e), and the other unit is retired as provided in
subparagraph (d).  The RHA will include an alternative operating
scenario that addresses potential service disruption of coal supplies
during the time period between January 31, 2014 through April 16, 2016.

The RHA will require that PSO seek all necessary regulatory approvals,
and will retire one of the coal-fired generating units at Northeastern
Station by April 16, 2016.

The RHA will require that PSO seek all necessary regulatory approvals,
and install and operate a dry-sorbent injection system, activated carbon
injection system, and a fabric filter baghouse, and secure further NOx
emission reductions by April 16, 2016 on the coal-fired generating unit
at Northeastern Station that will continue to operate.  After completion
of the installation of the pollution controls required by this
subparagraph, PSO will achieve a 0.15 lb/MMBtu emission rate for NOx on
a 30-day rolling average basis, and a 0.40 lb/MMBtu emission rate for
SO2 on a 30-day rolling average basis.

The RHA will require that during the first year of operation of the
controls required under the RHA, PSO will develop and propose a
monitoring program to test various operating profiles and other
measures, to determine whether increased SO2 removal efficiencies can be
achieved during normal operations.  Pursuant to the terms of the RHA,
PSO will submit the monitoring program to EPA and ODEQ for review and
will implement the monitoring program during the second and third years
of operation of the dry sorbent injection system.  PSO will evaluate and
report the results of the monitoring program to EPA and ODEQ, and if
that evaluation demonstrates that the technology is capable of
sustainably achieving an emission rate of less than 0.37 lbs/MMBtu on a
30-day rolling average basis without (i) altering the unit’s fuel
supply, (ii) incurring additional capital costs, (iii) increasing
operating expenses by more than a negligible amount, and/or (iv)
adversely impacting overall unit operations, ODEQ will propose to revise
the  emission rate in the RHA by 60 percent of the difference between
0.40 and the demonstrated emission rate.  Upon adoption after notice and
opportunity for hearing, Oklahoma, through the Secretary, will submit a
Regional Haze SIP revision to EPA for approval.  If the demonstrated
emission rate is 0.37 lbs/MMBtu or greater, no adjustment will be made
to the RHA, and the emission rate from the operating Northeastern
coal-fired generating unit in the RHA will remain 0.40 lbs/MMBtu.

The RHA will require that beginning in calendar year 2021, the Annual
Capacity Factor (calculated for each calendar year as a percentage of
MWH based on a rated capacity of 470 MW times 8760 hours) for the
operating coal-fired generating unit at Northeastern Station will be
reduced as follows:

to no more than 70 percent in calendar years 2021 and 2022;

to no more than 60 percent in calendar years 2023 and 2024; and

to no more than 50 percent in calendar years 2025 and 2026.

The RHA will require that no later than December 31, 2026, PSO will
retire the remaining operating coal-fired generating unit at
Northeastern Station.  However, in calendar year 2021, the RHA will
require PSO to evaluate whether the projected generation from that unit
can be replaced at lower or equal total projected costs from natural gas
or renewable resources.  Pursuant to the RHA, PSO will provide a copy of
the evaluation to EPA and ODEQ.  If power is available from such
resources at a lower projected total cost (including consideration of
PSO’s need to recover its remaining investment in the units), then the
operating unit will retire no later than December 31, 2025.

2.	Oklahoma, through the Secretary, will submit to EPA an Interstate
Transport SIP revision that addresses PSO’s Units and includes, among
other things, the following elements:

An enforceable mechanism that addresses SO2 reductions from sources
other than those operated by PSO, to the extent necessary to achieve the
anticipated visibility benefits from the 2018 regional modeling; and

A provision requiring that the enforceable mechanism referred to in
Paragraph 2(a) of this Attachment A be implemented if the SO2 emission
rate for the controlled unit at Northeastern is not reduced to 0.30
lbs/MMBtu or less as a result of the Paragraph 1(f) of this Attachment
A.

  PAGE  1


[Federal Register: June 23, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 119)]
[Notices]
[Page 29685-29686]
[DOCID:fr23jn09-40]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ID-6107-000]

Utt, James G.; Notice of Filing

June 16, 2009.
    Take notice that on June 15, 2009, James Utt filed an application
for authorization to hold interlocking

positions, pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act, 16
U.S.C. 825d (2006); part 45 of the regulations of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 18 CFR part 35 (2008); and Commission Order No.
664, Commission Authorization to Hold Interlocking Positions, Order No.
664, 70 Fed. Reg. 55717 (September 23, 2005), FERC Stats. & Regs.
31,194, 112 FERC 61,298 (2005), order denying reh'g, Order No. 669-A,
114 FERC 61,142 (2006).
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://
www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on June 25, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-14653 Filed 6-22-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 8 (Friday, January 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 2391]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00406]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL13-28-000]

Nevada Power Company; Notice of Initiation of Proceeding and
Refund Effective Date

    On December 31, 2012, the Commission issued an order that initiated
a proceeding in Docket No. EL13-28-000, pursuant to section 206 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 824e (2006), to determine the
justness and reasonableness of the proposed transmission and ancillary
service rates by Nevada Power Company. Nevada Power Company, 141 FERC ]
61,267 (2012).
    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL13-28-000, established
pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication
of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Dated: December 31, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-00406 Filed 1-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: October 28, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 208)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 66342-66344]
[DOCID:fr28oc10-17]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0892; Directorate Identifier 2010-NE-32-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH Models
TAE 125-02-99 and TAE 125-02-114 Reciprocating Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

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

    Service experience has shown that fracture of the timing chain
has occurred due to chain wear. This condition, if not corrected,
could lead to in-flight cases of engine shutdown.

We are proposing this AD to prevent engine in-flight shutdown leading
to loss of control of the airplane by requiring life limits for the
timing chain.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by December 13,
2010.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Contact Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH, Platanenstrasse 14 D-09350,
Lichtenstein, Germany, telephone: +49-37204-696-0; fax: +49-37204-696-
55; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for the service information
identified in this proposed AD.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Strom, Aerospace Engineer, Engine
Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2010-0892;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NE-32-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD based on those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact
with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search
function of the Web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any
of our dockets, including, if provided, the name of the individual who
sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review the DOT's complete Privacy
Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65
FR 19477-78).

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued EASA
AD 2010-0136, dated June 30, 2010 (referred to after this as ``the
MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The
MCAI states:

    Service experience has shown that fracture of the timing chain
has occurred due to chain wear. This condition, if not corrected,
could lead to in-flight cases of engine shutdown.

Engine experience shows that the design of the timing chain does not
have the expected durability as evidenced by accelerated, premature
wear, causing chain fracture resulting in engine in-flight shutdown.
The chain link pins and link plates become weakened and break from wear
caused by hard sooty particles that are by-products of combustion. The
link wear also lengthens the chain causing camshaft sprocket wear.
Replacing the timing chain at the compliance times in this AD will help
to avoid chain failure, which would cause engine shutdown.
    You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD
docket.

Relevant Service Information

    Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH has issued Service Bulletin No. TM
TAE 125-1010 P1, Revision 2, dated May 26, 2010. The actions described
in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe
condition identified in the MCAI.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This Proposed AD

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

and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type
design. This proposed AD would require initial replacement of the
timing chain on the TAE 125-02-99 and TAE 125-02-114 reciprocating
engines listed by serial number in Table 1 of the proposed AD, and
thereafter, repetitive replacements of the timing chain on all TAE 125-
02-99 and TAE 125-02-114 reciprocating engines.

Costs of Compliance

    Based on the service information, we estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 112 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it would take about 8 work-hours per product to
comply with this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $85 per work-
hour. Required parts would cost about $162 per engine. Based on these
figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to
be $94,304.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

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

Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH: Docket No. FAA-2010-0892;
Directorate Identifier 2010-NE-32-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by December 13, 2010.

Affected Airworthiness Directives (ADs)

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH models TAE
125-02-99 and TAE 125-02-114 reciprocating engines installed in, but
not limited to, Cessna 172 and (Reims-built) F172 series (European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Supplemental Type Certificate (STC)
No. EASA.A.S.01527); Piper PA-28 series (EASA STC No. EASA.A.S.
01632); APEX (Robin) DR 400 series (EASA STC No. A.S.01380); and
Diamond Aircraft Industries Models DA 40, DA 42, and DA 42M NG
airplanes.

Reason

    (d) This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) issued by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

    Service experience has shown that fracture of the timing chain
has occurred due to chain wear. This condition, if not corrected,
could lead to in-flight cases of engine shutdown.

    We are issuing this AD to prevent engine in-flight shutdown
leading to loss of control of the airplane by requiring life limits
for the timing chain.

Actions and Compliance

    (e) Unless already done, do the following actions.

Initial Replacement of Timing Chain

    (1) For engines with serial numbers (S/Ns) listed in Table 1 of
this AD, replace the timing chain within 600 flight hours-since-new,
or no later than 55 flight hours after the effective date of this
AD, whichever occurs later.

  Table 1--S/Ns of Engines Affected by the Compliance Time in Paragraph
                            (e)(1) of This AD
------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
02-02-01510 to 02-02-01514 inclusive.
02-02-01518 to 02-02-01520 inclusive.
02-02-01529.
02-02-01717.
02-02-01718.
02-02-01720.
02-02-01721.
02-02-01727.
02-02-01728.
02-02-01730 to 02-02-01733 inclusive.
02-02-01739 to 02-02-01752 inclusive.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) For engines with S/Ns not listed in Table 1 of this AD,
replace the timing chain within 910 flight hours-since-new, or no
later than 55 flight hours after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later.

Repetitive Replacements of Timing Chains for All TAE 125-02-99 and TAE
125-02-114 Engines

    (3) Thereafter, for all TAE 125-02-99 and TAE 125-02-114
engines, repetitively replace the timing chain within every
additional 910 flight hours.
    (4) Guidance on replacing the timing chain can be found in
Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH Service Bulletin No. TM TAE 125-1010
P1, Revision 2, dated May 26, 2010.

FAA AD Differences

    (f) This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information,
which require initial replacement of the timing chain for the
engines listed in paragraph (e)(1) above within either the next 110
flight hours or at the next maintenance, whichever occurs first, for
those engines having accumulated between 500 and 600 flight hours
time-since-new. The reason for the difference is to ensure that the
compliance requirements for all engines in paragraph (e)(1) above
are consistent.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (g) The Manager, Engine Certification Office, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.

Related Information

    (h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency AD 2010-0136,
dated June 30, 2010, and Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH Service
Bulletin No. TM TAE 125-1010 P1, Revision 2, dated May 26, 2010, for
related information. Contact Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH,
Platanenstrasse 14 D-09350, Lichtenstein, Germany, telephone: +49-
37204-696-0; fax: +49-37204-696-55; e-mail: info@centurion-
engines.com, for a copy of this service information.

    (i) Contact Alan Strom, Aerospace Engineer, Engine Certification
Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, for more information
about this AD.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on October 21, 2010.
Peter A. White,
Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-27228 Filed 10-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 127 (Friday, July 1, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38741-38742]
[FR Doc No: 2011-16592]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Third Meeting: RTCA Special Committee 225: Rechargeable Lithium
Batteries and Battery Systems--Small and Medium Sizes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special Committee 225 meeting: Rechargeable
Lithium Batteries and Battery Systems--Small and Medium Sizes.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
meeting of RTCA Special Committee 225: Rechargeable Lithium Batteries
and Battery Systems--Small and Medium Sizes.

DATES: The meeting will be held July 26-27, 2011, from 8:30 a.m. to 5
p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., 1150 18th Street,
Suite 910, NW., Washington, DC 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street,
Suite 910, NW., Washington, DC 20036, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, Web site http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., and Appendix 2),
notice is hereby given for a Special Committee 225, Rechargeable
Lithium Batteries and Battery Systems--Small and Medium Sizes.

Agenda

Tuesday July 26, 2011

     Welcome/Introductions/Administrative Remarks.
     Review of the meeting agenda.
     Review and approval of summary from the second plenary
meeting RTCA paper no. 120-11/SC225-004.
     Review of action items.
     Review progress on requirement development from working
group.
     Review new action items.
     Review agenda for Wednesday, July 27.

Wednesday July 27, 2011

     Review meeting agenda, other actions.
     Working Groups meeting.
     Working Group report, review progress and actions.
     Other Business.
     Establish Agenda for Fourth Plenary Meeting.
     Administrative Items (Meeting Schedule).

     Review all action items.
     Adjourn.
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may
present a written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 23, 2011.
Kathy Hitt,
RTCA Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 2011-16592 Filed 6-30-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P