Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations for Jackson County, Arkansas, and Incorporated Areas, 52436-52437 [2015-21507]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
52436
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 168 / Monday, August 31, 2015 / Proposed Rules
calibration standards, calibration
curves, completed visible emissions
observation forms, a calculation of the
average destruction efficiency and
combustion efficiency over the course of
each test, the date, time and duration of
the test, the waste gas composition and
NHVcz and/or LFLcz the gas tested, the
flowrate (at standard conditions) and
velocity of the waste gas, the MPGF
burner tip pressure, waste gas
temperature, meteorological conditions
(e.g., ambient temperature, and
barometric pressure, wind speed and
direction, relative humidity), and
whether there were any observed flare
flameouts.
(ii) If an engineering assessment is
done, sources must provide to the
agency a demonstration that a proper
level of destruction/combustion
efficiency was obtained, through prior
performance testing or the like for a
similar equivalent burner type design.
To support an equivalent burner
assessment of destruction/combustion
efficiency, sources must discuss and
provide information related to design
principles of burner type, burner size,
burner geometry, air-fuel mixing, and
the combustion principles associated
with this burner that will assure
smokeless operation under a variety of
operating conditions. Similarly, sources
must also provide details outlining why
all of these factors, in concert with the
waste gas that was tested in the
supporting reference materials, support
the conclusion that the MPGF burners
being proposed for use by the source
will achieve at least an equivalent level
of destruction efficiency as required by
the underlying applicable regulations.
(4) Long-Term MPGF Stability Testing
(a) The operation of a MPGF with a
stable, lit flame is of paramount
importance to continuously ensuring
good flare performance; therefore, any
source wishing to demonstrate
equivalency for purposes of using these
types of installations must conduct a
long-term stability performance test.
Since flare tip design and waste gas
composition have significant impact on
the range of stable operation, sources
should use a representative waste gas
the MPGF will typically burn or a waste
gas, such as an olefin or olefinic
mixture, that will challenge the MPGF
to perform at a high level with a stable
flame as well as challenge its smokeless
capacity.
(b) Sources should first design and
carry out a performance test to
determine the point of flare flame
instability and flameout for the MPGF
burner and waste gas composition
chosen to be tested. Successful, initial
demonstration of stability is achieved
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:00 Aug 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
when there is a stable, lit flame for a
minimum of five minutes at consistent
flow and waste gas composition. It is
recommended, although not required,
that sources determine the point of
instability at sonic flow conditions or at
the highest operating pressure
anticipated. Any data which
demonstrates instability and complete
loss of flame prior to the five minute
period must be reported along the initial
stable flame demonstration. Along with
destruction efficiency and combustion
efficiency, the data elements laid out in
3(a)(i) should also be reported.
(c) Using the results from (b) above as
a starting point, sources must perform a
minimum of three replicate tests at both
the minimum and maximum operating
conditions on at least one MPGF burner
at or above the NHVcz or at or below the
LFL cz determined in 4(b). If more than
one burner is tested, the spacing
between the burners must be
representative of the projected
installation. Each test must be a
minimum of 15-minutes in duration
with constant flow and composition for
the three runs at minimum conditions,
and the three runs at the maximum
conditions. The data and data elements
mentioned in 4(b) must also be reported.
(5) MPGF Cross-light Testing
(a) Sources must design and carryout
a performance test to successfully
demonstrate that cross-lighting of the
MPGF burners will occur over the range
of operating conditions (e.g., operating
pressure and/or velocity (Mach)
condition) for which the burners will be
used. Sources may use the NHVcz and/
or LFLcz established in 4 above and
perform a minimum of three replicate
runs at each of the operating conditions.
Sources must cross-light a minimum of
three burners and the spacing between
the burners and location of the pilot
flame must be representative of the
projected installation. At a minimum,
sources must report the following: A
description of the testing, a protocol
describing the test methodology used,
associated test method QA/QC
parameters, the waste gas composition
and NHVcz and/or LFLcz of the gas
tested, the velocity (or Mach speed
ratio) of the waste gas tested, the MPGF
burner tip pressure, the time, length,
and duration of the test, records of
whether a successful cross-light was
observed over all of the burners and the
length of time it took for the burners to
cross-light, records of maintaining a
stable flame after a successful cross-light
and the duration for which this was
observed, records of any smoking events
during the cross-light, waste gas
temperature, meteorological conditions
(e.g., ambient temperature, and
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
barometric pressure, wind speed and
direction, relative humidity), and
whether there were any observed flare
flameouts.
(6) Flaring Reduction Considerations
(a) Sources must make a
demonstration, considering MPGF
utilization, on whether additional flare
reduction measures, including flare gas
recovery, should be utilized and
implemented.
(7) MPGF Monitoring and Operating
Conditions
(a) Based on the results of the criteria
mentioned above in this section, sources
must make recommendations to the
agency on the type of monitoring and
operating conditions necessary for the
MPGF to demonstrate equivalent
reductions in emissions as compared to
flares complying with the requirements
at 40 CFR 60.18 and 40 CFR 63.11,
taking into consideration a control
scheme designed to handle highly
variable flows and waste gas
compositions.
We solicit comment on all aspects of
this framework. We anticipate this
framework would enable the agency to
review and approve future AMEL
requests for MPGF installations in a
more expeditious timeframe because we
anticipate that the information required
by the framework would provide us
with sufficient information to evaluate
future AMEL requests. We note that all
aspects of future AMEL requests would
still be subject to a notice and comment
proceeding.
Dated: August 20, 2015.
Janet G. McCabe,
Acting Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015–21420 Filed 8–28–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
44 CFR Part 67
[Docket ID FEMA–2015–0001; Internal
Agency Docket No. FEMA–B–1149]
Proposed Flood Elevation
Determinations for Jackson County,
Arkansas, and Incorporated Areas
Federal Emergency
Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.
AGENCY:
The Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) is
withdrawing its proposed rule
concerning proposed flood elevation
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 168 / Monday, August 31, 2015 / Proposed Rules
determinations for Jackson County,
Arkansas, and Incorporated Areas.
DATES: This withdrawal is effective on
August 31, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by Docket No. FEMA–B–1149
to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, 500 C
Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202) 646–4064, or (email)
Luis.Rodriguez3@fema.dhs.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis
Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, 500 C
Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,
(202) 646–4064, or (email)
Luis.Rodriguez3@fema.dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
November 2, 2010, FEMA published a
proposed rulemaking at 75 FR 67319,
proposing flood elevation
determinations along one or more
flooding sources in Jackson County,
Arkansas, and Incorporated Areas.
FEMA is withdrawing the proposed
rulemaking.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4104; 44 CFR 67.4.
Dated: August 20, 2015.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance
and Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
[FR Doc. 2015–21507 Filed 8–28–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–12–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 5
[ET Docket Nos. 10–236, 06–155; FCC 15–
76]
Radio Experimentation and Market
Trials
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the
Commission proposes to modify the
rules for program experimental licenses
to permit experimentation for radio
frequency (RF)-based medical devices, if
the device being tested is designed to
comply with all applicable service rules
in Part 18, Industrial, Scientific, and
Medical Equipment; Part 95, Personal
Radio Services Subpart H—Wireless
Medical Telemetry Service; or Part 95,
Subpart I—Medical Device
rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:00 Aug 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
Radiocommunication Service. This
proposal is designed to establish parity
between all qualified medical device
manufacturers for conducting basic
research and clinical trials with RFbased medical devices as to permissible
frequencies of operation.
DATES: Comments must be filed on or
before September 30, 2015 and reply
comments must be filed on or before
October 15, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by ET Docket Nos. 10–236
and 06–155, by any of the following
methods:
D Federal Communications
Commission’s Web site: https://
apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
D People with Disabilities: Contact the
FCC to request reasonable
accommodations (accessible format
documents, sign language interpreters,
CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov
or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202–
418–0432.
For detailed instructions for submitting
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rodney Small, Office of Engineering
and Technology, (202) 418–2452, email:
Rodney.Small@fcc.gov, TTY (202) 418–
2989.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(FNPRM), ET Docket Nos. 10–236 and
06–155, FCC 15–76, adopted July 6,
2015, and released July 8, 2015. The full
text of this document is available for
inspection and copying during normal
business hours in the FCC Reference
Center (Room CY–A257), 445 12th
Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. The
full text may also be downloaded at:
www.fcc.gov. People with Disabilities:
To request materials in accessible
formats for people with disabilities
(braille, large print, electronic files,
audio format), send an email to fcc504@
fcc.gov or call the Consumer &
Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202–
418–0530 (voice), 202–418–0432 (tty).
Summary of Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
1. In two April 2015 filings,
Medtronic, Inc. (Medtronic) observes
that program licenses ‘‘may not be
issued for operation on frequencies
listed in § 15.205 of the rules, which
includes the 401–406 MHz Medical
Device Radiocommunications Service
(‘MedRadio’) band often employed by
makers of implanted and body-worn
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
52437
medical devices.’’ Medical testing
licensees, on the other hand, may use
those frequencies, if they comply with
applicable service rules. Medtronic
therefore argues that this disparity in
frequencies contributes to program
licensees being less flexible than
medical testing licensees.
2. As discussed in the companion
Memorandum Opinion & Order in this
proceeding, basic medical research and
experimentation would be conducted
under a program (or conventional)
license by any manufacturer of RF-based
medical devices, whether that
manufacturer is eligible for a medical
testing license or not. The Commission
created the program experimental
license to reduce regulatory delay and
uncertainty and to promote innovation.
A program license is granted for a five
year term and allows the licensee to
conduct multiple unrelated experiments
within a broad range of frequencies.
Because researchers can modify the
scope of their experiments without
having to obtain Commission
permission to do so, the flexibility
provided will accelerate innovation in
RF technology, including RF-based
medical devices. However, the program
license rules do not permit
experimentation in frequency bands that
are restricted under § 15.205(a) of the
Commission’s Rules to protect the many
safety-of-life and passive services that
operate in these bands.
3. Medtronic rightly points out that
the 401–406 MHz band is a restricted
band under § 15.205(a) and is not
available for basic research under the
program license rules. However, the
401–406 MHz band is used for
implanted and body worn medical
devices under the part 95 MedRadio
rules. Consequently, manufacturers of
certain RF-based medical devices
cannot take advantage of the benefits
provided by a program license to
advance innovation in this area, even
though the devices they ultimately
develop could be authorized for use
under the Commission’s rules. Because
clinical trials conducted under the
medical testing license or as a market
trial may be tested in these bands, the
Commission sees no reason to impose
greater frequency restrictions on
program licensees conducting basic
research on the same devices.
4. Accordingly, the Commission
proposes to modify the rules for
program licenses to permit
experimentation on frequencies listed in
§ 15.205(a) of the Commission’s rules,
provided that—comparable to the rules
for medical testing licenses—the device
being tested is designed to comply with
all applicable service rules in part 18,
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 168 (Monday, August 31, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52436-52437]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-21507]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management Agency
44 CFR Part 67
[Docket ID FEMA-2015-0001; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1149]
Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations for Jackson County,
Arkansas, and Incorporated Areas
AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is withdrawing
its proposed rule concerning proposed flood elevation
[[Page 52437]]
determinations for Jackson County, Arkansas, and Incorporated Areas.
DATES: This withdrawal is effective on August 31, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-
1149 to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal
Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-4064, or
(email) Luis.Rodriguez3@fema.dhs.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC
20472, (202) 646-4064, or (email) Luis.Rodriguez3@fema.dhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 2, 2010, FEMA published a
proposed rulemaking at 75 FR 67319, proposing flood elevation
determinations along one or more flooding sources in Jackson County,
Arkansas, and Incorporated Areas. FEMA is withdrawing the proposed
rulemaking.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4104; 44 CFR 67.4.
Dated: August 20, 2015.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department
of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2015-21507 Filed 8-28-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P
