[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 89 (Thursday, May 8, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26473-26474]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10540]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-72086; File No. SR-EDGX-2014-05]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Designation of Longer Period for Commission Action on Proposed Rule
Change To Adopt a New Order Type Called the Mid-Point Discretionary
Order

May 2, 2014.
    On March 7, 2014, EDGX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``EDGX'') 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 its rules to add a new order type called
the Mid-Point Discretionary Order and to reflect the priority of Mid-
Point Discretionary Orders. The proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on March 25, 2014.\3\ The Commission
received no comment letters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71747 (March 19,
2014), 79 FR 16401.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that within 45 days of the
publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether these proposed rule changes should be disapproved.
The 45th day for this filing is May 9, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is extending the 45-day time period for Commission
action on the proposed rule change. The Commission finds that it is
appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on
the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider and
take action on the Exchange's proposed rule change.
    Accordingly, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(A)(ii)(I) of the Act \5\
and for the reasons stated above, the Commission designates June 23,
2014, as the date by which the Commission should either approve or
disapprove, or institute proceedings to determine whether to

disapprove, the proposed rule change (File No. SR-EDGX-2014-05).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(A)(ii)(I).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-10540 Filed 5-7-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 37 (Monday, February 27, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11907-11908]
[FR Doc No: 2017-03763]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER17-987-000]

Iron Horse Battery Storage, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Iron Horse Battery Storage, LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and

385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is March 13, 2017.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic 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>.

    Dated: February 21, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-03763 Filed 2-24-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 88 (Friday, May 7, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25111-25113]
[FR Doc No: 2010-10772]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0162]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; KFOG Kaboom, Fireworks Display, San Francisco, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in the
navigable waters in San Francisco Bay in San Francisco, CA, in support
of the KFOG Kaboom Fireworks Display. This safety zone is established
to ensure the safety of participants and spectators from the dangers
associated with the pyrotechnics. Unauthorized persons or vessels are
prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or remaining in the
safety zone without permission of the Captain of the Port or his
designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 7:45 a.m. on May 20, 2010, through
9:30 p.m. on May 22, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2010-0162 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2010-0162 in the
``Keyword'' box, pressing Enter, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are
also available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management
Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call Ensign Liezl Nicholas at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists, as publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with
respect to this rule would be impracticable because the event would
occur before the rulemaking process would be completed. Because of the
dangers posed by the pyrotechnics used in these fireworks displays, the
safety zones are necessary to provide for the safety of event
participants, spectators, spectator craft, and other vessels transiting
the event area. For the safety concerns noted, it is in the public
interest to have these regulations in effect during the event.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Any delay in the effective date of
this rule would expose mariners to the dangers posed by the
pyrotechnics used in the fireworks display.

Basis and Purpose

    The radio station KFOG will sponsor the KFOG Kaboom Fireworks
Display on May 22, 2010, on the navigable waters of San Francisco Bay,
CA. The fireworks display is meant for entertainment purposes. This
safety zone establishes a temporary restricted area on the waters
surrounding the fireworks launch site during loading of the
pyrotechnics, and during the fireworks displays. This restricted area
around the launch site is necessary to protect spectators, vessels, and
other property from the hazards associated with the pyrotechnics on the
fireworks barges. The Coast Guard has granted the event sponsor a
marine event permit for the fireworks displays.

Discussion of Rule

    From 7:45 a.m. on May 20, 2010, during the set up of the fireworks
and until the start of the fireworks displays, the temporary safety
zone applies to the navigable waters around the fireworks sites within
a radius of 100 feet. From 9 p.m. until 9:30 p.m., the area to which
the temporary safety zone applies will increase in size to encompass
the

navigable waters around the fireworks launch site within a radius of
1,000 feet. The fireworks launch site will be located at
37[deg]42'21.20'' N, 122[deg]23'3.46'' W.
    The effect of the temporary safety zones will be to restrict
navigation in the vicinity of the fireworks sites while the fireworks
are set up, and until the conclusion of the scheduled displays. Except
for persons or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander,
no person or vessel may enter or remain in the restricted area. These
regulations are needed to keep spectators and vessels a safe distance
away from the fireworks barges to ensure the safety of participants,
spectators, and transiting vessels.

Regulatory Analyses

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

Regulatory Planning and Review

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

Small Entities

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

Assistance for Small Entities

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

Collection of Information

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

Federalism

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

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

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

Indian Tribal Governments

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

Energy Effects

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

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 0023.1 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves establishing,
disestablishing, or changing Regulated Navigation Areas and security or
safety zones.
    An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-306 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-306  Safety Zone; KFOG Kaboom, Fireworks Display, San
Francisco, CA.

    (a) Location. This temporary safety zone is established for a
portion of the waters of San Francisco Bay in San Francisco, CA. The
fireworks launch sites are located in position: 37[deg]42'21.20'' N,
122[deg]23'3.46'' W (NAD 83). From 7:45 a.m. on May 20, 2010, until 9
p.m. on May 22, 2010, the temporary safety zone extends to the
navigable waters around the fireworks launch sites within a radius of
100 feet. From 9 p.m. until 9:30 p.m. on May 22, 2010, the area to
which the temporary safety zones extends encompasses the navigable
waters within a radius of 1,000 feet around the fireworks launch sites.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, ``designated
representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a
Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast
Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or
assisting the Captain of the Port San Francisco (COTP) in the
enforcement of the safety zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general regulations in Sec.  165.23,
entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative.
    (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the COTP or a designated representative.
    (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the COTP or a designated representative to obtain
permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or
operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to
them by the COTP or the designated representative. Persons and vessels
may request permission to enter the safety zones on VHF-16 or through
the 24-hour Command Center at telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (d) Effective period. This section is effective from 7:45 a.m. on
May 20, 2010 through 9:30 p.m. on May 22, 2010.

    Dated: April 16, 2010.
P.M. Gugg,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2010-10772 Filed 5-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 5 (Monday, January 8, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 764-768]
[FR Doc No: 2018-00025]

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

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

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

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 5 / Monday, January 8, 2018 /
Proposed Rules

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2008-0612; FRL-9972- 81--Region 9]

Approval of California Air Plan Revisions, Yolo-Solano Air
Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a revision to the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District
(YSAQMD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP).
This revision concerns the District's demonstration regarding
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirements for the
1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The
EPA previously proposed to disapprove YSAQMD's 2006 RACT SIP submittal
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS because we found that existing District
rules implemented RACT for many but not all applicable sources. The
YSAQMD has since addressed these deficiencies by adopting approvable
rules that implement RACT and by adopting negative declarations where
the District concluded it had no sources subject to RACT requirements.
Therefore, we withdraw our previous proposed disapproval of YSAQMD's
2006 RACT SIP and now propose to approve it into the California SIP.
The EPA is also proposing to approve YSAQMD's negative declarations
into the SIP for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    We are proposing to approve local SIP revisions under the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to
follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by February 7, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2008-0612 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to Stanley
Tong, at [email protected]. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be removed or edited from
Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish
any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically
any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415)
947-4122, [email protected].

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

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What documents did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of these documents?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted documents?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
    A. How is the EPA evaluating the submitted documents?
    B. Do the submitted documents meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What documents did the State submit?

    On September 13, 2006, the YSAQMD adopted its ``Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT) State Implementation Plan (SIP)''
(``2006 RACT SIP'') analysis to demonstrate its stationary sources are
subject to RACT rules for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. On January
31, 2007, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) submitted it to the
EPA for approval as a revision to the California SIP. On July 31, 2007,
the submittal was deemed complete by operation of law. On August 18,
2008, the EPA proposed action on YSAQMD's 2006 RACT SIP and stated that
four deficiencies prevented full approval of the submittal.
    On December 22, 2017, CARB transmitted the District's public draft
version of negative declarations for four Control Techniques Guidelines
(CTG) documents along with a request for parallel processing.\1\ The
District plans to adopt negative declarations for CTGs covering the
Manufacture of Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products, Wood Furniture
Manufacturing Operations, Air Oxidation Processes in Synthetic Organic
Chemical Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI), and Reactor Processes and
Distillation Operations in SOCMI.\2\ The negative declarations are
being adopted because the District states it does not have stationary
sources subject to these CTGs. As noted in footnote 1 of this document,
under our parallel processing procedure, the EPA proposes action on a
public draft version of a SIP revision but will take final action only
after the final version is adopted and submitted to the EPA for
approval. In this instance,

we are proposing action based on the public draft version of the
negative declarations transmitted by CARB on December 22, 2017, and
will not take final action until the final version of the negative
declarations is adopted and submitted to the EPA. CARB's December 22,
2017 letter states that the YSAQMD Governing Board is scheduled to
consider adoption of the negative declarations on January 10, 2018, and
if it is approved, CARB will submit the final package to the EPA as a
revision to the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Under the EPA's ``parallel processing'' procedure, the EPA
proposes rulemaking action concurrently with the state's proposed
rulemaking. If the state's proposed rule is changed, the EPA will
evaluate that subsequent change and may publish another notice of
proposed rulemaking. If no significant change is made, the EPA will
publish a final rulemaking on the rule after responding to any
submitted comments. Final rulemaking action by the EPA will occur
only after the rule has been fully adopted by California and
submitted formally to the EPA for incorporation into the SIP. See 40
CFR part 51, appendix V.
    \2\ The Yolo-Solano AQMD's Governing Board is scheduled to
consider adopting the four negative declarations on January 10,
2018. See public hearing notice available at http://www.ysaqmd.org/news/public-hearing-notice-negative-declarations-four-control-techniques-guidelines/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Are there other versions of these documents?

    There are no previous versions of the documents described above in
the YSAQMD portion of the California SIP for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted documents?

    Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) and Nitrogen Oxides
(NOX) together produce ground-level ozone, smog and
particulate matter, which harm human health and the environment.
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit regulations that
control VOC and NOX emissions. Sections 182(b)(2) and (f)
require that SIPs for ozone nonattainment areas classified as Moderate
or above implement RACT for any source covered by a CTG document and
for any major source of VOCs or NOX. The YSAQMD is subject
to this requirement because it regulates part of the Sacramento Metro
ozone nonattainment area that was previously designated and classified
as a Serious nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and is
currently classified as a Severe-15 ozone nonattainment area for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\3\ Therefore, the YSAQMD must, at a minimum,
adopt RACT-level controls for all sources covered by a CTG document and
for all major non-CTG sources of VOCs or NOX within the
nonattainment area that it regulates. Any stationary source that emits
or has the potential to emit at least 50 tons per year (tpy) of VOCs or
NOX is a major stationary source in a Serious ozone
nonattainment area (CAA section 182(c), (f), and 302(j)), and any
stationary source that emits or has the potential to emit at least 25
tpy of VOCs or NOX is a major stationary source in a Severe
ozone nonattainment area (CAA sections 182(d) and (f)). YSAQMD's 2006
RACT SIP reviewed for RACT major stationary sources that emit or had
the potential to emit at least 25 tpy of VOC or NOX.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 40 CFR 81.305; 75 FR 24409 (May 5, 2010). The YSAQMD
regulates the Solano County and Yolo County portions of the
Sacramento Metro ozone nonattainment area.
    \4\ YSAQMD 2006 RACT SIP pages 6 and 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section IV.G of the preamble to the EPA's final rule to implement
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (70 FR 71612, November 29, 2005) discusses
RACT requirements. It states in part that where a RACT SIP is required,
states implementing the 8-hour standard generally must assure that RACT
is met, either through a certification that previously required RACT
controls still represent RACT for 8-hour implementation purposes or
through a new RACT determination. The submitted documents provide
YSAQMD's analyses of its compliance with the CAA section 182 RACT
requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The EPA's technical
support documents (TSDs) \5\ have more information about the District's
submissions and the EPA's evaluations thereof.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The docket for this proposed action (https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EPA-R09-OAR-2008-0612) contains two
TSDs. One supported our August 18, 2008 proposed action (73 FR
48166) on the 2006 YSAQMD RACT SIP (2008 RACT SIP TSD). Although we
are withdrawing our August 18, 2008 proposed disapproval, the 2008
RACT SIP TSD contains pertinent information and analysis that
support our current action. The second TSD supports today's action,
and is dated December 2017 (2017 RACT SIP TSD).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action

A. How is the EPA evaluating the submitted documents?

    SIP rules must require RACT for each category of sources covered by
a CTG document as well as each major source of VOCs or NOX
in ozone nonattainment areas classified as Moderate or above (see CAA
section 182(b)(2)). The YSAQMD regulates a Severe ozone nonattainment
area (see 40 CFR 81.305) so the District's rules must implement RACT.
    States should also submit for SIP approval negative declarations
for those source categories for which they are not adopting CTG-based
regulations (because they have no sources above the CTG recommended
applicability threshold) regardless of whether such negative
declarations were made for an earlier SIP.\6\ To do so, the submittal
should provide reasonable assurance that no sources subject to the CTG
requirements currently exist or are planned for the YSAQMD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 57 FR 13498, 13512 (April 16, 1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The District's analysis must demonstrate that each major source of
NOX or VOCs in the nonattainment area is covered by a RACT-
level rule. In addition, for each CTG source category, the District
must either demonstrate that a RACT-level rule is in place, or submit a
negative declaration. Guidance and policy documents that we use to
evaluate CAA section 182 RACT requirements include the following:

    1. ``Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standard--Phase 2'': (70 FR 71612; November 29, 2005).
    2. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,''
57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
    3. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies,
and Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January
11, 1990).
    4. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    5. ``State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to
the General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
Implementation of Title I; Proposed Rule,'' (the NOX
Supplement), 57 FR 55620, November 25, 1992.
    6. Memorandum from William T. Harnett to Regional Air Division
Directors, (May 18, 2006), ``RACT Qs & As--Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT) Questions and Answers.''
    7. RACT SIPs, Letter dated March 9, 2006 from EPA Region IX
(Andrew Steckel) to CARB (Kurt Karperos) describing Region IX's
understanding of what constitutes a minimally acceptable RACT SIP.
    8. RACT SIPs, Letter dated April 4, 2006 from EPA Region IX
(Andrew Steckel) to CARB (Kurt Karperos) listing EPA's current CTGs,
Alternative Control Techniques (ACTs), and other documents which may
help to establish RACT.

    With respect to major stationary sources, the Sacramento Metro
ozone nonattainment area was classified as ``Serious'' nonattainment
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS at the time that California submitted
the YSAQMD 2006 RACT SIP to the EPA. The Sacramento Metro ozone
nonattainment area was subsequently reclassified to ``Severe'' ozone
nonattainment. YSAQMD's 2006 RACT SIP lists major stationary sources
within its jurisdiction that emit or have the potential to emit at
least 25 tpy of VOC or NOX--the threshold associated with
major stationary sources in Severe ozone nonattainment areas.

B. Do the submitted documents meet the evaluation criteria?

    Our August 18, 2008 proposed disapproval rulemaking and associated
2008 RACT SIP TSD provide an extensive evaluation of YSAQMD's 2006 RACT
SIP and negative declarations. See 73 FR 48166. The August 18, 2008
proposal found that the District's

submission generally met the CAA section 182 RACT requirements, with
the exception of the following four deficiencies that prevented full
approval of YSAQMD's 2006 RACT SIP:
    1. YSAQMD identified three major non-CTG sources in the District
that were not covered by RACT rules or SIP approved permits. Such rules
or permits should be submitted to the EPA for approval.
    Complete--YSAQMD adopted the following rules and the EPA approved
them into the SIP:
    Rule 2.41 Expandable Polystyrene Manufacturing Operations (adopted
September 10, 2008); SIP approved September 8, 2011 (76 FR 55581).
    Rule 2.42 Nitric Acid Production (adopted May 13, 2009); SIP
approved on May 10, 2010 (75 FR 25778).
    Rule 2.43 Biomass Boilers (adopted November 10, 2010); SIP approved
July 2, 2012.
    2. YSAQMD's pharmaceutical manufacturing rule may be less stringent
than the CTG. Rule 2.35 Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Operations should
be revised and submitted to the EPA for approval.
    Parallel processing negative declaration--YSAQMD determined that
emissions from pharmaceutical manufacturing operations are well below
the CTG's applicability threshold. The primary process at its facility
performing pharmaceutical manufacturing operations involves
fermentation, which is exempted by a supporting document that helps
implement the CTG. The guidance document indicates that the
applicability threshold for the Manufacture of Synthesized
Pharmaceutical Products CTG is 15 lb/day and that the CTG does not
apply to fermentation processes.\7\ YSAQMD plans to adopt a negative
declaration for this CTG in January 2018 and, as discussed below, has
requested parallel processing of the negative declaration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ EPA-450/2-79-004, September 1979, Guidance to State and
Local Agencies in Preparing Regulations to Control Volatile Organic
Compounds from Ten Stationary Source Categories, page 61. Document
available at https://www.epa.gov/nscep.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. On May 14, 2008, YSAQMD amended the solvent cleaning provisions
in several rules to address RACT requirements. These rules need to be
submitted to, and approved by, the EPA.
    Complete--The VOC limits for solvent cleaning operations were
consolidated into Rule 2.31 Solvent Cleaning and Degreasing, and made
more stringent. Rule 2.31 was approved into the SIP on April 28, 2015
(80 FR 23449). In general, we propose to conclude that the existing
SIP-approved rules from which the solvent cleaning limits were
consolidated, in concert with SIP-approved Rule 2.31, implement RACT
for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
    4. YSAQMD should submit a negative declaration for the Wood
Furniture CTG or submit Rule 2.39 Wood Products Coatings Operations for
SIP approval.
    Parallel processing negative declaration--YSAQMD plans to adopt a
negative declaration for this CTG in January 2018 and, as discussed
below, has requested parallel processing of the negative declaration.
    The EPA concludes that YSAQMD has effectively taken actions to
address each of the four deficiencies identified in our August 18, 2008
proposal.
    Where there are no existing sources covered by a particular CTG
document, states may, in lieu of adopting RACT requirements for those
sources, adopt negative declarations certifying that there are no such
sources in the relevant ozone nonattainment area. YSAQMD plans to
adopt, at its January 10, 2018 Board hearing, negative declarations for
the following CTGs:

EPA-450/2-78-029 Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture
of Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products;
EPA-450/3-84-015 Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from
Air Oxidation Processes in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry;
EPA-450/4-91-031 Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from
Reactor Processes and Distillation Operations in Synthetic Organic
Chemical Manufacturing Industry;
EPA-453/R-96-007 Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from
Wood Furniture Manufacturing Operations.
    The EPA has searched the CARB emissions inventory database and
verified that there do not appear to be facilities in the YSAQMD that
might be subject to these CTGs. We believe that these negative
declarations are consistent with the relevant policy and guidance
regarding RACT.
    Our analysis of the remainder of YSAQMD's 2006 RACT SIP for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS remains unchanged, and we propose to find that
the District's RACT SIP submission is consistent with CAA requirements
and relevant guidance regarding RACT, and SIP revisions.
    Our August 18, 2008 proposed action also listed 13 CTG categories
for which the YSAQMD states it has no sources in the District subject
to the CTGs and no District rules covering those categories. These
categories are repeated in Table 1 below. Table 2 lists the additional
negative declarations that YSAQMD is adopting and for which it has
requested parallel processing.

                     Table 1--Negative Declarations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        CTG source category                CTG reference document
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aerospace.........................  EPA-453/R-97-004--Aerospace
                                     Manufacturing and Rework
                                     Operations.
Ships.............................  61 FR 44050 Shipbuilding and Ship
                                     Repair.
Metal Coil Container and Closure..  EPA-450/2-77-008--Surface Coating of
                                     Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics,
                                     Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks.
Magnetic Wire.....................  EPA-450/2-77-033--Surface Coating of
                                     Insulation of Magnet Wire.
Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing     EPA-450/2-83-007--Equipment Leaks
 Plants, Equipment Leaks.            from Natural Gas/Gasoline
                                     Processing Plants.
Refineries........................  EPA-450/2-77-025--Refinery Vacuum
                                     Producing Systems, Wastewater
                                     Separators, and Process Unit
                                     Turnarounds.
                                    EPA-450/2-78-036--VOC Leaks from
                                     Petroleum Refinery Equipment.
Paper and Fabric..................  EPA-450/2-77-008--Surface Coating of
                                     Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics,
                                     Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks.
Dry Cleaning......................  EPA-450/3-82-009--Large Petroleum
                                     Dry Cleaners.
Rubber Tires......................  EPA-450/2-78-030--Manufacture of
                                     Pneumatic Rubber Tires.
Large Appliances, Surface Coating.  EPA-450/2-77-034--Surface Coating of
                                     Large Appliances.
Wood Coating......................  EPA-450/2-78-032--Factory Surface of
                                     Flat Wood Paneling.

Synthetic Organic Chemical........  EPA-450/3-83-006--Fugitive Emissions
                                     from Synthetic Organic Chemical
                                     Polymer and Resin Manufacturing
                                     Equipment.\8\
Polyester Resin...................  EPA-450/3-83-006--Fugitive Emissions
                                     from Synthetic Organic Chemical
                                     Polymer and Resin Manufacturing
                                     Equipment.
                                    EPA-450/3-83-008--Manufacture of
                                     High-Density Polyethylene,
                                     Polypropylene, and Polystyrene
                                     Resins.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

           Table 2--Negative Declarations--Parallel Processing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        CTG source category                CTG reference document
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pharmaceutical Products...........  EPA-450/2-78-029 Control of Volatile
                                     Organic Emissions from Manufacture
                                     of Synthesized Pharmaceutical
                                     Products.
Synthetic Organic Chemical          EPA-450/3-84-015 Control of Volatile
 Manufacturing.                      Organic Compound Emissions from Air
                                     Oxidation Processes in Synthetic
                                     Organic Chemical Manufacturing
                                     Industry.
                                    EPA-450/4-91-031 Control of Volatile
                                     Organic Compound Emissions from
                                     Reactor Processes and Distillation
                                     Operations in Synthetic Organic
                                     Chemical Manufacturing Industry.
Wood Furniture Coating............  EPA-453/R-96-007 Control of Volatile
                                     Organic Compound Emissions from
                                     Wood Furniture Manufacturing
                                     Operations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our  2008 and 2017 RACT SIP TSDs and our August 18, 2008 proposal
have more information on our evaluation of the submitted RACT SIP and
negative declarations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ YSAQMD listed the Polymer and Resin Manufacturing Equipment
CTG under the Synthetic Organic Chemical category and the Polyester
Resin category. Accordingly, the 2006 RACT SIP submittal lacked the
appropriate negative declarations for the SOCMI category. YSAQMD
plans to adopt the correct negative declarations for the SOCMI
category in January 2018 (see Table 2--Negative Declarations--
Parallel Processing).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, and based on the
rationale discussed above, the EPA proposes to approve YSAQMD's 2006
RACT SIP and four negative declarations because they fulfill the RACT
SIP requirements under CAA sections 182(b) and (f) and 40 CFR 51.912
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As noted above, our proposed action
also relies upon our evaluation of the public draft version of the four
negative declarations planned for adoption by the YSAQMD in January
2018 and we will not take final action until these negative
declarations are adopted and submitted to us as a revision to the
California SIP. If the negative declarations that we have evaluated
were to be revised significantly prior to adoption and submittal, we
would need to reconsider our proposed action accordingly. We are
simultaneously withdrawing our previous proposal (73 FR 48166, August
18, 2008) to disapprove the YSAQMD 2006 RACT SIP because the YSAQMD has
corrected the identified RACT deficiencies for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard and are now proposing full approval as meeting the relevant
CAA requirements.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Although we are withdrawing our August 18, 2008 proposed
action, our TSD associated with that proposed action still contains
pertinent information that summarizes our evaluation of YSAQMD's
2006 RACT SIP. On September 17, 2008, the YSAQMD submitted a comment
letter outlining actions it took or planned to take to remedy the
deficiencies identified in our August 18, 2008 proposed action. On
March 16, 2009, YSAQMD transmitted a revised Final RACT SIP (draft)
to the EPA. These documents are available in the docket for EPA-R09-
OAR-2008-0612 under ``comments''. See https://www.regulations.gov/docketBrowser?rpp=25&so=DESC&sb=commentDueDate&po=0&dct=PS&D=EPA-R09-OAR-2008-0612.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until
February 7, 2018. If we take final action to approve the submitted
documents, our final action will incorporate them into the federally
enforceable SIP.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve state law
as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     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 (Public Law 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 Clean Air Act; and
     does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible

methods under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: December 26, 2017.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2018-00025 Filed 1-5-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: August 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 161)]
[Notices]
[Page 48427-48428]
[DOCID:fr19au08-88]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Supplemental Notice for the National Parks Overflights Advisory
Group Aviation Rulemaking Committee Meeting

ACTION: Revised notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National
Park Service (NPS), in accordance with the National Parks Air Tour
Management Act of 2000, announce the next meeting of the National Parks
Overflights Advisory Group (NPOAG) Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC).
This notification provides the dates, location, and agenda for the
meeting. This notification revises Federal Register notice published on
July 30, 2008 (Vol. 73, No. 147, Page 44311) to indicate a change in
the meeting location and time of meetings.
    Dates and Location: The NPOAG ARC will meet on September 3-4, 2008.
The meeting will now take place in a commercial office building at 826
East Front Street, Port Angeles, WA, leased by the NIPS. The office
phone number at this facility is<PHONE_NUMBER>. The meetings will be
held from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on September 3 and from 8 a.m to 3 p.m. on
September 4th. This NPOAG meeting will be conducted in closed session
and is not open to the public.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barry Brayer, AWP-1SP, Special
Programs Staff, Federal Aviation Administration, Western-Pacific Region
Headquarters, P.O. Box 92007, Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007, telephone:
(310) 725-3800, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Karen Trevino,
National Park Service, Natural Sounds Program, 1201 Oakridge Dr., Suite
100, Fort Collins, CO, 80525, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The National Parks Air Tour Management Act of 2000 (NPATMA),
enacted on April 5, 2000, as Public Law 106-181, required the
establishment of the NPOAG within one year after its enactment. The Act
requires that the NPOAG be a balanced group of representatives of
general aviation, commercial air tour operations, environmental
concerns, and Native American tribes. The Administrator of the FAA and
the Director of NIPS (or their designees) serve as ex officio members
of the group. Representatives of the Administrator and Director serve
alternating 1-year terms as chairman of the advisory group.
    The duties of the NPOAG include providing advice, information, and
recommendations to the FAA Administrator and the NIPS Director on:
Implementation of Public Law 106-181; quiet aircraft technology; other
measures that might accommodate interests to visitors of national
parks; and at the request of the Administrator and the Director, on
safety, enviromnental, and other issues related to commercial air tour
operations over national parks or tribal lands.

Agenda for the September 3-4, 2008 NPOAG Meeting

    The agenda for the meeting will include, but is not limited to, the
following: Development of a Strategic Plan, review and approval of the
meeting minutes from the September 25-26, 2007 NPOAG meeting in Fort
Collins, CO; update on ongoing Air Tour Management Program projects;
and NPOAG subgroup assignments.

Attendance at the Meetings

    This NPOAG meeting will be conducted in closed session and will not
be open to the public.

    Issued in Hawthorne, CA, on August 11, 2008.
Barry S. Brayer,
Manager, Special Programs Office, Western Pacific Region.
[FR Doc. E8-19017 Filed 8-18-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 17, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2364-2366]
[FR Doc No: 2018-00656]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2017-1249; Product Identifier 2013-NM-104-AD; Amendment
39-19156; AD 2018-02-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all
Fokker Services B.V. Model F28 Mark 0070 and Mark 0100 series
airplanes. This AD requires contacting the FAA to obtain instructions
for addressing the unsafe condition on these products, and doing the
actions specified in those instructions. This AD was prompted by an
erroneous radio altimeter reading, which caused certain systems to
respond in a way that led to loss of speed. We are issuing this AD to
address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES: This AD becomes effective February 15, 2018.
    We must receive comments on this AD by March 5, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
1249; or in person at the Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for the Docket Operations office
(telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Section, Transport Standards Branch, FAA, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW, Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 425-
227-1149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
2013-0112, dated May 28, 2013 (referred to after this as the Mandatory
Continuing Airworthiness Information, or ``the MCAI''), to correct an
unsafe condition for all Fokker Services B.V. Model F28 Mark 0070 and
Mark 0100 series airplanes. The MCAI states:

    Following an accident * * * [of an] aeroplane on final approach,
the investigating body determined that an important contributing
factor to the accident was an erroneous reading of -7 to -8 feet
from the left Radio Altimeter (RA). The responses of the
autothrottle and autopilot systems to this erroneous RA system
reading led to speed loss and, in combination with operational
factors, caused the aeroplane to hit the ground before reaching the
runway.
    Fokker Services conducted an evaluation of the effects of un-
flagged erroneous low RA system indications in response to the
recommendations in the investigator's report. The result of the
evaluation was a new ``ERRONEOUS RADIO ALTIMETER INDICATION''
abnormal procedure in the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM). This new
procedure includes pulling the circuit breaker of a failed RA
system, and in support of this, new yellow identification collars to
the RA circuit breakers are to be introduced to improve
instantaneous recognition, both visual and tactile, in low
illumination and under increased workload conditions.
    In order to prevent an unsafe condition, similar to the one that
contributed to the accident described above, this [EASA] AD requires
incorporation of the new abnormal procedure in the AFM and
installation of the new yellow RA circuit breaker identification
collars.

    You may examine the MCAI on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2017-
1249.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of This AD

    This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another
country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant
to our bilateral agreement with the State of Design Authority, we have
been notified of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. We are
issuing this AD because we evaluated all pertinent information and
determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or
develop on other products of the same type design.

FAA's Determination of the Effective Date

    Since there are currently no domestic operators of this product, we
find good cause that notice and opportunity for prior public comment
are unnecessary. In addition, for the reason(s) stated above, we find
that good cause exists for making this amendment effective in less than
30 days.

Comments Invited

    This AD is a final rule that involves requirements affecting flight
safety, and we did not precede it by notice and opportunity for public
comment. We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under
the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2017-1249; Product
Identifier 2013-NM-104-AD'' at the beginning of your comments. We
specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic,
environmental, and energy aspects of this AD. We will consider all
comments received by the closing date and may amend this AD based on
those comments.

    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this AD.

Costs of Compliance

    Currently, there are no affected U.S.-registered airplanes. This AD
requires contacting the FAA to obtain instructions for addressing the
unsafe condition, and doing the actions specified in those
instructions. Based on the actions specified in the MCAI AD, we are
providing the following cost estimates for an affected airplane that is
placed on the U.S. Register in the future:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost per
                   Action                                 Labor cost                Parts cost        product
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification...............................  1 work-hour x $85 per hour = $85...              $9             $94
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    This AD is issued in accordance with authority delegated by the
Executive Director, Aircraft Certification Service, as authorized by
FAA Order 8000.51C. In accordance with that order, issuance of ADs is
normally a function of the Compliance and Airworthiness Division, but
during this transition period, the Executive Director has delegated the
authority to issue ADs applicable to transport category airplanes to
the Director of the System Oversight Division.

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):

2018-02-03 Fokker Services B.V.: Amendment 39-19156; Docket No. FAA-
2017-1249; Product Identifier 2013-NM-104-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective February 1, 2018.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Fokker Services B.V. Model F28 Mark 0070 and
Mark 0100 series airplanes, certificated in any category, all serial
numbers.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 34, Navigation.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by an erroneous radio altimeter (RA)
reading, which caused certain systems to respond in a way that led
to loss of speed. We are issuing this AD to ensure the flight crew
has procedures for detecting erroneous RA readings. Erroneous RA
readings could cause the autothrottle and autopilot systems to
respond by causing a loss of speed, which, in combination with
operational factors, could cause an airplane to hit the ground
before reaching the runway.

(f) Compliance

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

(g) Required Action(s)

    Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, request
instructions from the Manager, International Section, Transport
Standards Branch, FAA, to address the unsafe condition specified in
paragraph (e) of this AD; and accomplish the action(s) at the times
specified in, and in accordance with, those instructions. Guidance
can be found in Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information
(MCAI) European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2013-0112, dated
May 28, 2013.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    The Manager, International Section, Transport Standards Branch,
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 Section, send it to the
attention of the person identified in paragraph (i)(2) of this AD.
Information may be emailed to: [email protected].
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.

(i) Related Information

    (1) Refer to MCAI EASA AD 2013-0112, dated May 28, 2013, for
related information. You may examine the MCAI on the internet at
http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No.
FAA-2017-1249.

    (2) For more information about this AD, contact Tom Rodriguez,
Aerospace Engineer, International Section, Transport Standards
Branch, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue SW, Renton, WA 98057-3356; telephone:
425-227-1137; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

(j) Material Incorporated by Reference

    None.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 5, 2018.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-00656 Filed 1-16-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P