### 17584 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

pilot-compartment view, the SVS must meet the following requirements:

a. The SVS design must minimize unacceptable display characteristics or artifacts (e.g., terrain shadowing against a dark background) that obscure the desired image of the scene, impair the pilot’s ability to detect and identify visual references, mask flight hazards, distract the pilot, or otherwise degrade task performance or safety.

b. Control of SVS image display brightness must be sufficiently effective in dynamically changing background (ambient) lighting conditions to avoid pilot distraction, impairment of the pilot’s ability to detect and identify visual references, masking of flight hazards, or to otherwise degrade task performance or safety. If automatic control for image brightness is not provided, it must be shown that a single, manual setting is satisfactory for the range of lighting conditionsencountered during a time-critical, highworkload phase of flight ( e.g., lowvisibility instrument approach).

c. A readily accessible control must be provided that permits the pilot to immediately deactivate and reactivate display of the SVS image on demand, without having to remove hands from the flight controls and throttles.

d. The SVS image on the HUD must not impair the pilot’s use of guidance information, or degrade the presentation and pilot awareness of essential flight information displayed on the HUD, such as alerts, airspeed, attitude, altitude and direction, approach guidance, windshear guidance, TCAS resolution advisories, or unusual-attitude recovery

cues.

e. The SVS image and the HUD symbols, which are spatially referenced to the pitch scale, outside view, and image, must be scaled and aligned (i.e., conformal) to the external scene. In addition, the SVS image and the HUD symbols—when considered singly or in combination—must not be misleading, cause pilot confusion, or increaseworkload. Airplane attitudes or crosswind conditions may cause certain symbols ( e.g., the zero-pitch line or flight-path vector) to reach field-of-view limits, such that they cannot be positioned conformally with the image and external scene. In such cases, these symbols may be displayed but with an altered appearance that makes the pilot aware that they are no longer displayed conformally (for example, ‘‘ghosting’’ ). The combined use of symbology and runway image may not be used for path monitoring when path symbology is no longer conformal.

f. A HUD system used to display SVS images must, if previously certified, continue to meet all of the requirements of the original approval.

3. The safety and performance of the pilot tasks associated with the use of the pilot-compartment view must be not be degraded by the display of the SVS image. These tasks include the following:

a. Detection, accurate identification and maneuvering, as necessary, to avoid traffic, terrain, obstacles, and other flight hazards.

b. Accurate identification and utilization of visual references required for every task relevant to the phase of flight.

4. Appropriate limitations must be stated in the Operating Limitations section of the Airplane Flight Manual to prohibit the use of the SVS for functions
that have not been found to be acceptable.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on March

18, 2011.

K.C. Yanamura, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2011–7414 Filed 3–29–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION**
**AGENCY**

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R06–OAR–2010–0190; FRL–9287–7]**

**Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Oklahoma;**  **Regional Haze State Implementation Plan; Federal Implementation Plan for**  **Interstate Transport of Pollution Affecting Visibility and Best Available**  **Retrofit Technology Determinations**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Announcement of public hearing.

**SUMMARY :**  On March 22, 2011, EPA published a proposal in the Federal Register to approve and disapprove portions of State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Oklahoma and promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the Clean Air Act requirement for best available retrofit technology (BART) for sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ) emissions and to prevent emissions from Oklahoma sources from interfering with other states’ measures to protect visibility. In the notice EPA announced an open house and public hearing for the proposal to be held April 13, 2011, in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. In this notice EPA is announcing an additional open house and public hearing to be held in Tulsa, Oklahoma on April 14, 2011. More information is provided in

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION**

.

**DATES :**  Public hearings, preceded by an open house, will be held on April 13, 2011, in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and April 14, 2011, in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

**ADDRESSES :**  The April 13, 2011, open house and public hearing will be held at the Metro Technology Centers, Springlake Campus, Business Conference Center, Meeting Rooms H and I, 1900 Springlake Drive, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73111, (405) 424–8324. The April 14, 2011, open house and public hearing will be held at the Tulsa Tech—Riverside Campus, in the
Auditorium of the Alliance Conference Center, 801 East 91st Street, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74132, (918) 828–4000. Driving directions to the Tulsa Tech— Riverside Campus may also be found using the following address: 801 West K Place, Jenks, Oklahoma 74037.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Joe Kordzi, EPA Region 6 Air PlanningSection, telephone (214) 665–7186, email address r6air

_ okhaze@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Throughout this document whenever

‘‘we’’

, ‘‘us ’’ , or ‘‘ our’’ is used, we mean the EPA. On March 22, 2011, we published a proposal in the Federal Register to (1) approve and disapprove portions of SIP revisions submitted by the State of Oklahoma and (2) promulgate a FIP to address the Clean Air Act requirement
for BART for SO 2 emissions and to prevent emissions from Oklahoma sources from interfering with other states’ measures to protect visibility. See 76 FR 16168. Our proposal can be
accessed online at http://www.regulations.gov (Docket No. EPA–R06–OAR–2010–0190). In the notice we announced an open house and public hearing for the proposal to be held Wednesday, April 13, 2011, in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. We have scheduled an additional open house and public hearing to be held in Tulsa, Oklahoma on Thursday, April 14, 2011.

The Oklahoma City open house and public hearing is scheduled to be held on Wednesday April 13, 2011, at the Metro Technology Centers, Springlake Campus, Business Conference Center, Meeting Rooms H and I, 1900 Springlake Drive, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73111, (405) 424–8324. The Metro Technology Centers Springlake Campus is located at the intersection of Martin Luther King Ave. and Springlake
Drive between NE. 36th and NE. 50th just south of the Oklahoma City Zoo and Kirkpatrick Center. Parking for the


### 17585 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Business Conference Center is available at no charge.

The Tulsa open house and public hearing is scheduled to be held on Thursday, April 14, 2011, at the Tulsa Tech—Riverside Campus, in the

Auditorium of the Alliance Conference Center, 801 East 91st Street, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74132, (918) 828–4000. Driving directions to the Tulsa Tech— Riverside Campus may also be found using the following address: 801 West K Place, Jenks, Oklahoma 74037. The Tulsa Tech—Riverside Campus is located on the south side of Tulsa, and is east of Highway 75 and north of the Creek Turnpike. Parking is available on campus at no charge.

For both locations the open house will begin at 1 p.m. and end at 3 p.m. local time. The public hearing will be held from 4 p.m. until 6 p.m., and again from 7 p.m. until 9 p.m. Opening remarks for the public hearing will be provided at 4 p.m., and again at 7 p.m. The public hearing will provide interested parties the opportunity to present information and opinions to EPA concerning our proposal. Interested parties may also submit written comments, as discussed in the proposal. Written statements and supporting information submitted during the comment period will be considered with the same weight as any oral comments and supporting information presented at the public hearing. We will not respond to comments during the public hearing. When we publish our final action, we will provide written responses to all oral and written comments received on our proposal. To provide opportunities for questions and discussion, we will hold an open house prior to the public hearing. During the open house, EPA staff will be available to informally answer questions on our proposed action. Any comments made to EPA staff during the open house must still be provided formally in writing or orally during the public hearing in order

to be considered in the record.

At the public hearing, the hearing officer may limit the time available for each commenter to address the proposal to 5 minutes or less if the hearing officer determines it to be appropriate. We will not be providing equipment for

commenters to show overhead slides or make computerized slide presentations. Any person may provide written or oral comments and data pertaining to our proposal at the Public Hearing. Verbatim transcripts, in English, of the hearing and written statements will be included in the rulemaking docket. Dated: March 23, 2011.

Carl E. Edlund,
Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, Director, Region 6.

[FR Doc. 2011–7459 Filed 3–29–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION**
**AGENCY**

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R07–OAR–2011–0309; FRL–9287–9]**

**Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of** 

**Missouri**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  EPA is proposing to approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
submittal from the state of Missouri addressing the requirements of Clean Air Act (CAA) sections 110(a)(1) and (2)
for the 1997 revisions to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone. Section 110(a)(1) requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP to support implementation of each new or revised NAAQS promulgated by the EPA and these SIPs are commonly referred to as

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIPs. EPA believes that Missouri’s infrastructure SIP adequately
addresses the elements described in section 110(a)(2) and further described in the October 2, 2007, guidance for infrastructure SIPs issued by the EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. However, because EPA already approved the portion of Missouri’s SIP submittal relating to the interstate transport infrastructure element, section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), this proposed rulemaking does not address the interstate transport element, nor does this proposal reopen any aspect of EPA’s prior action on the interstate transport element. Furthermore, this
action does not address infrastructure requirements with respect to the 1997

PM 2.5 NAAQS or the 2006 revisions to the NAAQS. Those requirements will be addressed in future rulemaking.

**DATES :**  Comments must be received on or before April 29, 2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– OAR–2011–0309 by one of the following
methods:

1. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting

comments.

2. E-mail: kramer.elizabeth@epa.gov.

3. Mail: Ms. Elizabeth Kramer, Air Planning and Development Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7, Air and Waste Management Division, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.

4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to Ms. Elizabeth Kramer, Air Planning and Development Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7, Air and Waste Management Division, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.

Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2011– 0309. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be
made available online at http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http:// www.regulations.gov or e-mail information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The http:// www.regulations.gov Web site is an

‘‘ anonymous access ’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http:// www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and should be free of any
defects or viruses.

Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically in http:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101, from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,