[Federal Register: November 13, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 218)]
[Notices]
[Page 63956-63957]
[DOCID:fr13no07-111]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

ITS Joint Program Office; Intelligent Transportation Systems
Program Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Research and Innovative Technology Administration, U.S.
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    This notice announces, pursuant to section 10(A)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (Pub. L. 72-363; 5 U.S.C. app. 2), a
meeting of the Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Program
Advisory Committee (ITSPAC). The meeting will be held November 26,
2007, 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. and November 27, 2007, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. The
meeting will take place at the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S.
DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington DC, in Conference Room
6 on the lobby level of the West Building.
    The ITSPAC, established under section 5305 of Public Law 109-59,
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users, August 10, 2005, and chartered on February 24, 2006,
was created to advise the Secretary of Transportation on all matters
relating to the study, development and implementation of intelligent
transportation systems. Through its sponsor, the ITS Joint Program
Office, the ITSPAC will make recommendations to the Secretary regarding
the ITS program needs, objectives, plans, approaches, contents, and
progress.
    The following is a summary of the meeting's tentative agenda. Day
1: (1) Welcome and Introductions; (2) ITS Program Overview; (3)
Identifying Trends in ITS (Panel Session); and (4) A & A and Wrap-up.
Day 2: (1) Reports on Results of ITSPAC Member Interviews; (2) Future
Vision for ITS Program (Gaps and Opportunities, What Does Success Look
Like?, Implications for the Future ITS Program); (3) Summary of
Outcomes (Prioritizing Trends/Programs in Terms of JPO Role

and Opportunities); and (4) Next Steps in Strategic Planning
Activities.
    Since access to the U.S. DOT building is controlled, all persons
who plan to attend the meeting must notify Ms. Marcia Pincus, the
Committee Management Officer, at<PHONE_NUMBER> not later than November
21, 2007. Individuals attending the meeting must report to the 1200 New
Jersey Avenue entrance of the U.S. DOT Building for admission.
Attendance is open to the public, but limited space is available. With
the approval of Ms. Shelley Row, the Committee Designated Federal
Official, members of the public may present oral statements at the
meeting. Non-committee members wishing to present oral statements or
obtain information should contact Ms. Pincus.
    Questions about the agenda or written comments may be submitted by
U.S. Mail to: U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and
Innovative Technology Administration, ITS Joint Program Office,
Attention: Marcia Pincus, Room E33-401, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington DC 20590 or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>. The ITS Joint Program
Office requests that written comments be submitted prior to the
meeting.
    Persons with a disability requiring special services, such as an
interpreter for the hearing impaired, should contact Ms. Pincus at
least seven calendar days prior to the meeting.
    Notice of this meeting is provided in accordance with the FACA and
the General Service Administration regulations (41 CFR part 102-3)
covering management of Federal advisory committees.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on the 6th day of November, 2007.
John Augustine,
Managing Director, ITS Joint Program Office.
[FR Doc. E7-22148 Filed 11-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-HY-P


[Federal Register: December 1, 2009 (Volume 229, Number 74)]
[Notices]
[Page 62885]
[DOCID:fr01de09-159]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment on Surplus Property
Release at Kinston Regional Jetport, Kinston, NC

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of Title 49, U.S.C. Section 47153(d),
notice is being given that the FAA is considering a request from the
North Carolina Global TransPark Authority to waive the requirement that
a 3.63 acre parcel of surplus property, located at the Kinston Regional
Jetport, be used for aeronautical purposes.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 31, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this notice may be mailed or delivered in
triplicate to the FAA at the following address: Atlanta Airports
District Office, 1701 Columbia Ave., Campus Building, Suite 2-260,
College Park, GA 30337.
    In addition, one copy of any comments submitted to the FAA must be
mailed or delivered to Ms. Darlene A. Waddell, Executive Director at
the following address: 2780 Jetport Road, Suite A, Kinston, NC 28504.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rusty Nealis, Program Manager, Atlanta
Airports District Office, 1701 Columbus Ave., Campus Bldg., Suite 2-
260, College Park, GA 30337,<PHONE_NUMBER>. The application may be
reviewed in person at this same location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA is reviewing a request by the North
Carolina Global TransPark Authority to release 3.63 acres of surplus
property at the Kinston Regional Jetport. The surplus property is being
used for a computer design software facility for Spatial Integrated
Systems, Inc.
    Any person may inspect the request in person at the FAA office
listed above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
    In addition, any person may, upon request, inspect the request,
notice and other documents germane to the request in person at 2780
Jetport Road, Suite A, Kinston, NC 28504.

    Issued in Atlanta, GA on November 17, 2009.
Scott L. Seritt,
Manager, Atlanta Airports District Office, Southern Region.
[FR Doc. E9-28445 Filed 11-30-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 225 (Friday, November 21, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 69459]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27550]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL15-19-000]

Avista Corporation; Notice of Petition for Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on November 10, 2014, pursuant to Rule 207 of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice
and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207, and sections 366.3(b)(i) and 366.3(d) of
the Commission's regulations, Avista Coproration (Avista) requesting
exemption from certain requirements under the Public Utility Holding
Company Act of 2005 (PUHCA 2005),\1\ as more fully described in the
petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 42 U.S.C. 16451, et seq. (PUHCA 2005). See 42 U.S.C. 16454
(providing for certain exemptions from the requirements of PUHCA
2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Petitioner.
    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 5 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 email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on December 10, 2014.

    Dated: November 14, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-27550 Filed 11-20-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: May 22, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 100)]
[Notices]
[Page 29838-29841]
[DOCID:fr22my08-112]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2000-7257; Notice No. 47]

Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC); Working Group Activity
Update

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Announcement of Railroad Safety Advisory Committee working
group activities.

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

SUMMARY: FRA is updating its announcement of RSAC's Working Group
activities to reflect its current status.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Woolverton, RSAC Coordinator,
FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Mailstop 25, Washington, DC 20590,
(202) 493-6212, or Grady Cothen, Deputy Associate Administrator for
Safety, FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Mailstop 25, Washington, DC
20590,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice serves to update FRA's last
announcement of working group activities and status reports as of
February 1, 2008, (73 FR 6257). The 34th full RSAC Committee meeting
was held February 20, 2008, and the 35th meeting is scheduled for June
11, 2008, at the National Housing Center in Washington, DC.
    Since its first meeting in April of 1996, the RSAC has accepted 25
tasks. The status for each of the tasks is provided below.

Open Tasks

    Task 96-4--Tourist and Historic Railroads. Reviewing the
appropriateness of the agency's current policy regarding the
applicability of existing and proposed regulations to tourist,
excursion, scenic, and historic railroads. This task was accepted on
April 2, 1996, and a working group was established. The working group
monitored the steam locomotive regulation task. Planned future
activities involve the review of other regulations for possible
adaptation to the safety needs of tourist and historic railroads.
Contact: Grady Cothen, Jr.,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task 03-01--Passenger Safety. This task includes updating and
enhancing the regulations pertaining to passenger safety, based on
research and experience. This task was accepted on May 20, 2003, and a
working group was established. Prior to embarking on substantive
discussions of a specific task, the working group set forth in writing
a specific description of the task. The working group reports planned
activities to the full Committee at each scheduled full RSAC meeting,
including milestones for completion of projects and progress toward
completion. At the first meeting held September 9-10, 2003, a
consolidated list of issues was completed. At the second meeting held
November 6-7, 2003, four task groups were established: Emergency
preparedness, mechanical, crashworthiness, and track/vehicle
interaction. The task groups met and reported on activities for working
group consideration at the third meeting held May 11-12, 2004, and a
fourth meeting was held October 26-27, 2004. The working group met on
March 21-22, 2006, and again on September 12-13, 2006, at which time
the group agreed to establish a task force on general passenger safety.
The full Passenger Safety Working Group met on April 17-18, 2007, and
again on December 11-12, 2007. The next meeting is scheduled for June
18, 2008. Contact: Charles Bielitz,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (Emergency Preparedness Task Force) At the working group meeting of
March 9-10, 2005, the working group received and approved the consensus
report of the Emergency Preparedness Task Force related to emergency
communication, emergency egress, and rescue access. These
recommendations were presented to, and approved by, the full RSAC on
May 18, 2005. The working group met on September 7-8, 2005, and
additional supplementary recommendations were presented to, and
accepted by, the full RSAC on October 11, 2005. The Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) was published on August 24, 2006, and was open for
comments until October 23, 2006. The working group agreed upon
recommendations for resolution of final comments during the April 17-
18, 2007, meeting. The recommendations were presented to, and approved
by, the full RSAC on June 26, 2007. The final rule regarding emergency
communication, emergency egress, and rescue access was published on
February 1, 2008 (73 FR 6370). The task force met on October 17-18,
2007, and the group reached consensus on draft rule text for a followup
NPRM on passenger train emergency systems. The task force presented the
draft rule text to the Passenger Safety Working Group on December 11-
12, 2007, and the consensus draft rule text was presented and approved
by a full RSAC vote during the February 20, 2008, meeting. The next
meeting is scheduled for May 13-14, 2008. Contact: Brenda Moscoso,
(202) 493-6282.
    (Mechanical Task Force) (Completed) Initial recommendations on
mechanical issues (revisions to Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) part 238) were approved by the full Committee on January 26,
2005. At the working group meeting of September 7-8, 2005, the task
force presented additional perfecting amendments and the full RSAC
approved them on October 11, 2005. An NPRM was published in the Federal
Register on December 8, 2005, (70 FR 73070). Public comments were due
by February 17, 2006. The final rule was published in the Federal
Register on October 19, 2006, (71 FR 61835) effective December 18,
2006.
    (Crashworthiness Task Force) Among its efforts, the Crashworthiness
Task Force provided consensus recommendations on static-end strength
that were adopted by the working group on September 7-8, 2005. The full
Committee accepted the recommendations on October 11, 2005. The Front-
End Strength of Cab Cars and Multiple-Unit Locomotives NPRM was
published in the Federal Register on August 1, 2007 (72 FR 42016), with
comments due by October 1, 2007. A number of comments were entered into
the docket and FRA is considering each of them in drafting a final
rule. To demonstrate the means of determining compliance with the
crashworthiness requirements of the rule, FRA scheduled deformation
tests as prescribed in the NPRM. A dynamic impact test per the
performance standard was conducted on April 16, 2008. Additionally, two
quasi-static tests are planned for May 22, 2008 and June 25, 2008. The
objectives of the tests are to show alternative means for demonstrating
compliance with dynamic performance and quasi-static strength-based
standard outlined in the NPRM. Contact: Gary Fairbanks,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (Vehicle/Track Interaction Task Force) The task force is developing
proposed revisions to 49 CFR Parts 213 and 238 principally regarding
high-speed passenger service. The task force met on October 9-11, 2007,
and again on November 19-20, 2007, in Washington, DC and presented the
final task force report and final recommendations and proposed rule
text for approval by the Passenger Safety Working Group at the December
11-12, 2007, meeting. The final report and the proposed rule text were
approved by the working group and were presented to, and approved by,
full RSAC vote during the February 20, 2008, meeting. The group last
met on February 27-28, 2008, and FRA is currently drafting an NPRM. No
additional task force meetings are currently scheduled. Contact: John
Mardente,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (General Passenger Safety Task Force) At the working group meeting
on April 17-18, 2007, the task force presented a progress report to the
working group. The task force met on July 18-19, 2007, and afterward it
reported proposed reporting cause codes for injuries involving the
platform gap that were approved by the working group by mail ballot in
September 2007. The full

RSAC approved the recommendations for changes to 49 CFR Part 225
accident/incident cause codes on October 25, 2007. The task force
continues work on passenger train door securement, ``second train in
station,'' trespasser incidents, and system safety based solutions by
developing a regulatory approach to system safety. The General
Passenger Safety Task Force presented draft guidance material for
management of the gap that was considered and approved by the working
group during the December 11-12, 2007, meeting and was presented and
approved by full RSAC vote during the February 20, 2008, meeting. The
group met last on April 23-24, 2008. Contact: Dan Knote, (631) 567-
1596.
    Task 05-01--Review of Roadway Worker Protection Issues. This task
was accepted on January 26, 2005, to review 49 CFR Part 214, Subpart C,
Roadway Worker Protection, and related sections of Subpart A; recommend
consideration of specific actions to advance the on-track safety of
railroad employees and contractors engaged in maintenance-of-way
activities throughout the general system of railroad transportation,
including clarification of existing requirements. A working group was
established and reported to the RSAC any specific actions identified as
appropriate. The first meeting of the working group was held on April
12-14, 2005. The group drafted and accepted regulatory language for
various revisions, clarifications, and additions to 32 separate items
in 19 sections of the rule. However, two parties raised technical
concerns regarding the draft language concerning electronic display of
track authorities. The working group reported recommendations to the
full Committee at the June 26, 2007, meeting. FRA, through the NPRM
process, is to address this issue along with eight additional items on
which the working group was unable to reach a consensus. Comments were
received and were considered during the drafting of the NPRM. In early
2008, the external working group members were solicited to review the
consensus text for errata review. A draft NPRM is currently under
review for legal sufficiency by the Office of Safety staff and legal
counsel, and is expected to be published in late 2008. Contact:
Christopher Schulte,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task 05-02--Reduce Human Factor-Caused Train Accident/Incidents.
This task was accepted on May 18, 2005, to reduce the number of human
factor-caused train accidents/incidents and related employee injuries.
The Railroad Operating Rules Working Group was formed and the group
extensively reviewed the issues presented. The final working group
meeting devoted to developing a proposed rule was held February 8-9,
2006. The working group was not able to deliver a consensus regulatory
proposal, but did recommend that it be used to review comments on FRA's
NPRM, which was published in the Federal Register on October 12, 2006,
(FR 71 60372) with public comments due by December 11, 2006. Two
reviews were held, one February 8-9, 2007, and the other April 4-5,
2007. Consensus was reached on four items and those items were
presented and accepted by the full RSAC Committee at the June 26, 2007,
meeting. A final rule was published in the Federal Register on February
13, 2008 (73 FR 8442) with an effective date of April 14, 2008. The
most recent working group meetings were held September 27-28, 2007, and
January 17-18, 2008. The next meeting is scheduled for May 21-22, 2008.
Contact: Douglas Taylor,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task 06-01--Locomotive Safety Standards. This task was accepted on
February 22, 2006, to review 49 CFR Part 229, Railroad Locomotive
Safety Standards, and revise as appropriate. A working group was
established with the mandate to report any planned activity to the full
Committee at each scheduled full RSAC meeting, to include milestones
for completion of projects and progress toward completion. The first
working group meeting was held May 8-10, 2006. Working group meetings
were held on August 8-9, 2006; September 25-26, 2006; October 30-31,
2006; January 9-10, 2007; and the working group presented
recommendations regarding revisions to requirements for locomotive
sanders to the full RSAC on September 21, 2006. The NPRM regarding
Sanders was published in the Federal Register on March 6, 2007 (72 FR
9904). Comments received were discussed by the working group for
clarification, and FRA published a final rule on October 19, 2007 (72
FR 59216). The working group is continuing the review of 49 CFR Part
229 with a view to proposing further revisions to update the standards.
The working group met on November 27-28, 2007, and February 5-6, 2008.
The next meeting is scheduled for May 20-21, 2008, and a followup
meeting is scheduled for August 5-6, 2008. Contact: George Scerbo,
(202) 493-6249.
    Task 06-02--Track Safety Standards and Continuous Welded Rail.
Section 9005 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (Pub.L. No. 109-59,
``SAFETEA-LU''), the 2005 Surface Transportation Authorization Act,
requires FRA to issue requirements for inspection of joint bars in
continuous welded rail (CWR) to detect cracks that could affect the
integrity of the track structure. (49 U.S.C. 20142(e)). FRA published
an interim final rule (IFR) establishing new requirements for
inspections on November 2, 2005 (70 FR 66288). On October 11, 2005, FRA
offered the RSAC a task to review comments on this IFR, but the
conditions could not be established under which the Committee could
have undertaken this with a view toward consensus. Comments on the IFR
were received through December 19, 2005, and FRA reviewed the comments.
On February 22, 2006, the RSAC accepted this task to review and revise
the CWR related to provisions of the Track Safety Standards, with
particular emphasis on reduction of derailments and consequent injuries
and damage caused by defective conditions, including joint failures, in
track using CWR. A working group was established. The working group
will report any planned activity to the full Committee at each
scheduled full RSAC meeting, including milestones for completion of
projects and progress toward completion. The first working group
meeting was held April 3-4, 2006, at which time the working group
reviewed comments on the IFR. The second working group meeting was held
April 26-28, 2006. The working group also met May 24-25, 2006, and July
19-20, 2006. The working group reported consensus recommendations for
the final rule that were accepted by the full RSAC Committee by mail
ballot on August 11, 2006. The final rule was published in the Federal
Register on October 11, 2006, (71 FR 59677). The working group is
continuing its review of 49 CFR Section 213.119 with a view to
proposing further revisions to update the standards. The working group
met January 30-31, 2007; April 10-11, 2007; June 27-28, 2007; August
15-16, 2007; October 23-24, 2007; and January, 8-9, 2008. The working
group reported consensus recommendations for revisions to 49 CFR
Section 213.119 regulations to the full RSAC Committee on February 20,
2008, and the recommendations were accepted. The next meeting is
scheduled for September 16-17, 2008. Contact: Ken Rusk,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task 06-03--Medical Standards for Safety-Critical Personnel. This
task was accepted on September 21, 2006, to enhance the safety of
persons in the railroad operating environment and the public by
establishing standards and

procedures for determining the medical fitness for duty of personnel
engaged in safety-critical functions. A working group has been
established and will report any planned activity to the full Committee
at each scheduled full RSAC meeting, including milestones for
completion of projects and progress toward completion. The first
working group meeting was held December 12-13, 2006. The working group
met on February 20-21, 2007; July 24-25, 2007; August 29-30, 2007;
October 31-November 1, 2007; December 4-5, 2007; February 13-14, 2008;
March 26-27, 2008; and April 22-23, 2008. A task force of physicians
was established in May 2007 to work on specific medical exam-related
issues. The task force of physicians has had meetings or conference
calls on July 24, 2007; August 20, 2007; October 15, 2007; and October
31, 2007, and is scheduled to meet again on June 23-24, 2008. Contact:
Alan Misiaszek,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task 07-01--Track Safety Standards. This task was accepted on
February 22, 2007, to consider specific improvements to the Track
Safety Standards (TSS) or other responsive actions, supplementing work
already underway on CWR specifically: review controls applied to reuse
of rail in CWR ``plug rail,'' review the issue of cracks emanating from
bond wire attachments, consider improvements in the TSS related to
fastening of rail to concrete ties, and ensure a common understanding
within the regulated community concerning requirements for internal
rail flaw inspections. These tasks were assigned to the Track Safety
Standards Working Group. The working group will report any planned
activity to the full Committee at each scheduled full RSAC meeting,
including milestones for completion of projects and progress toward
completion. The first working group meeting was held on June 27-28,
2007, and the group met again on August 15-16, 2007, and October 23-24,
2007. Two task forces were created under the working group; the
Concrete Ties Task Force and the Rail Integrity Task Force. The
Concrete Ties Task Force met on November 26-27, 2007; February 13-14,
2008; and April 16-17, 2008, and the next meeting is scheduled for July
9-10, 2008. The Rail Integrity Task Force met on November 28-29, 2007;
February 12-13, 2008; and April 15-16, 2008, and the next meeting is
scheduled for July 8-9, 2008. Contact: Ken Rusk,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Task 08-01--Report on the Nation's Railroad Bridges. This task was
accepted on February 20, 2008, to report to the Federal Railroad
Administrator on the current state of railroad bridge safety
management, update the findings and conclusions of the 1993 Summary
Report of the FRA Railroad Bridge Safety Survey, and include
recommendations for further action with a target date of November 3,
2008. The working group first met on April 24-25, 2008 and the next
meeting is scheduled for June 12-13, 2008.

Completed Tasks

    Task 96-1--(Completed) Revising the Freight Power Brake
Regulations.
    Task 96-2--(Completed) Reviewing and recommending revisions to the
TSS (49 CFR part 213).
    Task 96-3--(Completed) Reviewing and recommending revisions to the
Radio Standards and Procedures (found under 49 CFR part 220).
    Task 96-5--(Completed) Reviewing and recommending revisions to
Steam Locomotive Inspection Standards (49 CFR part 230).
    Task 96-6--(Completed) Reviewing and recommending revisions to
miscellaneous aspects of the regulations addressing Locomotive Engineer
Certification (49 CFR part 240).
    Task 96-7--(Completed) Developing Roadway Maintenance Machines (On-
Track Equipment) Safety Standards.
    Task 96-8--(Completed) This planning task evaluated the need for
action responsive to recommendations contained in a report to Congress,
titled, ``Locomotive Crashworthiness & Working Conditions.''
    Task 97-1--(Completed) Developing crashworthiness specifications
(49 CFR part 229) to promote the integrity of the locomotive cab in
accidents resulting from collisions.
    Task 97-2--(Completed) Evaluating the extent to which
environmental, sanitary, and other working conditions in locomotive
cabs affect the crew's health and the safe operation of locomotives,
proposing standards where appropriate.
    Task 97-3--(Completed) Developing event recorder data survivability
standards.
    Task 97-4 and Task 97-5--(Completed) Defining positive train
control functionalities, describing available technologies, evaluating
costs and benefits of potential systems, and considering implementation
opportunities and challenges, including demonstration and deployment.
    Task 97-6--(Completed) Revising various regulations to address the
safety implications of processor-based signal and train control
technologies, including communications-based operating systems.
    Task 97-7--(Completed) Determining damages qualifying an event as a
reportable train accident.
    Task 00-1--(Completed-task withdrawn) Determining the need to amend
regulations protecting persons who work on, under, or between rolling
equipment and persons applying, removing, or inspecting rear-end
marking devices (Blue Signal Protection).
    Task 01-1--(Completed) Developing conformity of FRA's regulations
for accident/incident reporting (49 CFR Part 225) to revised
regulations of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S.
Department of Labor, and to make appropriate revisions to the FRA Guide
for Preparing Accident/Incident Reports (Reporting Guide).
    Please refer to the notice published in the Federal Register on
March 11, 1996, (61 FR 9740) for more information about the RSAC.

    Issued in Washington, DC on May 15, 2008.
Michael J. Logue,
Associate Administrator for Safety Compliance and Program
Implementation.
[FR Doc. E8-11532 Filed 5-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register: September 5, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 171)]
[Notices]
[Page 52351]
[DOCID:fr05se06-56]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-54379; File No. SR-CBOE-2006-66]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change Regarding Market-
Maker Appointments

August 28, 2006.
    On July 11, 2006, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend CBOE Rule 8.3 to provide
that in the event a Market-Maker is a nominee of a member organization
or has registered the Market-Maker's membership for a member
organization, the member organization with which the Market-Maker is
associated would be permitted to request that the Exchange deem all
class appointments be made to the member organization instead of to the
individual Market-Maker.\3\ In such a case, if an individual Market-
Maker were no longer associated with a member organization, the class
appointments would continue to be held by the member organization and
not the individual Market-Maker. In the event a member organization did
not request that the class appointments be held by the member
organization, a Market-Maker's class appointments would continue to be
held in the name of the individual Market-Maker and not the member
organization with which the Market-Maker is associated. The proposed
rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register on July
27, 2006.\4\ The Commission received no comments on the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ If such a request is made by a member organization, CBOE
would consider that the submission of electronic quotations and
orders would be made by and on behalf of the member organization
with which the individual Market-Maker is associated. However, CBOE
proposes that CBOE Rule 8.3 would state that the individual Market-
Maker would continue to have all of the obligations of a Market-
Maker under Exchange rules in these circumstances.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54184 (July 20,
2006), 71 FR 42690.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange \5\ and, in
particular, the requirements of Section 6 of the Act \6\ and the rules
and regulations thereunder. The Commission specifically finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act \7\
in that it is designed to promote just and equitable principles of
trade, to remove impediments and to 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 Commission believes that the
proposal should provide more flexibility to Market-Maker organizations
in structuring class appointments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission notes
that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\8\ that the proposed rule change (SR-CBOE-2006-66) is approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-14597 Filed 9-1-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: March 11, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 46)]
[Notices]
[Page 10596-10597]
[DOCID:fr11mr09-90]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2007-E-0462]

Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent
Extension; CERENIA INJECTABLE SOLUTION

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined the
regulatory review period for CERENIA INJECTABLE SOLUTION and is
publishing this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA
has made the determination because of the submission of an application
to the Director of Patents and Trademarks, Department of Commerce, for
the extension of a patent which claims that animal drug product.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and petitions to the Division of
Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630
Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Submit electronic comments
to http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory
Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
51, rm. 6222, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term
Restoration Act of 1984 (Public Law 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug
and Patent Term Restoration Act (Public Law 100-670) generally provide
that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as
the patented item (human drug product, animal drug product, medical
device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory
review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a
product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the
amount of extension an applicant may receive.
    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A
testing phase and an approval phase. For animal drug products, the
testing phase begins on the earlier date when either a major
environmental effects test was initiated for the drug or when an
exemption under section 512(j) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (21 U.S.C. 360b(j)) became effective and runs until the approval
phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial submission of
an application to market the animal drug product and continues until
FDA grants permission to market the drug product. Although only a
portion of a regulatory review period may count toward the actual
amount of extension that the Director of Patents and Trademarks may
award (for example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well
as any time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's
determination of the length of a regulatory review period for an animal
drug product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase
as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(4)(B).
    FDA recently approved for marketing the animal drug product CERENIA
INJECTABLE SOLUTION (maropitant). CERENIA INJECTABLE SOLUTION is
indicated for the prevention and treatment of acute vomiting in dogs.
Subsequent to this approval, the Patent and Trademark Office received a
patent term restoration application for CERENIA INJECTABLE SOLUTION
(U.S. Patent No. 6,222,038) from Pfizer Inc., and the Patent and
Trademark Office requested FDA's assistance in determining this
patent's eligibility for patent term restoration. In a letter dated May
6, 2008, FDA advised the Patent and Trademark Office that this animal
drug product had undergone a regulatory review period and that the
approval of CERENIA INJECTABLE SOLUTION represented the first permitted
commercial marketing or use of the product. Shortly thereafter, the
Patent and Trademark Office requested that FDA determine the product's
regulatory review period.
    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for
CERENIA INJECTABLE SOLUTION is 1,887 days. Of this time, 1,841 days
occurred during the testing phase of the regulatory review period,
while 46 days occurred during the approval phase. These periods of time
were derived from the following dates:
    1. The date an exemption under section 512(j) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360b(j)) became effective: December
1, 2001. The applicant claims June 28, 2000, as the date the
investigational new animal drug application (INAD) became effective.
However, the date that a major health or environmental effects test is
begun or the date on which the agency acknowledges the filing of a
notice of claimed investigational exemption for a new animal drug,
whichever is earlier, is the effective date for the INAD. According to
FDA records, December 1, 2001, is the effective date for the INAD.
    2. The date the application was initially submitted with respect to
the animal drug product under section 512 of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act: December 15, 2006. The applicant claims December 13,
2006, as the date the new animal drug application (NADA) for CERENIA
INJECTABLE SOLUTION (NADA 141-263) was initially submitted. However, a
review of FDA records reveals that NADA 141-263 was initially submitted
on December 15, 2006.
    3. The date the application was approved: January 29, 2007. FDA has
verified the applicant's claim that NADA 141-263 was approved on
January 29, 2007.
    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the
maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office applies several statutory limitations in
its calculations of the actual period for patent extension. In its
application for patent extension, this applicant seeks 1,078 days of
patent term extension.
    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are
incorrect may submit to the Division of Dockets Management (see
ADDRESSES) written or electronic comments and ask for a redetermination
by May 11, 2009. Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA
for a determination regarding whether the applicant for extension acted
with due diligence during the regulatory review period by September 8,
2009. To meet its burden, the petition must contain sufficient facts to
merit an FDA investigation. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d
sess., pp. 41-42, 1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in
21 CFR 10.30.
    Comments and petitions should be submitted to the Division of
Dockets Management. Three copies of any mailed information are to be
submitted, except that individuals may submit one copy. Comments are to
be identified with the docket number found in brackets in the heading
of this document. Comments and petitions may be seen in the Division of
Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    Dated: February 17, 2009.
Jane A. Axelrad,
Associate Director for Policy, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
[FR Doc. E9-5112 Filed 3-10-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 217 (Monday, November 9, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71351-71352]
[FR Doc No: 2020-24845]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: FEMA-2020-0033; OMB No. 1660-0026]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; State Administrative Plan for the Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: 60 day notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites
the general public to take this opportunity to comment on an extension,
without change, of a currently approved information collection. In
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice seeks
comments concerning the State Administrative Plan for the procedural
guide that details how the State will administer the Hazard Mitigation
Grant Program (HMGP).

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before January 8, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments at www.regulations.gov under Docket ID FEMA-
2020-0033. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket
ID, and 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 and Security Notice that is
available via a link on the homepage of www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roselyn Brown-Frei, Section Chief,
Hazard Mitigation Division, Federal Insurance and Mitigation
Administration, FEMA<EMAIL_ADDRESS>202-924-7198.
You may contact the Information Management Division for copies of the
proposed collection of information at

email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA regulations in 44 CFR 206.437 require
development and updates to the State Administrative Plan by State
Applicants/Recipients, as a condition of receiving HMGP funding under
section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5170c. Applicant/Recipients can be any State
of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin
Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, or an Indian Tribal government (federally-recognized)
that chooses to act as an Applicant/Recipient. A State is defined in
section 102(4) of the Stafford Act (42 U.S.C. 5122) as any State of the
United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin
Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands.

Collection of Information

    Title: State Administrative Plan for the Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program.
    Type of Information Collection: Extension, without change, of a
currently approved information collection.
    OMB Number: 1660-0026.
    FEMA Forms: None.
    Abstract: The State Administrative Plan is a procedural guide that
details how the State will administer the HMGP. The State, Territory,
or Indian Tribal government (who acts as a recipient) must have a
current administrative plan approved by the appropriate FEMA Regional
Administrator before receiving HMGP funds. The administrative plan may
take any form including a chapter within a comprehensive State
mitigation program strategy.
    Affected Public: State, Territories, and Tribal governments.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 35.
    Frequency of Response: Twice Annually.
    Estimated Number of Responses: 70.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 560.
    Estimated Total Annual Respondent Cost: $32,704.
    Estimated Respondents' Operation and Maintenance Costs: There are
no Operation and Maintenance Costs associated with this information
collection.
    Estimated Respondents' Capital and Start-Up Costs: There are no
record keeping, capital, start-up or maintenance costs associated with
this information collection.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost to the Federal Government: $23,871.

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.

Maile Arthur,
Acting Records Management Branch Chief, Office of the Chief
Administrative Officer, Mission Support, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2020-24845 Filed 11-6-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-BW-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 157 (Monday, August 15, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54178-54179]
[FR Doc No: 2016-19285]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Twenty-Ninth Meeting Special Committee 216 Aeronautical Systems
Security

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

ACTION: TWENTY-NINTH MEETING Special Committee 216 Aeronautical Systems
Security.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a
meeting of TWENTY-NINTH MEETING Special Committee 216 Aeronautical
Systems Security.

DATES: The meeting will be held September 19-23, 2016, 09:00 a.m.-5:00
p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at: General Aviation Manufacturers
Association, Inc., 1400 K St. NW., #801, Washington, DC 20005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karan Hofmann at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
(202) 330-0680, or The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street NW., Suite
910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax at
(202) 833-9434, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org.
    Notice: Those who plan to attend in person need to provide the
following information to Karan Hofmann at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>no later
than Wednesday, September 14th:

    Name
    Country of citizenship
    Company
    Email address

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of the TWENTY-NINTH MEETING Special
Committee 216 Aeronautical Systems Security. The agenda will include
the following:

Monday, September 19, 2016--9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

1. Welcome and Administrative Remarks
2. Introductions
3. Agenda Review
4. Meeting-Minutes Review
5. Jointly with WG-72:
    a. Review Joint Action List
    b. Review White Papers
    i. Status and intent of those planned and produced
    ii. Gain common understanding of intent
    iii. Resolve differences
6. Plan next steps in developing WG-72 and SC-216 harmonized draft
document
7. Schedule Update
8. Date, Place and Time of Next Meeting
9. New Business
10. Adjourn Plenary

Tuesday, September 20, 2016--9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

Continuation of Plenary or Working Group Sessions

Wednesday, September 21, 2016--9:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m.

Continuation of Plenary or Working Group Sessions

Thursday, September 22, 2016--9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

Continuation of Plenary or Working Group Sessions

Friday, September 23, 2016--9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

Continuation of Plenary or Working Group Sessions

    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 August 9, 2016.
Mohannad Dawoud,
Management & Program Analyst, Partnership Contracts Branch, ANG-A17,
NextGen, Procurement Services Division, Federal Aviation
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016-19285 Filed 8-12-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 19 (Monday, January 30, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5787-5788]
[FR Doc No: 2023-01505]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R05-OAR-2021-0949; FRL-9532-03-R5]

Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Redesignation of the Ohio portion of the
Cincinnati, Ohio-Kentucky Area to Attainment of the 2015 Ozone
Standard; Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action corrects an error in a table posted in the June 9,
2022, rule redesignating the Ohio portion of the Cincinnati, Ohio-
Kentucky area to attainment of the 2015 ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS). The table contained motor vehicle emissions
budgets (Budgets) for volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of
nitrogen (NOX) for the Ohio portion of the Cincinnati OH-KY
area. The Budgets table in that action conflicts with the Budgets
submitted by Ohio and set forth in the proposed rule. Therefore, EPA is
correcting the erroneous table.

DATES: This correction is effective on January 30, 2023.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2021-0949. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) 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
www.regulations.gov or at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region
5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays and facility closures
due to COVID-19. We recommend that you telephone Olivia Davidson,
Environmental Scientist, at<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting the Region 5
office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Olivia Davidson, Environmental
Scientist, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA published a final rule redesignating the
Ohio portion of the Cincinnati area to attainment of the 2015 ozone
NAAQS on June 9, 2022 (87 FR 35104). That rule also approved VOC and
NOX Budgets for the Ohio portion of the Cincinnati area for
transportation conformity purposes. In that rule, EPA erroneously
identified the 2015 ozone Budgets as 14.15 and 10.58 tons per day (tpd)
for NOX in 2026 and 2035, respectively, and 25.30 and 18.98
tpd for VOC in 2026 and 2035, respectively. The table in that action
conflicts with the Budgets submitted by Ohio and set forth in the
proposed rule. The Budgets submitted by Ohio are 14.15 and 10.58 tpd
for VOC in 2026 and 2035, and 25.30 and 18.98 tpd in 2026 and 2035 for
NOX. Therefore, the table is being revised to reflect the
correct Budgets.
    Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B), provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that
notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary or contrary
to the public interest, the agency may issue a rule without providing
notice and an opportunity for public comment. We have determined that
there is good cause for making this rule final without prior proposal
and opportunity for comment because we are merely correcting an
incorrect citation in a previous action. Thus, notice and public
procedure are unnecessary. We find that this constitutes good cause
under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action is not a significant regulatory action subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
(E.O.s) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011). This action does not impose an information
collection burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.). Because the agency has made a ``good cause'' finding
that this action is not subject to notice-and-comment requirements
under the Administrative Procedures Act or any other statute as
indicated in the section above, it is not subject to the regulatory
flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C 601
et seq.), or to sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4). This action 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 governments, as
specified by E.O. 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). In addition,
the State Implementation Plan (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 E.O. 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
action is not subject to E.O. 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),
because it is not economically significant. This action is also not
subject to E.O. 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001). This technical correction action does not involve
technical standards; thus the requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) do not apply. The action also does not involve special
consideration of environmental justice related issues as required by
E.O. 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act (CRA), and
EPA will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. Section 808 allows the
issuing agency to make a rule effective sooner than otherwise provided
by the CRA if the agency makes a good cause finding that notice and
public procedure is impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the
public interest. This determination must be supported by a brief
statement. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). As stated previously, EPA had made such a
good cause finding, including the reasons therefore, and established an
effective date of January 30, 2023. This correction to 40 CFR 52 for
Ohio is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Correction

    In FR Doc. 2022-12318, published in the Federal Register on June 9,
2022 (87 FR 35104), on page 35108, in first column, the table entitled
``Table 2--2026 and 2035 Budgets for the Ohio Portion for the 2015
Ozone NAAQS Maintenance Area [Tons per summer day, TPSD]'' is corrected
to read:

 Table 2--2026 and 2035 Budgets for the Ohio Portion for the 2015 Ozone
                         NAAQS Maintenance Area
                       [Tons per summer day, TPSD]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          2026     2035
                       Pollutant                         Budget   Budget
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX...................................................    25.30    18.98
VOC...................................................    14.15    10.58
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: January 19, 2023.
Debra Shore,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2023-01505 Filed 1-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 12, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44987-44989]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15930]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2016-3987; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-165-AD;
Amendment 39-18580; AD 2016-13-15]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Dassault Aviation Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 7X airplanes. This AD was prompted by a
report of improperly drilled bores, located on upper and lower
stiffener joints to the Web at a certain frame. This AD requires a one-
time inspection of the bores, and repair if necessary. We are issuing
this AD to detect and correct an unsatisfactory bore that can adversely
affect the structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective August 16, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of August 16,
2016.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this final rule,
contact Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box
2000, South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet:
http://www.dassaultfalcon.com. You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating
Docket No. FAA-2016-3987.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-
3987; 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 AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
800-647-

5527) is Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain Dassault Aviation
Model FALCON 7X airplanes. The NPRM published in the Federal Register
on March 1, 2016 (81 FR 10535) (``the NPRM'').
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued
Airworthiness Directive 2015-0204, dated October 8, 2015 (referred to
after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or
``the MCAI''), to correct an unsafe condition for certain Dassault
Aviation FALCON 7X airplanes. The MCAI states:

    On the assembly line of Falcon 7X airplanes, defects were
detected on left hand and right hand engine pylons. A quality review
revealed that bores located on upper and lower stiffener joints to
the web at pylon Frame 41 were improperly drilled. Fettlings of
borings, for fixing diameter 4 mm [millimeters] and 5 mm, were found
ovalized, too deep and having irregular surface qualities under the
head of fixing. Dassault Aviation identified the individual
airplanes that are potentially affected by this production
deficiency.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, would adversely
affect the structural integrity of the airplane.
    To address this potential unsafe condition Dassault Aviation
published Service Bulletin (SB) 7X-346 to provide corrective action
instructions.
    For the reasons described above, this [EASA] AD requires a one-
time [detailed] visual [and rototest] inspection for unsatisfactory
bores and, depending on findings, repair of affected stiffener
bores.

    A bore is not satisfactory if it has any surface defects greater
than or equal to 0.5 mm or if any chamfer dimension or edge distance
value is not within the dimensions specified in Dassault Aviation
Service Bulletin 7X-346, dated April 24, 2015. You may examine the MCAI
in the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-3987.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting this AD with the changes described
previously except for minor editorial changes. We have determined that
these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed Dassault Service Bulletin 7X-346, dated April 24, 2015.
The service information describes procedures for a one-time inspection
and repair of the bores on stiffeners at Frame 41 on the engine pylons.
    This service information is reasonably available because the
interested parties have access to it through their normal course of
business or by the means identified in the ADDRESSES section.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 55 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per      Cost on U.S.
                Action                         Labor cost           Parts cost        product        operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection...........................  66 work-hours x $85 per                $0          $5,610        $308,550
                                        hour = $5,610.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We estimate the following costs to do any necessary repair that
would be required based on the results of the required inspection. We
have no way of determining the number of airplanes that might need this
repair:

                                               On-Condition Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                    Action                                 Labor cost               Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repair........................................  20 work-hours x $85 per hour =              $149          $1,849
                                                 $1,700.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

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

Regulatory Findings

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

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

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

Adoption of the Amendment

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

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

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

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

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2016-13-15 Dassault Aviation: Amendment 39-18580. Docket No. FAA-
2016-3987; Directorate Identifier 2015-NM-165-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective August 16, 2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Dassault Aviation Model FALCON 7X airplanes,
certificated in any category, manufacturer serial numbers 1 through
221 inclusive, except serial numbers 182 and 220.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 53, Fuselage.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by a report of improperly drilled bores,
located on upper and lower stiffener joints to the web at a certain
frame. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct an
unsatisfactory bore that can adversely affect the structural
integrity of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Inspect Bores

    Within 4,000 flight cycles or 98 months, whichever occurs first
since date of issuance of the original airworthiness certificate or
date of issuance of the original export certificate of
airworthiness, do a detailed visual and rototest inspection of the
bores, located on upper and lower stiffener joints to the web at
pylon Frame 41, to determine if the bores are not satisfactory, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault Service
Bulletin 7X-346, dated April 24, 2015.

(h) Repair

    If, during the inspection required by paragraph (g) of this AD,
it is determined that any bore is not satisfactory: Before further
flight, repair affected bores, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Dassault Service Bulletin 7X-346, dated April 24,
2015, except as required by paragraph (i) of this AD.

(i) Exceptions

    Where the Dassault Service Bulletin 7X-346, dated April 24,
2015, specifies to contact Dassault Aviation: Before further flight,
repair using a method approved by the Manager, International Branch,
ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA); or Dassault Aviation's EASA Design
Organization Approval (DOA).

(j) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using
the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR
39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight
Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information
directly to the International Branch, send it to ATTN: Tom
Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>. Information
may be emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any
approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or
lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight
standards district office/certificate holding district office. The
AMOC approval letter must specifically reference this AD.
    (2) Contacting the Manufacturer: For any requirement in this AD
to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer, the action must be
accomplished using a method approved by the Manager, International
Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or EASA; or
Dassault Aviation's EASA DOA. If approved by the DOA, the approval
must include the DOA-authorized signature.

(k) Related Information

    Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI)
EASA AD 2015-0204, dated October 8, 2015, for related information.
This MCAI may be found on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2016-3987.

(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless this AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Dassault Service Bulletin 7X-346, dated April 24, 2015.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation, Teterboro Airport, P.O. Box 2000,
South Hackensack, NJ 07606; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet:
http://www.dassaultfalcon.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 23, 2016.
Dorr M. Anderson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-15930 Filed 7-11-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 164 (Monday, August 25, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50554-50556]
[FR Doc No: 2014-20053]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0814 & EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0692; FRL-9915-65-Region 4]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Florida;
Infrastructure Requirement (Visibility) for the 1997 and 2006 PM, and
2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On April 18, 2008, and September 23, 2009, the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) received state implementation plan (SIP)
submissions from the State of Florida, through the Florida Department
of Environmental Protection (FDEP), regarding the infrastructure
elements for the 1997 annual Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively. On October 31, 2012, EPA received
a SIP submission from FDEP regarding the infrastructure elements for
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Additionally, on October 22, 2013, FDEP
supplemented the three aforementioned infrastructure SIP submissions.
The Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) requires that each state adopt and
submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of
each NAAQS promulgated by EPA. These plans are commonly referred to as
``infrastructure'' SIPs. Specifically, EPA is taking final action to
approve the submissions for Florida as they relate to the 1997 annual
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
infrastructure SIP requirements to protect visibility in other states.
All other applicable infrastructure requirements for these NAAQS have
been addressed in separate rulemakings. EPA is approving the elements
of these infrastructure SIP submissions, as supplemented on October 22,
2013, as they relate to the protection of visibility in other states.

DATES: This rule will be effective September 24, 2014.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0814 for the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 SIP submissions and EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0692 for the 2008
8-hour ozone SIP submission. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., 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
electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the
Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection.
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404)
562-9043. Mr. Lakeman can be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Upon promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, sections 110(a)(1) and
(2) of the CAA require states to address basic SIP requirements,
including emissions inventories, monitoring, and modeling to assure
attainment and maintenance for that new NAAQS. On July 18, 1997 (62 FR
38652), EPA established an annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15.0
micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\), based on a 3-year average of
annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, and a 24-hour NAAQS of 65
[mu]g/m\3\. On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), EPA retained the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS at 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year
average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations and promulgated
a new 24-hour NAAQS of 35 [mu]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of the
98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. On March 27, 2008 (77 FR
16436), EPA revised the 8-hour ozone NAAQS to 0.075 parts per million.
On March 21, 2014, EPA proposed to approve SIP submissions from Florida
as they relate to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) infrastructure SIP
requirements to protect visibility in other states for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS, 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, and 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS. A summary of the background for today's final
action is provided below. See EPA's March 21, 2014, proposed rulemaking
at 79 FR 15718 for more detail.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) has two components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and
110(a)(2)(D)(ii). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) includes four distinct
components, commonly referred to as ``prongs,'' that must be addressed
in infrastructure SIP submissions. The first two prongs, which are
codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), are provisions that prohibit
any source or other type of emissions activity in one state from
contributing significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS in another
state (prong 1) and interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in
another state (prong 2). The third and fourth prongs, which are
codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are provisions that prohibit
emissions activity in one state interfering with measures required to
prevent significant deterioration of air quality in another state
(prong 3) and to protect visibility in another state (prong 4). Section
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to include provisions ensuring
compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating to interstate
and international pollution abatement.
    EPA has previously taken action to address SIP submissions from
Florida related to prongs 1 through 3 of section

110(a)(2)(D)(i) and the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) for
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS, and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Today's final rulemaking relates
only to prong 4 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), which as previously
described, requires that infrastructure SIPs contain adequate
provisions to protect visibility in other states.

II. Response to Comments

    On March 21, 2014 (79 FR 15718), EPA published a proposed rule to
approve SIP submissions from Florida as they relate to the section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) infrastructure SIP requirements to protect
visibility in other states for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS,
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA
received comments and questions on the rulemaking from two members of
the general public (collectively referred to as the ``Commenter''). A
summary of these comments and EPA's response is provided below.
    Comment: The Commenter contends that EPA must disapprove the
infrastructure SIP submissions as they relate to prong 4 of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) because, according to the Commenter, regional haze at
the St. Marks Wildlife Refuge (St. Marks Class I Area) is caused by
prescribed burning; the Smoke Management Plan (SMP) attached to
Florida's regional haze SIP submittal is ``largely ignored'' by the
Florida Forest Service (FFS); the FFS has not designated the St. Marks
Class I Area as a Smoke Sensitive Area/Receptor and ``regularly
approves burns that engulf'' the St. Marks Class I Area and the Gulf of
Mexico; Georgia and Florida ``regularly send smoke from prescribed
burning to the other state;'' the FFS should disapprove prescribed
burns on days when the wind direction will likely send smoke in the
direction of the St. Marks Class I Area; and Florida's regional haze
SIP is ``never enforced.''
    Response: EPA disagrees that the concerns raised by the Commenter
require the Agency to disapprove Florida's infrastructure SIP
submissions under prong 4. The regional haze regulations at 40 CFR
51.308(d)(3)(v)(E) require that each state consider smoke management
techniques and plans for agricultural and forestry management purposes
in developing the long-term strategy (LTS) included in its regional
haze SIP. In reviewing Florida's regional haze SIP, EPA agreed with the
State's determination that elemental carbon associated with prescribed
fires was not a significant contributor to visibility in the Class I
areas in Florida or Georgia.\1\ Florida evaluated the impact of
emissions from within the State on Class I areas in neighboring states
and consulted with those states through a regional planning process.\2\
In its formal correspondence with Florida, Georgia supported Florida's
approach to identifying and evaluating emissions sources that
contribute significantly to visibility impairment in Georgia's Class I
areas and did not identify prescribed fires in Florida as a source that
significantly impacts those areas.\3\ EPA concluded that Florida had
satisfied the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(d)(3)(v)(E) to consider the
need for smoke management techniques in Florida's LTS for ensuring
reasonable progress towards improving visibility, but had reasonably
concluded that such techniques were not needed in its regional haze SIP
for the first planning period.\4\ We note that the Commenter has not
provided any information unavailable at the time that EPA finalized
action on Florida's regional haze SIP that warrants a different
conclusion. More importantly, given that the visibility requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) are directed toward the protection of
visibility in downwind states, the comments do not show that the
impacts from prescribed burning in Florida are interfering with the
reasonable progress goals set by Georgia or other nearby states for
their Class I areas. As such, the comments relating to visibility
impacts at the St. Marks Class I Area in Florida do not provide a basis
for disapproving FDEP's SIP submissions addressing the requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) with respect to visibility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 77 FR 31240, 31251, 31260-31261 (May 25, 2012).
    \2\ Id. at 31260.
    \3\ Id. at 31260-61; Letter from James P. Johnson, Georgia
Department of Natural Resources, to Thomas G. Rogers, FDEP (May 26,
2009) (attached as Exhibit 3 to Florida's regional haze SIP and
available in Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2010-0935).
    \4\ 77 FR at 31250-31251.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the comments concerning enforcement, the Commenter has
not identified any specific instances in which the State has failed to
implement or enforce any elements of its regional haze SIP. Florida
included the SMP as Appendix N to its regional haze SIP submittal, but
as noted in the transmittal document associated with Florida's August
31, 2010 regional haze SIP submission, the appendices to that
submission were included to provide background information and ``were
not proposed to be incorporated into the SIP.'' \5\ Because the SMP is
not part of Florida's SIP, it is not federally enforceable. Concerns
regarding the implementation of the SMP by the FFS should be addressed
to the State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ FDEP, Proposed Revision to State Implementation Plan, Number
2010-01, Regional Haze Plan (Amended), SIP Transmittal (August 31,
2010), p.3. This document can be found in Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2010-0935.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action

    As described above, EPA is approving the infrastructure SIP
submissions from FDEP as addressing prong 4 of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) of the CAA for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS and for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Specifically, EPA is
approving FDEP's April 18, 2008, and September 23, 2009, submissions
for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and FDEP's October 31,
2011, submission for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, as supplemented on
October 22, 2013, as they pertain to prong 4 of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) because they are consistent with section 110 of the
CAA.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. See 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
final 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, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state,
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    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 October 24, 2014. 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 dioxide, Particulate
Matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.

    Dated: August 14, 2014.
Heather McTeer Tony,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    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.

Subpart K--Florida

0
2. Section 52.520(e) is amended by adding three new entries for
``110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 Fine
Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards'',
``110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2006 Fine
Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' and
``110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' at the end of the table to
read as follows:

Sec.  52.520  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                                 EPA-Approved Florida Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         State
             Provision                 effective     EPA  approval     Federal Register         Explanation
                                         date            date               notice
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure         4/18/2008       8/25/2014  [Insert Federal        Addressing prong 4 of
 Requirements for the 1997 Fine                                      Register citation].    section
 Particulate Matter National                                                                110(a)(2)(D)(i)
 Ambient Air Quality Standards.                                                             only.
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure         9/23/2009       8/25/2014  [Insert Federal        Addressing prong 4 of
 Requirements for the 2006 Fine                                      Register citation].    section
 Particulate Matter National                                                                110(a)(2)(D)(i)
 Ambient Air Quality Standards.                                                             only.
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure        10/31/2011       8/25/2014  [Insert Federal        Addressing prong 4 of
 Requirements for the 2008 Ozone                                     Register citation].    section
 National Ambient Air Quality                                                               110(a)(2)(D)(i)
 Standards.                                                                                only.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2014-20053 Filed 8-22-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


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

General Comment:Hearth & Home journal article which states "Manufacturers that we interviewed this year all posted strong growth numbers of 15 to 20 percent, and perhaps a bit beyond. They did that while key indicators such as new home starts and sales, remodeling activity and consumer confidence were still far from what they were back in 2008." March 2014 edition.

This document can be viewed at the USEPA Docket Center Public Reading Room.  Address: 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Room 3334, Washington, DC 20004. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>