i.e., those that are estimated to have less than one chance in
100,000,000 per year of occurring. Features, events, and processes with
a higher chance of occurring shall be considered for use in performance
assessments conducted to show compliance with Sec. Sec.  197.20(a)(1),
197.25(b)(1), and 197.30, except as stipulated in paragraph (b) of this
section. In addition, unless otherwise specified in these standards or
NRC regulations, DOE's performance assessments need not evaluate the
impacts resulting from features, events, and processes or sequences of
events and processes with a higher chance of occurring if the results
of the performance assessments would not be changed significantly in
the initial 10,000-year period after disposal.
    (2) The same features, events, and processes identified in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section shall be used in performance
assessments conducted to show compliance with Sec. Sec.  197.20(a)(2)
and 197.25(b)(2), with additional considerations as stipulated in
paragraph (c) of this section.
    (b) For performance assessments conducted to show compliance with
Sec. Sec.  197.25(b) and 197.30, DOE's performance assessments shall
exclude unlikely features, events, or processes, or sequences of events
and processes. The DOE should use the specific probability of the
unlikely features, events, and processes as specified by NRC.
    (c) For performance assessments conducted to show compliance with
Sec. Sec.  197.20(a)(2) and 197.25(b)(2), DOE's performance assessments
shall project the continued effects of the features, events, and
processes included in paragraph (a) of this section beyond the 10,000-
year post-disposal period through the period of geologic stability. The
DOE must evaluate all of the features, events, or processes included in
paragraph (a) of this section, and also:
    (1) The DOE must assess the effects of seismic and igneous
scenarios, subject to the probability limits in paragraph (a) of this
section for very unlikely features, events, and processes. Performance
assessments conducted to show compliance with Sec.  197.25(b)(2) are
also subject to the probability limits for unlikely features, events,
and processes as specified by NRC.
    (i) The seismic analysis may be limited to the effects caused by
damage to the drifts in the repository, failure of the waste packages,
and changes in the elevation of the water table under Yucca Mountain.
NRC may determine the magnitude of the water table rise and its
significance on the results of the performance assessment, or NRC may
require DOE to demonstrate the magnitude of the water table rise and
its significance in the license application. If NRC determines that the
increased elevation of the water table does not significantly affect
the results of the performance assessment, NRC may choose to not
require its consideration in the performance assessment.
    (ii) The igneous analysis may be limited to the effects of a
volcanic event directly intersecting the repository. The igneous event
may be limited to that causing damage to the waste packages directly,
causing releases of radionuclides to the biosphere, atmosphere, or
ground water.
    (2) The DOE must assess the effects of climate change. The climate
change analysis may be limited to the effects of increased water flow
through the repository as a result of climate change, and the resulting
transport and release of radionuclides to the accessible environment.
The nature and degree of climate change may be represented by constant
climate conditions. The analysis may commence at 10,000 years after
disposal and shall extend through the period of geologic stability. The
NRC shall specify in regulation the values to be used to represent
climate change, such as temperature, precipitation, or infiltration
rate of water.
    (3) The DOE must assess the effects of general corrosion on
engineered barriers. The DOE may use a constant representative
corrosion rate throughout the period of geologic stability or a
distribution of corrosion rates correlated to other repository
parameters.

0
10. Appendix A to part 197 is added to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 197--Calculation of Annual Committed Effective Dose
Equivalent

    Unless otherwise directed by NRC, DOE shall use the radiation
weighting factors and tissue weighting factors in this Appendix to
calculate the internal component of the annual committed effective
dose equivalent for compliance with Sec. Sec.  197.20 and 197.25 of
this part. NRC may allow DOE to use updated factors issued after the
effective date of this regulation. Any such factors shall have been
issued by consensus scientific organizations and incorporated by EPA
into Federal radiation guidance in order to be considered generally
accepted and eligible for this use. Further, they must be compatible
with the effective dose equivalent dose calculation methodology
established in ICRP 26 and 30, and continued in ICRP 60 and 72, and
incorporated in this appendix.

I. Equivalent Dose

    The calculation of the committed effective dose equivalent
(CEDE) begins with the determination of the equivalent dose,
HT, to a tissue or organ, T, listed in Table A.2 below by
using the equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15OC08.000

where DT,R is the absorbed dose in rads (one gray, an SI
unit, equals 100 rads) averaged over the tissue or organ, T, due to
radiation type, R, and wR is the radiation weighting
factor which is given in Table A.1 below. The unit of equivalent
dose is the rem (sievert, in SI units).

               Table A.1--Radiation weighting factors, wR1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Radiation type and energy range \2\                wR value
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Photons, all energies......................................            1
Electrons and muons, all energies..........................            1
Neutrons, energy
    < 10 keV...............................................            5
    10 keV to 100 keV......................................           10
    > 100 keV to 2 MeV.....................................           20
    >2 MeV to 20 MeV.......................................           10
    > 20 MeV...............................................            5
Protons, other than recoil protons, > 2 MeV................            5
Alpha particles, fission fragments, heavy nuclei...........          20
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All values relate to the radiation incident on the body or, for
  internal sources, emitted from the source.
\2\ See paragraph A14 in ICRP Publication 60 for the choice of values
  for other radiation types and energies not in the table.

II. Effective Dose Equivalent

    The next step is the calculation of the effective dose
equivalent, E. The probability of occurrence of a stochastic effect
in a tissue or organ is assumed to be proportional to the equivalent
dose in the tissue or organ. The constant of proportionality differs
for the various tissues of the body, but in assessing health
detriment the total risk is required. This is taken into account
using the tissue weighting factors, wT in Table A.2,
which represent the proportion of the stochastic risk resulting from
irradiation of the tissue or organ to the total risk when the whole
body is irradiated uniformly and HT is the equivalent
dose in the tissue or organ, T, in the equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15OC08.001

                 Table A.2--Tissue weighting factors, wT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Tissue or organ                          wT value
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gonads.....................................................         0.20
Bone marrow (red)..........................................         0.12
Colon......................................................         0.12
Lung.......................................................         0.12
Stomach....................................................         0.12
Bladder....................................................         0.05
Breast.....................................................         0.05
Liver......................................................         0.05
Esophagus..................................................         0.05
Thyroid....................................................         0.05
Skin.......................................................         0.01
Bone surface...............................................         0.01
Remainder..................................................    a b 0.05
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Remainder is composed of the following tissues: adrenals, brain,
  extrathoracic airways, small intestine, kidneys, muscle, pancreas,
  spleen, thymus, and uterus.
\b\ The value 0.05 is applied to the mass-weighted average dose to the
  Remainder tissues group, except when the following ``splitting rule''
  applies: If a tissue of Remainder receives a dose in excess of that
  received by any of the 12 tissues for which weighting factors are
  specified, a weighting factor of 0.025 (half of Remainder) is applied
  to that tissue or organ and 0.025 to the mass-averaged committed
  equivalent dose equivalent in the rest of the Remainder tissues.

III. Annual Committed Tissue or Organ Equivalent Dose

    For internal irradiation from incorporated radionuclides, the
total absorbed dose will be spread out in time, being gradually
delivered as the radionuclide decays. The time distribution of the
absorbed dose rate will vary with the radionuclide, its form, the
mode of intake and the tissue within which it is incorporated. To
take account of this distribution the quantity committed equivalent
dose, HT([tau]) where [tau] is the integration time in
years following an intake over any particular year, is used and is
the integral over time of the equivalent dose rate in a particular
tissue or organ that will be received by an individual following an
intake of radioactive material into the body:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15OC08.002

for a single intake of activity at time t0 where
HT([tau]) is the relevant equivalent-dose rate in a
tissue or organ at time t. For the purposes of this rule, the
previously mentioned single intake may be considered to be an annual
intake.

IV. Internal Component of the Annual Committed Effective Dose
Equivalent

    If the annual committed equivalent doses to the individual
tissues or organs resulting from an annual intake are multiplied by
the appropriate weighting factors, wT, from table A.2,
and then summed, the result will be the internal component of the
annual committed effective dose equivalent E([tau]):
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15OC08.003

[FR Doc. E8-23754 Filed 10-14-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 81 (Thursday, April 26, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18227-18230]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08794]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2018-0234]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Lake Michigan, Calumet Harbor, Chicago, IL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing two temporary safety zones on
Lake Michigan in Calumet Harbor, in Chicago, IL. This action is
necessary and intended to ensure safety of life on the navigable waters
of the United States immediately prior to, during, and after a lakebed
rock removal operation involving explosives. Entry of vessels or
persons into these zones is prohibited

unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port Lake
Michigan.

DATES: This rule is effective from midnight on May 1, 2018 through
midnight on September 1, 2018.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2018-0234 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 rule,
call or email LT John Ramos, Marine Safety Unit Chicago, U.S. Coast
Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

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 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 doing so would be impracticable. The
Coast Guard did not receive the final details for this event until
there was insufficient time remaining before the event to publish a
NPRM. Thus, delaying the effective date of this rule to wait for a
comment period to run would be impracticable because it would inhibit
the Coast Guard's ability to protect the public and vessels from the
hazards associated with a lakebed rock removal operation from May 1,
2018 through September 1, 2018.
    We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast
Guard finds that good cause exists for making this temporary rule
effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.
For the same reasons discussed in the preceding paragraph, waiting for
a 30 day notice period to run would be impracticable.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The legal basis for the rule is the Coast Guard's authority to
establish safety zones: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
    From May 1, 2018 through September 1, 2018, a rock removal
operation involving explosives will take place on Lake Michigan in
Calumet Harbor, in Chicago, IL. The Captain of the Port Lake Michigan
has determined that the lakebed rock removal operation will pose a
significant risk to public safety and property. Such hazards include
detonation of explosive material and a change in the depth of water for
a small period of time.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    With the aforementioned hazards in mind, the Captain of the Port
Lake Michigan has determined that two temporary safety zones are
necessary to ensure the safety of the public during the rock removal
operation on Lake Michigan in Calumet Harbor. Safety zone one will be
enforced from midnight on May 1, 2018 to through midnight on September
1, 2018. Safety zone one will encompass all waters of Lake Michigan in
Chicago, IL, bounded by a line drawn from the Calumet Harbor Entrance
South Side Light at 41[deg]44.1348' N, 087[deg]30.3790' W then
southwest to 41[deg]43.8568' N, 087[deg]30.6587' W then southeast to
41[deg]43.5801' N, 087[deg]30.2830' W then east to the Calumet Harbor
Breakwater South End Light at 41[deg]43.5619' N, 087[deg]29.6016' W
(NAD 83). Safety zone two will be enforced intermittently from midnight
on May 1, 2018 through midnight on September 1, 2018. A broadcast
notice to marines will be issued prior to the start of blasting to
notify the public that safety zone two is being enforced. Safety zone
two will encompass all waters of Lake Michigan in Chicago, IL, within a
2000 foot radius from 41[deg]43.6665' N, 087[deg]30.3805' W (NAD 83).
    Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zones is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan,
or a designated on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port or a
designated on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

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

    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. Executive Order 13771 (``Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs''), directs agencies to
reduce regulation and control regulatory costs and provides that ``for
every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be
identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be
prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.'' This
rule has not been designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under
Executive order 12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget.
    As this rule is not a significant regulatory action, this rule is
exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 13771. See OMB's
Memorandum titled ``Interim Guidance Implementing Section 2 of the
Executive Order of January 30, 2017 titled `Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs' '' (February 2, 2017).
    We conclude that this rule is not a significant regulatory action
because we anticipate that it will have minimal impact on the economy,
will not interfere with other agencies, will not adversely alter the
budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will not raise any novel
legal or policy issues. The two safety zones created by this rule will
be relatively small, allowing vessel traffic to continue to safely
transit while either or both are enforced, and safety zone two will be
enforced intermittently only for short periods of time. Under certain
conditions, moreover, vessels may still transit through the safety
zones when permitted by the Captain of the Port.

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.
    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered the impact of this temporary rule on small entities. This
rule will affect the following entities, some of which might be small
entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit on a
portion of Lake Michigan in Calumet Harbor from midnight May 1, 2018
through midnight September 1, 2018.
    These safety zones will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the reasons cited in the
Regulatory Planning and Review section. Additionally, before the
enforcement of the zones, we will issue local Broadcast Notice to
Mariners and Local Notice to Mariners so vessel owners and operators
can plan accordingly.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. 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 the establishment of two safety zones for a lakebed rock
removal operation involving explosives on Lake Michigan in Calumet
Harbor, in Chicago, IL. It is categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1, of DHS
Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of Environmental
Consideration (REC) supporting this determination is available in the
docket where indicated in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. We
seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from this rule.

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 parts 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.T09-0234 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-2018-0234   Safety Zone; Lake Michigan, Calumet Harbor,
Chicago, IL.

    (a) Location. Safety zone one; all navigable waters of Lake
Michigan bounded by a line drawn from the Calumet Harbor Entrance South
Side Light at 41[deg]44.1348' N, 087[deg]30.3790' W then southwest to
41[deg]43.8568' N, 087[deg]30.6587' W then southeast to 41[deg]43.5801'
N, 087[deg]30.2830' W then east to the Calumet Harbor Breakwater South
End Light at 41[deg]43.5619' N, 087[deg]29.6016' W (NAD 83). Safety
zone two will encompass all navigable waters of Lake Michigan within a
2000 foot radius from 41[deg]43.6665' N, 087[deg]30.3805' W (NAD 83).
    Enforcement period. This rule will be enforced from midnight on May
1, 2018 through midnight on September 1, 2018 for safety zone one.
Safety zone two will be enforced intermittently from midnight on May 1,
2018 through midnight on September 1, 2018. Prior to the commencement
of blasting operations a broadcast notice to mariners will be issued to
notify the

public that safety zone two is being enforced.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within
these safety zones is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of
the Port Lake Michigan or a designated on-scene representative.
    (2) These safety zones are closed to all vessel traffic, except as
may be permitted by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or a
designated on-scene representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the Captain of the Port Lake
Michigan is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who
has been designated by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan to act on
his or her behalf.
    (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zones shall contact the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or an on-
scene representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the
Port Lake Michigan or an on-scene representative may be contacted via
VHF Channel 16 or alternatively they may contact the Captain of the
Port Lake Michigan via landline at<PHONE_NUMBER>. Vessel operators given
permission to enter or operate in the safety zones must comply with all
directions given to them by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan, or
an on-scene representative.

    Dated: April 11, 2018.
Thomas J. Stuhlreyer,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan.
[FR Doc. 2018-08794 Filed 4-25-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 170 (Thursday, September 1, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54397-54399]
[FR Doc No: 2011-22351]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0533; Directorate Identifier 2011-NE-16-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Lycoming Engines (Type Certificate
Previously Held by Textron Lycoming) 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 would require removing certain

``machined-from-billet'' Volare LLC (formerly Precision Airmotive
Corporation, formerly Facet Aerospace Products Company, formerly
Marvel-Schebler (BorgWarner)) HA-6 carburetors, inspecting for a loose
mixture control sleeve or for a sleeve that may become loose, repairing
the carburetor, or replacing the carburetor with one eligible for
installation. This proposed AD was prompted by a report of a
``machined-from-billet'' HA-6 carburetor having a loose mixture control
sleeve that rotated in the carburetor body causing restriction of fuel
and power loss. We are proposing this AD to prevent engine in-flight
shutdown, power loss, and reduced control of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by October 17,
2011.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Marvel-Schebler Aircraft Carburetors LLC, 125 Piedmont Avenue,
Gibsonville NC 27249; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Web site: http://www.msacarbs.com. You
may review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park,
Burlington, MA. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neil Duggan, Aerospace Engineer,
Propulsion, Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Small Airplane
Directorate; 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337; phone:
404-474-5576; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2011-0533;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NE-16-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    Volare Carburetors, LLC recently informed us of an airplane
experiencing power loss. Volare reported that the airplane engine's
carburetor, formerly known as a Precision Airmotive ``machined-from-
billet'' HA-6 carburetor, had a loose mixture control sleeve that
rotated in the carburetor body. That rotation restricted fuel flow and
caused power loss. Volare also reported that the sleeve rotation was a
manufacturing defect.
    In 2008, a similar power loss event occurred. At that time, the
manufacturer recovered five carburetors, which represented all known
discrepant carburetors. With this recent failure, however, the
population of five affected carburetors is too small, and must be
expanded.
    This condition, if not corrected, could result in in-flight
shutdown or power loss, possibly resulting in reduced control of the
airplane.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed Marvel-Schebler Aircraft Carburetors LLC Emergency
Service Bulletin (SB) No. SB-18, dated October 14, 2010. The SB
identifies the affected population of HA-6 carburetors.

FAA's Determination

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

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require accomplishing the actions specified
in the service information described previously, except as discussed
under ``Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service
Information.''

Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service Information

    This proposed AD has a compliance time of within 50 flight hours
after the effective date of the AD. The Marvel-Schebler Aircraft
Carburetors LLC Emergency SB No. SB-18, dated October 14, 2010, has a
compliance time of before further flight.
    This proposed AD would not require returning the carburetor to the
manufacturer. The SB does.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 10,700 engines installed
on aircraft of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about
0.5 work-hour per aircraft to perform the proposed inspection, and that
about 409 carburetors would need repair. Approximately 2 work-hours per
carburetor are required to repair the carburetor. The average labor
rate is $85 per work-hour. Required parts would cost about $600 per
carburetor. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the
proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $769,680. Our cost estimate is
exclusive of possible warranty coverage.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    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
airworthiness directive (AD):

Lycoming Engines (Type Certificate previously held by Textron
Lycoming) Reciprocating Engines: Docket No. FAA-2011-0533;
Directorate Identifier 2011-NE-16-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by October 17, 2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to the Lycoming Engines reciprocating
engines listed in Table 1 of this AD, with carburetor part numbers
listed in Table 2 of this AD.

                                    Table 1--Affected Lycoming Engine Models
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
O-320-D1D                             O-360-A1G6D                           O-360-A1H6
O-360-A2G                             O-360-A4G                             O-360-A4J
O-360-A4K                             O-360-C4F                             O-360-E1A6D
O-360-F1A6                            HO-360-C1A                            LO-360-A1G6D
LO-360-A1H6                           LO-360-E1A6D                          TO-360-C1A6D
O-540-J3C5D                           O-540-L3C5D                           N/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

           Table 2--Part Numbers (Including All Dash Numbers) of Known Affected HA-6 Model Carburetors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       10-5219-XX             10-5224-XX             10-5230-XX             10-5235-XX             10-5253-XX
       10-5255-XX             10-5283-XX             10-6001-XX             10-6019-XX             10-6030-XX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD was prompted by a report of a ``machined-from-
billet'' HA-6 carburetor having a loose mixture control sleeve that
rotated in the carburetor body causing restriction of fuel and power
loss. We are issuing this AD to prevent engine in-flight shutdown,
power loss, and reduced control of the airplane.

Compliance

    (e) Comply with this AD within 50 flight hours after the
effective date of this AD, unless already done.

Inspection

    (f) Inspect the carburetor to determine the type of body the
carburetor has. Use Marvel-Schebler Emergency Service Bulletin (SB)
No. SB-18, dated October 14, 2010, Figure (3) to determine which
type of body is used.
    (g) If the carburetor has a die-cast body, no further action is
required.
    (h) If the carburetor has an affected ``machined-from-billet''
body, remove the carburetor; and replace the carburetor with:
    (i) An HA-6 carburetor not listed in Table 2 of this AD; or
    (ii) An HA-6 carburetor that is listed in Table 2 but is
exempted as described in paragraphs 1.A. and 1.B of Marvel-Schebler
Emergency SB No. SB-18, dated October 14, 2010; or that has already
been repaired using that Emergency SB.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (i) 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

    (j) For more information about this AD, contact Neil Duggan,
Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion, Atlanta Aircraft Certification
Office, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate; 1701 Columbia Avenue,
College Park, Georgia 30337; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (404) 474-
5606; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (k) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Marvel-Schebler Aircraft Carburetors LLC, 125 Piedmont Avenue,
Gibsonville, NC 27249; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-
mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Web site: http://www.msacarbs.com. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on August 24, 2011.
Thomas A. Boudreau,
Acting Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-22351 Filed 8-31-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: September 24, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 185)]
[Notices]
[Page 58455-58456]
[DOCID:fr24se10-151]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62948; File No. SR-NYSE-2010-69]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change Amending Rule 104 To Adopt
Pricing Obligations for Designated Market Makers

September 20, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on September 17, 2010, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 104 to adopt pricing
obligations for Designated Market Makers (``DMMs''). The text of the
proposed rule change is available at the Exchange, the Commission's
Public Reference Room, and http://www.nyse.com.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 104 to adopt pricing
obligations for DMMs. Under the proposal, the Exchange will require
DMMs to continuously maintain two-sided bid and offer interest within a
Designated Percentage \3\ from the National Best Bid and National Best
Offer (``NBBO'') for each security in which they are registered. These
pricing obligations are intended to eliminate trade executions against
DMM placeholder quotations traditionally priced far away from the
inside market, commonly known as ``stub quotes.'' They are also
intended to augment and work in conjunction with Trading Pauses in
individual securities due to extraordinary market volatility, which are
already in place on a pilot basis for stocks in the S&P 500[reg] Index
and the Russell 1000[reg] Index, under Exchange Rule 80C.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The term Designated Percentage is defined in proposed Rule
104(a)(1)(B)(iii).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62252 (June 10,
2010), 75 FR 34186 (June 16, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-39). See also
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62884 (September 10, 2010), 75
FR 56618 (September 16, 2010) (SR-NYSE-2010-49). See also Rule 80C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the proposal, the Exchange will require DMMs to enter and
maintain quotes priced no more than the Designated Percentage away from
the NBBO. Permissible quotes are determined by the individual character
of the security, the time of day in which the quote is entered, and
other factors which are summarized below.
    For purposes of the proposed rule, Designated Percentage shall mean
the Threshold Move as defined under Rule 80C less two (2) percentage
points. Because the Threshold Move across all exchanges is currently
10%, a DMM's quote in a security may not be more than 8% away from
NBBO. Once a permissible quote is entered, it may rest without
adjustment until such time as it is more than the Defined Limit away
from the NBBO. For purposes of the proposed rule, the Designated Limit
shall mean the Threshold Move as defined under Rule 80C less one-half
percentage point (i.e. 9.5%). If the DMM's resting interest exceeds the
Defined Limit the DMM must enter new interest at a price not more than
the Designated Percentage of 8% away from the NBBO (or identify to the
Exchange current resting interest that satisfies the

DMM's obligation). For times during the trading day when a Trading
Pause is not in effect under Rule 80C (e.g., before 9:45 a.m. and after
3:35 p.m.), the Designated Percentage calculation will assume a trigger
percentage of 22%. Therefore, a DMM must maintain a quote no further
than 20% away from the NBBO and the quote may rest without adjustment
until it is more than 21.5% from the NBBO. In the absence of an NBBO,
the above calculations will remain the same, but will use the last
reported sale from the single plan processor responsible for
consolidation of information for the security pursuant to Rule 603 of
Regulation NMS.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 240.603.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For securities that are not subject to Trading Pauses, the
Designated Percentage will assume a trigger percentage of 32% and apply
the same 2% reduction. Thus, DMMs registered in those securities shall
be required to maintain quotes no more than 30% away from NBBO. As with
securities subject to Trading Pauses, once a permissible quote is
entered it may rest without adjustment until such time as it becomes
more than the Defined Limit away from the NBBO (31.5%), whereupon the
DMM must enter new interest at a price not more than the Designated
Percentage of 30% away from the NBBO (or identify to the Exchange
current resting interest that satisfies the DMM's obligation). The
Exchange proposes that these requirements shall apply to NMS stocks (as
defined in Rule 600 under Regulation NMS) \6\ during the trading day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 240.600.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nothing in the proposal shall preclude a DMM from quoting at price
levels that are closer to the NBBO than the levels required under the
proposal.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\7\ in
general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\
in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism
of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in
general, to protect investors and the public interest. The Exchange
believes that the proposed rule change also is consistent with the
principles of Section 11A(a)(1) \9\ of the Act in that it seeks to
assure fair competition among brokers and dealers and among exchange
markets. The Exchange believes the proposed rule change meets these
requirements in that it promotes transparency and uniformity concerning
pricing obligations across markets for certain market participants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78k-1(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

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

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2010-69 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2010-69. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/
sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10
a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make publicly available. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2010-69 and should be
submitted on or before October 15, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-23971 Filed 9-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 199 (Monday, October 15, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51937-51938]
[FR Doc No: 2018-22383]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP18-534-000]

Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review of the Northern Lights 2019 Expansion and
Rochester Projects

    On July 27, 2018, Northern Natural Gas Company (Northern) filed an
application in Docket No. CP18-534-000 requesting a Certificate of
Public Convenience and Necessity pursuant to Section 7(c) of the
Natural Gas Act to construct and operate certain natural gas pipeline
facilities. The proposal has two major components, known as the
Northern Lights 2019 Expansion Project and the Rochester Project, which
together would provide approximately 138,504 dekatherms per day of
upstream firm natural gas transportation service to serve increased
markets for industrial, commercial, and residential uses.
    On August 10, 2018, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission or FERC) issued its Notice of Application for the Project.
Among other things, that notice alerted agencies issuing federal
authorizations of the requirement to complete all necessary reviews and
to reach a final decision on a request for a federal authorization
within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the projects. This instant notice
identifies the FERC staff's planned schedule for the completion of the
EA for the projects.

Schedule for Environmental Review

Issuance of EA November 21, 2018
90-day Federal Authorization Decision Deadline February 19, 2019

    If a schedule change becomes necessary, additional notice will be
provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the
Project's progress.

Project Description

    The projects consist of new pipeline and compression facilities,
all in the state of Minnesota. The Rochester Project component includes
12.6 miles

of new 16-inch-diameter pipeline in Olmsted County (Rochester
Greenfield Lateral); increase of maximum allowable operating pressure
on an 8-mile-long segment of 16-inch-diameter pipeline in Freeborn and
Mower Counties; a new town border station in Olmsted County, including
a pig receiver; relocation of a regulator from Freeborn to Mower
County; and appurtenant facilities, including two valves and a pig
launcher at milepost (MP) 0.0 of the Rochester Greenfield Lateral.
    The Northern Lights Expansion Project component includes 10.0 miles
of new 24-inch-diameter pipeline in Hennepin and Wright Counties; 4.3
miles of new 8-inch-diameter pipeline loop extension in Morrison
County; 1.6 miles of new 6-inch-diameter pipeline loop in Le Sueur
County; 3.1 miles of new 24-inch-diameter pipeline extension in Carver
County; a new 11,153-horsepower (hp) compressor station in Carver
County; an additional 15,900 hp of compression at the existing
Faribault Compressor Station in Rice County; an additional 15,900 hp of
compression at the existing Owatonna Compressor Station in Steele
County; and appurtenant facilities, including valves, pig launchers,
and pig receivers in Hennepin, Wright, Morrison, Le Sueur, and Carver
Counties.

Background

    On February 6, 2018, the Commission issued a Notice of Intent to
Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Planned Northern Lights
2019 Expansion Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues
(NOI). The NOI addressed both the Northern Lights 2019 Expansion and
the Rochester Project components, and was issued during the pre-filing
review of the projects in Docket No. PF18-1-000 and was sent to
affected landowners; federal, state, and local government agencies;
elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native
American tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries and
newspapers.
    In response to the NOI, the Commission received comments from the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota State Historic
Preservation Office; one Native American tribe; ten landowners; and one
public interest group. The primary issues raised by the commentors were
karst terrain, groundwater, surface waterbodies, special status
species, property values, local economy, land use, and air quality and
noise impacts from construction and operation of pipeline facilities.
All substantive comments will be addressed in the EA.
    The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is a cooperating agency in
the preparation of the EA.

Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to
keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets,
the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription. This can
reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by
automatically providing you with notification of these filings,
document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Additional information about the projects are available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs at (866) 208-FERC or on the
FERC website (www.ferc.gov). Using the ``eLibrary'' link, select
``General Search'' from the eLibrary menu, enter the selected date
range and ``Docket Number'' excluding the last three digits (i.e.,
CP18-534), and follow the instructions. For assistance with access to
eLibrary, the helpline can be reached at<PHONE_NUMBER>, TTY (202) 502-
8659, or at [email protected]. The eLibrary link on the FERC
website also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by
the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rule makings.

    Dated: October 9, 2018
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-22383 Filed 10-12-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 236 (Monday, December 9, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73872-73873]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29251]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: FEMA-2013-0051; OMB No. 1660-0127]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Logistics Capability Assistance Tool (LCAT)

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites
the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity
to comment on a revision of a currently approved information
collection. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
this notice seeks comments concerning the Logistics Capability
Assistance Tool (LCAT).

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before February 7, 2014.

ADDRESSES: To avoid duplicate submissions to the docket, please use
only one of the following means to submit comments:
    (1) Online. Submit comments at http://www.regulations.gov under
Docket ID FEMA-2013-0051. Follow the instructions for submitting
comments.
    (2) Mail. Submit written comments to Docket Manager, Office of
Chief Counsel, DHS/FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Room 8NE, Washington, DC
20472-3100.
    All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket
ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material,
all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any
personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this
information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act
notice that is available via the link in the footer of http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Megan Repass, Program Analyst,
Logistics Management Directorate, Logistics Plans & Exercises Division,
202-646-2522 for additional information. You may contact the Records
Management Division for copies of the proposed collection of
information at facsimile number<PHONE_NUMBER> or email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Logistics Capability Assistance Tool
(LCAT) is tailored for use by state, local, and tribal entities to
evaluate their current disaster logistics readiness, identify areas for
targeted improvement, and develop a roadmap to both mitigate weaknesses
and further enhance strengths. The LCAT is authorized by Public Law
109-295, Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2007, and
Title VI of the Post-Katrina Emergency Reform Act of 2006, Sections 636
and 637 (6 U.S.C. 636 and 637).

Collection of Information

    Title: Logistics Capability Assistance Tool (LCAT).
    OMB Number: 1660-0127.
    Type of Information Collection: Revision of a currently approved
information collection.
    FEMA Forms: FEMA Form 008-0-1, State Content Guide (formerly LCAT
Booklet); FEMA Form 008-0-2, Local Content Guide; FEMA Form 008-0-3,
Tribal Content Guide.
    Abstract: The Logistics Capability Assistance Tool (LCAT) is a
voluntary maturity model for state, local, and tribal entities to self-
assess their disaster logistics planning and response capabilities and
identify areas of relative strength and weakness. The LCAT is
facilitated through two-day collaborative sessions and is hosted by the
requesting emergency management agency's office. FEMA provides the
emergency management agencies with a detailed analysis report and
roadmap for continuous improvement if the state, local, or tribal
entity decides to share the outcome.
    Affected Public: State, local, or Tribal Government.
    Number of Respondents: 41.
    Number of Responses: 41.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 363 hours.

                                                                           Estimated Annualized Burden Hours and Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of                                                 Total annual                    Total annual
           Type of respondent                 Form name/form No.         Number of     responses per   Total number       Average burden per        burden (in    Average hourly    respondent
                                                                        respondents     respondent     of responses       response (in hours)         hours)         wage rate         cost
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State, Local or Tribal Government.......  LCAT Briefing/No Form.....              11               1              11  0.33 hour (20 minutes)....             3.3          $43.57         $158.16
State, Local or Tribal Government.......  State Content Guide and                 10               1              10  12 hours..................             120           43.57        5,228.40
                                           Instructions/FEMA Form
                                           008-0-1.
State, Local or Tribal Government.......  Local Content Guide/FEMA                10               1              10  12 hours..................             120           43.57        5,228.40
                                           Form 008-0-2.
State, Local or Tribal Government.......  Tribal Content Guide/FEMA               10               1              10  12 hours..................             120           43.57        5,228.40
                                           Form 008-0-3.
                                         -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................  ..........................              41  ..............              41  ..........................             363  ..............       15,843.36
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Note: The ``Avg. Hourly Wage Rate'' for each respondent includes a 1.4 multiplier to reflect a fully-loaded wage rate.

    Estimated Cost: The estimated annual cost to respondents for the
hour burden is $15,843.36. There are no annual costs to respondents
operations and maintenance costs for technical services. There is no
annual start-up or capital costs. The cost to the Federal Government is
$252,340.00.

Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption
above. Comments are solicited to (a) Evaluate whether the proposed data
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b)
evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

    Dated: November 26, 2013.
Charlene D. Myrthil,
Director, Records Management Division, Mission Support Bureau, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2013-29251 Filed 12-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16988-16990]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6918]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0776; FRL-9651-2]
RIN 2060-AR20

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Amendment to HFO-1234yf SNAP
Rule for Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning Sector

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
revise one of the use conditions required for use of hydrofluoroolefin
(HFO)-1234yf (2,3,3,3-tetrafluoroprop-1-ene), a substitute for ozone-
depleting substances (ODSs) in the motor vehicle air conditioning end-
use within the refrigeration and air conditioning sector, as acceptable
subject to use conditions under the EPA's Significant New Alternatives
Policy (SNAP) program. The revised use condition incorporates by
reference a revised standard from SAE International. In the ``Rules and
Regulations'' section of this Federal Register, we are revising a use
condition for use of HFO-1234yf in motor vehicle air conditioning as a
direct final rule without a prior proposed rule. If we receive no
adverse comment, we will not take further action on this proposed rule.

DATES: Written comments must be received by April 23, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2011-0776 by mail to OAR Docket and Information Center, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460.
    Comments may also be submitted electronically or through hand
delivery/courier by following the detailed instructions in the
ADDRESSES section of the direct final rule located in the rules section
of this Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Margaret Sheppard, Stratospheric
Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs; Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code 6205J, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax number,
(202) 343-2338; email address at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The
published versions of notices and rulemakings under the SNAP program
are available on EPA's Stratospheric Ozone Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/regs. The full list of SNAP decisions in all
industrial sectors is available at http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Why is EPA issuing this proposed rule?

    This action proposes revising a use condition for the refrigerant
HFO-1234yf in motor vehicle air conditioning under EPA's Significant
New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program. This action would incorporate
by reference an updated edition of a standard from SAE International
and clarifying the scope of the use condition. We have published a
direct final rule which revises a condition for use of HFO-1234yf in
motor vehicle air conditioning in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section
of this Federal Register because we view this as a noncontroversial
action and anticipate no adverse comment. We have explained our reasons
for this action in the preamble to the direct final rule.
    If we receive no adverse comment and no requests for public
hearings in response to this action, we will not take further action on
this proposed rule. If we receive adverse comment, we will withdraw the
direct final rule and it will not take effect. We would address all
public comments in any subsequent final rule based on this proposed
rule. If a public hearing is requested, EPA will provide notice in the
Federal Register as to the location, date, and time.
    We do not intend to institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.
For further information, please see the information provided in the
ADDRESSES section of this document.

II. Does this action apply to me?

    This notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) would regulate the use of
HFO-1234yf (2,3,3,3-tetrafluoroprop-1-ene, Chemical Abstracts Service
Registry Number [CAS Reg. No.] 754-12-1) as a refrigerant in new motor
vehicle air conditioning (MVAC) systems in new passenger cars and
light-duty trucks. Businesses in this end-use that might want to use
HFO-1234yf in new MVAC systems in the future include:

 Automobile manufacturers
 Automobile repair shops
Regulated entities may include:

    Table 1--Potentially Regulated Entities, by North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) Code
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Category                   NAICS code                 Description of regulated entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry...........................             336111  Automobile Manufacturing.
Services...........................             811111  General Automotive Repair.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather a guide
regarding entities likely to be regulated by this action. If you have
any questions about whether this action applies to a particular entity,
consult the person listed in the preceding section, FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

III. What is EPA proposing?

    EPA is proposing to revise one of the use conditions required for
use of hydrofluoroolefin (HFO)-1234yf (2,3,3,3-tetrafluoroprop-1-ene),
a substitute for ozone-depleting substances (ODSs) in the motor vehicle
air conditioning end-use under EPA's Significant New Alternatives
Policy

(SNAP) program. In March 2011, EPA listed HFO-1234yf as acceptable,
subject to use conditions, for use in motor vehicle air conditioning
(MVAC) systems in new passenger cars and light-duty trucks (March 29,
2011; 76 FR 17488). We are revising the use condition that incorporated
by reference the February 2011 edition of SAE International's \1\
(herein after, SAE) J2844 standard for connections with refrigerant
containers. We are revising this use condition to incorporate by
reference an updated edition of the standard, and we also are
clarifying the scope of that use condition. This action does not place
any significant burden on the regulated community and ensures
consistency with industry standards. The direct final rule will be
effective on May 22, 2012 without further notice unless we receive
adverse comment (or a request for a public hearing) by April 23, 2012.
If EPA receives adverse comment or a request for a public hearing, we
will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the
public that all or part of this rule will not take effect. EPA will
address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on this
proposed rule. We will not institute a second public comment period on
this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this
time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Formerly, the Society of Automotive Engineers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    You may claim that information in your comments is confidential
business information, as allowed by 40 CFR part 2. If you submit
comments and include information that you claim as confidential
business information, we request that you submit them directly to
Margaret Sheppard in two versions: one clearly marked ``Public'' to be
filed in the public docket, and the other marked ``Confidential'' to be
reviewed by authorized government personnel only.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
It contains no new requirements for reporting. However, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has previously approved the information
collection requirements contained in the existing regulations in
subpart G of 40 CFR part 82 under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control
numbers 2060-0226 (EPA ICR No. 1596.08). This Information Collection
Request (ICR) included five types of respondent reporting and
recordkeeping activities pursuant to SNAP regulations: submission of a
SNAP petition, filing a SNAP/TSCA Addendum, notification for test
marketing activity, recordkeeping for substitutes acceptable subject to
use restrictions, and recordkeeping for small volume uses. The OMB
control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statutes unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations,
and small governmental jurisdictions.
    EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis in connection with this proposed rule because this
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. For purposes of assessing the impacts of
today's rule on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small
business as defined by the Small Business Administration's (SBA)
regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; for NAICS code 336111 (Automobile
manufacturing), a small business has <1000 employees; and for NAICS
code 811111 (General Automotive Repair), a small business has annual
receipts of less than $7.0 million; (2) a small governmental
jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school
district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and
(3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on
small entities, EPA has concluded that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This rule will not impose any requirements on small entities beyond
current industry practices. Today's action effectively ensures
consistency with current industry practices and standards, whereas
without these revisions, small businesses would need to reconcile
differences between EPA regulations and industry standards.
    It is not clear that there would be any cost differential between
these new unique fittings, those used with the current automotive
refrigerant, HFC-134a, or other fittings that the automotive industry
could adopt instead. It is possible that the fittings required in the
revised use condition will be less expensive because they are a
standard shape and size easily produced in a metal-working shop. Thus,
cost impacts of this proposed rule on small entities are expected to be
small. This proposed rule is expected to relieve burden for some small
entities, such as automotive repair shops, by avoiding confusion over
which fittings to use and by using a more robust fitting that allows
quick detection of any leaks from the valve.
    Although this proposed rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has
tried to reduce the impact of this rule on small entities. EPA has
worked together with SAE International and with groups representing
professional service technicians such as the Mobile Air Conditioning
Society Worldwide, which conducts regular outreach with technicians and
owners of small businesses such as retail refrigerant suppliers and
automobile repair shops.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This rule does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in
expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any one year.
This final rule will not impose any requirements beyond current
industry practices, and thus, compliance costs are expected to be
small. Thus, this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections
202 or 205 of UMRA.
    This rule is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of
UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The requirements of
this rule apply to the servicing of motor vehicle air conditioning
systems. The requirements of this rule for unique fittings are expected
to be comparable in cost to those of current fittings. Requirements
would be the same as those imposed on any other entity performing
servicing on motor vehicle air conditioning systems.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. This regulation applies directly
to facilities that use these substances and not to governmental
entities. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed action
from State and local officials.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). It does not
significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal
governments, because this regulation applies directly to facilities
that use these substances and not to governmental entities. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
    EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed
action from tribal officials.

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

    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health
or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This proposed rule is not economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and the Agency does not have reason to believe
the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action
present a disproportionate risk to children. This action concerns only
use of a specific fitting that may reduce technician's exposure in the
course of professional servicing of MVAC systems. Therefore, we did not
conduct further health or risk assessments beyond those in the original
rulemaking (March 29, 2011; 76 FR 17488). This rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically significant as
defined in Executive Order 12866 and because the Agency does not have
reason to believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by
this action present a disproportionate risk to children.
    The public is invited to submit comments or identify peer-reviewed
studies and data that assess effects of early life exposure to HFO-
1234yf.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, Section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This rulemaking involves technical standards. EPA proposes to use
SAE International's most recent version of the SAE J2844 standard, ``R-
1234yf (HFO-1234yf) New Refrigerant Purity and Container Requirements
for Use in Mobile Air-Conditioning Systems.'' This standard can be
obtained from http://www.sae.org/technical/standards/. This standard
addresses, among other things, appropriate fittings and other
requirements for refrigerant containers for use for professional
servicing of MVAC systems using the alternative refrigerant HFO-1234yf.
    EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of the proposed rulemaking
and, specifically, invites the public to identify potentially-
applicable voluntary consensus standards and to explain why such
standards should be used in this regulation.

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

    Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This final rule requires specific use conditions for
unique fittings for use with refrigerant containers for professional
servicing of MVAC systems, for those servicing MVAC systems using this
low global warming potential refrigerant alternative. It does not
directly affect the amount of exposure to or emissions of HFO-1234yf
expected.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Stratospheric ozone layer.

    Dated: March 15, 2012.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012-6918 Filed 3-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P