[Federal Register: January 6, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 3)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 750-753]
[DOCID:fr06ja10-7]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 138

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0007]
RIN 1625-AB25

Consumer Price Index Adjustments of Oil Pollution Act of 1990
Limits of Liability--Vessels and Deepwater Ports

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is adopting, as a final rule, without change,
an interim rule published on July 1, 2009. The interim rule increased
the limits of liability that apply under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990
(OPA 90) to vessels and to deepwater ports subject to the Deepwater
Port Act of 1974, to reflect significant increases in the Consumer
Price Index (CPI). The interim rule also established the methodology
the Coast Guard uses to adjust the OPA 90 limits of liability for
inflation, and made minor regulatory

amendments to clarify applicability of the OPA 90 single-hull tank
vessel limits of liability.

DATES: This final rule is effective February 5, 2010. As discussed in
the interim rule published on July 1, 2009, at 74 FR 31358, to the
extent this rulemaking affects the collection of information in 33 CFR
138.85, the Coast Guard will not enforce the information collection
request until it is approved by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).

ADDRESSES: Comments and material received from the public, as well as
documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket
for this rulemaking, are part of Docket No. USCG-2008-0007 and are
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. You may also view the docket for this rulemaking on the
Internet by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2008-
0007 in the ``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
rulemaking, call or e-mail Benjamin White, National Pollution Funds
Center, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket
for this rulemaking, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents for Preamble

I. Abbreviations
II. Regulatory History
III. Background
IV. Discussion of Comments and Changes
V. Regulatory Analyses
    A. Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Small Entities
    C. Assistance for Small Entities
    D. Collection of Information
    E. Federalism
    F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    G. Taking of Private Property
    H. Civil Justice Reform
    I. Protection of Children
    J. Indian Tribal Governments
    K. Energy Effects
    L. Technical Standards
    M. Environment

I. Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COFR Certificate of Financial Responsibility
CPI Consumer Price Index
CPI NPRM The notice of proposed rulemaking published on September
24, 2008, titled ``Consumer Price Index Adjustments of Oil Pollution
Act of 1990 Limits of Liability--Vessels and Deepwater Ports'' (73
FR 54997)
CPI-U Consumer Price Index--All Urban Consumers, Not Seasonally
Adjusted, U.S. City Average, All Items, 1982-84=100
Deepwater Port A deepwater port licensed under the Deepwater Port
Act of 1974 (33 U.S.C. 1501-1524)
DHS U.S. Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
Fund Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund
Interim Rule The interim rule for this rulemaking, published on July
1, 2009, titled ``Consumer Price Index Adjustments of Oil Pollution
Act of 1990 Limits of Liability--Vessels and Deepwater Ports'' (74
FR 31357)
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OPA 90 The Oil Pollution Act of 1990, as amended (Title I of which
is codified at 33 U.S.C. 2701, et seq.; Title IV of which is
codified in relevant part at 46 U.S.C. 3703a)
Sec.  Section symbol
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Regulatory History

    On September 24, 2008, the Coast Guard published a notice of
proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register, at 73 FR 54997, entitled
``Consumer Price Index Adjustments of Oil Pollution Act of 1990 Limits
of Liability--Vessels and Deepwater Ports'' (CPI NPRM). The CPI NPRM
proposed to adjust the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, as amended (OPA 90),
limits of liability set forth at 33 CFR part 138, subpart B, for
vessels and for deepwater ports licensed under the Deepwater Port Act
of 1974, as amended (33 U.S.C. 1501-1524) (hereinafter ``Deepwater
Ports''), as required by 33 U.S.C. 2704(d), to reflect significant
increases in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI NPRM also proposed
a methodology for calculating and implementing the proposed and future
mandated OPA 90 limit of liability inflation adjustments.
    On July 1, 2009, we published the Interim Rule, at 74 FR 31357,
responding to public comments submitted on the CPI NPRM, adjusting the
OPA 90 limits of liability as proposed, and establishing the
methodology for adjusting the limits of liability. In addition, in
response to a public comment, the Interim Rule made minor amendments to
clarify the applicability of the single-hull tank vessel limits of
liability, and solicited additional public comment on this
clarification.
    In the docket for this rulemaking, we received two letters
containing a total of seven comments on the Interim Rule. We also
received a non-public oral comment on the Interim Rule, which we have
summarized in a memo to the docket. These comments are discussed in
part IV, below.
    No public meeting was requested at either the CPI NPRM or Interim
Rule stages of this rulemaking, and none was held. All comments and
other materials related to this rulemaking have been placed in the
public docket for this rulemaking (Docket No. USCG-2008-0007).
    For further discussion of the regulatory history for this
rulemaking, see the Interim Rule. That document is available in the
docket for this rulemaking.

III. Background

    In general under Title I of OPA 90, the responsible parties for a
vessel or facility which discharges, or poses a substantial threat of
discharge of, oil into or upon United States navigable waters,
adjoining shorelines or the exclusive economic zone, are liable for the
OPA 90 removal costs and damages that result from such incident. (33
U.S.C. 2702(a).) The responsible parties' total liability for OPA 90
removal costs and damages is, however, limited under certain
circumstances, as provided in 33 U.S.C. 2704, to the applicable limit
of liability amounts set forth at 33 CFR part 138, subpart B.
    In instances when the liability limits apply, the Oil Spill
Liability Trust Fund (Fund) is available to compensate the excess OPA
90 removal costs and damages. (See 33 U.S.C. 2708, 2712(a)(4), and
2713; and 33 CFR part 136.) Therefore, to prevent the real value of the
OPA 90 limits of liability from depreciating over time as a result of
inflation and preserve the polluter-pays principle embodied in OPA 90,
OPA 90 requires that the President periodically adjust the limits of
liability, by regulation, to reflect significant increases in the CPI.
(See 33 U.S.C. 2704(d)(4).)
    On September 24, 2008, in accordance with this mandate and further
delegations to the Coast Guard, we proposed to adjust the OPA 90 limits
of liability for vessels and Deepwater Ports in 33 CFR part 138,
subpart B, for inflation, and to establish the methodology for the
proposed and future mandated OPA 90 limit of liability inflation
adjustments. (CPI NPRM, 73 FR 54997.)
    During the public comment period for the CPI NPRM, the Coast Guard
vessel certification program received a question asking what applicable
amounts of OPA 90 financial

responsibility apply under the Certificate of Financial Responsibility
(COFR) program regulations, at 33 CFR part 138, subpart A, to single-
hull tank vessels that do not carry oil as cargo. As explained further
in the Interim Rule, it was not until after the comment period for the
CPI NPRM closed that we determined the question raised a substantive
issue concerning applicability of the single-hull tank vessel limits of
liability amended by this rulemaking. The question was, therefore,
submitted as a comment to the public docket for this rulemaking after
the close of the CPI NPRM comment period.
    To avoid delaying the required inflation adjustments to the OPA 90
limits of liability, we published the Interim Rule, at 74 FR 31357,
instead of a final rule. This permitted us to receive additional public
comment on the single-hull tank vessel limit of liability applicability
issue before issuing a final rule. The Interim Rule increased the OPA
90 limits of liability for vessels and Deepwater Ports, effective July
31, 2009, to reflect significant increases in the CPI. In addition, the
Interim Rule established the methodology the Coast Guard uses to adjust
the OPA 90 limits of liability for inflation. Finally, the Interim Rule
made minor amendments to Sec. Sec.  138.220(b) and 138.230(a),
clarifying that the OPA 90 single-hull tank vessel limits of liability
only apply to single-hull tank vessels that are constructed or adapted
to carry, or that carry, oil as cargo or cargo residue, and
specifically invited public comment on this clarification.
    For further discussion of the background for this rulemaking, see
the preambles for the CPI NPRM and the Interim Rule. Both documents are
available in the docket for this rulemaking.

IV. Discussion of Comments and Changes

    Two letters with seven comments, and a memorandum summarizing one
non-public oral comment related to the Interim Rule, were submitted to
the docket for this rulemaking. The comments were generally supportive
of this rulemaking and, as discussed below, none of the comments raised
any issue that persuaded or convinced the Coast Guard to change the
regulatory text published in the Interim Rule. This final rule,
therefore, adopts the Interim Rule, at 74 FR 31357, without change.
    An anonymous commenter expressed the view that fines ``oil
profiteers'' have to pay for polluting should be raised by 1,000
percent. This comment is beyond the scope of this rulemaking. The
primary purpose of this rulemaking is to implement the statutorily-
mandated inflation increases to the OPA 90 limits of liability and to
clarify their applicability. Any other increase to the limits of
liability would have to be authorized by Congress. Moreover, the OPA 90
limits of liability only concern the liability of responsible parties
under 33 U.S.C. 2702 for OPA 90 removal costs and damages. The OPA 90
limits of liability and 33 CFR part 138, subpart B, as amended by this
rulemaking do not limit, or otherwise affect or concern, the amount of
fines, penalties or other liability of responsible parties under other
provisions of law.
    An environmental organization supported increasing the limits of
liability to reflect significant increases in the CPI, agreed with the
Coast Guard's assessment that the statute does not allow for CPI-based
reductions in the limits of liability, agreed with the process
established to ensure future increases occur on a regular basis, and
agreed with the procedure to immediately update limits as soon as the
percentage target is reached if it does not occur at the 3 year
interval. This commenter further stated that the threshold of 3 percent
CPI increase over 3 years set forth in the Interim Rule is appropriate.
The commenter, however, expressed the view that a lower percentage
threshold should be considered by the Coast Guard (i.e., a 1% CPI
increase over 3 years). In response to that comment, we considered
whether a lower threshold should be adopted. We concluded, based on the
entire historical record of annual changes in the CPI-U (the Consumer
Price Index--All Urban Consumers, Not Seasonally Adjusted, U.S. City
Average, All Items, 1982-84 = 100) going back to 1913, that a CPI
increase threshold of 3 percent over 3 years will almost always result
in future inflation adjustments to the OPA 90 limits of liability every
3 years, and is therefore adequate to protect against risk shifting to
the Fund. We are, therefore, making no changes to the CPI increase
threshold adopted in the Interim Rule in response to this comment.
    The non-public oral comment, from a financial responsibility
guarantor, expressed support for the minor amendments made by the
Interim Rule, at Sec. Sec.  138.220(b) and 138.230(a), to clarify that
the single-hull tank vessel limits of liability only apply to single-
hull tank vessels that are constructed or adapted to carry, or that
carry, oil as cargo or cargo residue. The clarifying amendments are
being adopted by this final rule without change.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This final 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. OMB has not reviewed it under that
Order. Public comments on the Interim Rule are summarized in Part IV of
this preamble. We made no changes to the Interim Rule and we received
no public comments that would alter our assessment of the impacts of
the Interim Rule. As explained in Part IV, above, we are adopting the
Interim Rule without change. We are, therefore, adopting the Regulatory
Assessment prepared for the Interim Rule as final. See the ``Regulatory
Planning and Review'' section of the Interim Rule for more information.

B. 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.
    In the CPI NPRM and again in the Interim Rule, we certified under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that the rule would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. We have found no
additional data or information that would change our findings in this
respect. We, therefore, adopt for this final rule, the certification of
the Interim Rule, under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that this rulemaking will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. See the ``Small Entities'' sections of the Interim Rule and
the NPRM for additional information.

C. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. 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.
    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).

D. Collection of Information

    As defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), ``collection of information''
comprises reporting, recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and
other, similar actions. The title and description of the information
collection, a description of those who must collect the information,
and an estimate of the total annual burden follow. The estimate covers
the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing sources of
data, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection.
    Public comments on the Interim Rule are summarized in Part IV of
this preamble, above. We received no public comments that would alter
our assessment of the collection of information impacts in the Interim
Rule. We have adopted the assessment in the Interim Rule as final. See
the ``Collection of Information'' section of the Interim Rule in the
public docket for this rulemaking (USCG-2008-0007).
    OMB has not yet completed its review of this collection request
titled ``Consumer Price Index Adjustments of Oil Pollution Act of 1990
Limits of Liability -- Vessels and Deepwater Ports'' (OMB CONTROL
NUMBER: 1625-0046). Therefore, the Coast Guard will not enforce the
information collection requirement at 33 CFR 138.85 triggered by this
rulemaking until its information collection request is approved by OMB.
We will publish a document in the Federal Register informing the public
of OMB's decision to approve, modify, or disapprove the collection.
    You are not required to respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

E. 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.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

G. Taking of Private Property

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

H. 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.

I. 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.

J. 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.

K. 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.

L. Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their
regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the
OMB, 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.

M. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded that 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 section 2.B.2, figure 2-1,
paragraph (34)(a) of the Instruction. An environmental analysis
checklist and a categorical exclusion determination are available in
the public docket for this rulemaking, where indicated above under
ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 138

    Hazardous materials transportation, Insurance, Limits of liability,
Oil pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Water
pollution control.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the interim rule
amending 33 CFR part 138, published at 74 FR 31368 on July 1, 2009, is
adopted as a final rule without change.

    Dated: December 30, 2009.
William R. Grawe,
Acting Director, National Pollution Funds Center, United States Coast
Guard.
[FR Doc. E9-31349 Filed 1-5-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 28 (Wednesday, February 11, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7555-7559]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02700]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2015-0037; FRL-9922-87-Region 9]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, Butte
County Air Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing a
limited approval and limited disapproval of revisions to the Butte
County Air Quality Management District's (BCAQMD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern
volatile organic compounds (VOCs), oxides of nitrogen (NOX),
and particulate matter (PM) emissions from open burning. We are
proposing action on a local rule that regulates these emission sources
under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on
this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES: Any comments must arrive by March 13, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2015-0037, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email.
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. 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 be free of any defects
or viruses.
    Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov, some
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be publicly
available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours
with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rynda Kay, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4118<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal
    A. What rule did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of this rule?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?
    B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. What are the deficiencies in the rule?
    D. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule
    E. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rule did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the date
that is was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                             Table 1--Submitted Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Local agency                 Rule No.              Rule title               Amended      Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BCAQMD................................          300   Open Burning..................     02/24/11      09/21/12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 11, 2012, EPA determined that the submittal for BCAQMD
Rule 300 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V,
which must be met before formal EPA review.

B. Are there other versions of this rule?

    There is no previous version of Rule 300 in the California SIP.
BCAQMD previously adopted Rules 301-325 for open burning which were
approved by the EPA for inclusion into the California SIP in 1987.
BCAQMD later consolidated these rules locally into Rule 300. On
February 24, 2011, BCAQMD updated the open burning requirements in Rule
300 and CARB submitted the rule to us on October 21, 2012. This rule
would supersede the BCAQMD rules currently in the California SIP as
listed below.

                                         Table 2--Rules To Be Superseded
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Rule                            Title                SIP approval date          FR Citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
301................................  Prohibitions on Open         February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
                                      Burning.
302................................  Exemptions to Rule 301.....  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
303................................  Burn Permits...............  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
304................................  Exemptions to Rule 303.....  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
306................................  Information Furnished by     February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
                                      Permit Applicant.
307................................  Ignition Hours.............  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
308................................  Notice of Intent to Ignite.  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
309................................  Freedom from Debris and      February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
                                      Moisture.
310................................  Arrangement of Agricultural  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
                                      and Wood Waste.
311................................  Drying Period..............  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
312................................  Wind Direction.............  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
313................................  Ignition Devices...........  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
314................................  Burning of Vines or Bushes   February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
                                      Treated with Herbicides.

315................................  Rice Straw Burning.........  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
316................................  Field Crop Ignition........  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
317................................  Field Crops Harvested Prior  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
                                      to September 10.
318................................  Restriction of Burning       February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
                                      During Poor Air Quality
                                      Conditions.
320................................  Certificate from Department  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
                                      of Fish and Game.
322................................  Special Permit.............  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
323................................  Range Improvement Burning..  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
324................................  Burning at Disposal Sites..  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
325................................  Exemption to Rule 324......  February 3, 1987......  52 FR 3226.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule?

    Open burning emits PM, including particulate matter of ten microns
or less (PM10) and particulate matter of 2.5 microns or less
(PM2.5), directly, as well as VOCs and NOX, which
are precursors to ozone and PM2.5. VOCs help produce ground-
level ozone and smog, which harm human health and the environment.
NOX helps produce ground-level ozone, smog and particulate
matter, which harm human health and the environment. PM contributes to
effects that are harmful to human health and the environment, including
premature mortality, aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular
disease, decreased lung function, visibility impairment, and damage to
vegetation and ecosystems.
    Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit regulations
that control VOC, NOX, and PM emissions. Rule 300 is
designed to minimize the impacts of smoke and other air pollutants
generated by open burning. EPA's technical support document (TSD) has
more information about this rule.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see CAA section
110(a)(2)), must not interfere with applicable requirements concerning
attainment and reasonable further progress or other CAA requirements
(see CAA section 110(l)), and must not modify certain SIP control
requirements in nonattainment areas without ensuring equivalent or
greater emissions reductions (see CAA section 193).
    In PM2.5 nonattainment areas classified as moderate, the
SIP must include Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) (see CAA
section 189(a)(1)). BCAQMD regulates the Chico nonattainment area in
Butte County, which is classified as moderate for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) (40 CFR
81.305). On September 10, 2013 (78 FR 55225), EPA issued a
determination that the area had attained the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 standard based on complete, quality-assured, and
certified ambient air monitoring data for the 2010-2012 monitoring
period. Under EPA's Clean Data Policy and the regulations that embody
it, 40 CFR 51.1004(c) (for PM2.5), an EPA determination that
an area is attaining the relevant standard suspends the area's
obligations to submit RACM for as long as the area continues to attain.
Therefore, BCAQMD is not currently required to implement RACM for
PM2.5. If the Chico nonattainment area is redesignated to
attainment, RACM requirements for PM2.5 will no longer
apply.
    BCAQMD also regulates the Chico ozone nonattainment area, which is
classified as marginal under the 1997 and 2008 NAAQS.\1\ CAA sections
172(c)(1) and 182 require implementation of RACM for moderate and above
ozone areas, but not for marginal areas. Therefore, BCAQMD is not
subject to RACM requirements with respect to ozone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On December 3, 2012 (77 FR 71551), EPA determined that Chico
nonattainment area had attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date, and that it continued to attain the 1997
standard based upon complete quality-assured data for 2009-2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate
enforceability, revision/relaxation and rule stringency requirements
for the applicable criteria pollutants include the following:
    1. ``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).
    2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January 11,
1990).
    3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe this rule is largely consistent with the relevant policy
and guidance regarding enforceability, stringency, and SIP relaxations.
Rule provisions which do not meet the evaluation criteria are
summarized below and discussed further in the TSD.

C. What are the deficiencies in the rule?

    BCAQMD Rule 300 contains two provisions which do not meet the
evaluation criteria concerning enforceability and preclude full SIP
approval. The provisions allow the Air Pollution Control Officer (APCO)
to independently interpret the SIP without explicit and replicable
procedures within the rule to tightly define how the discretion is
exercised to assure equivalent emission reductions and without explicit
approval of such discretion provisions by the EPA (Little Blue Book,
page 17; see also 52 FR 45044, 45109 (November 24, 1987)).
    1. Sections 5.53 and 6.5 prohibit burning of rubbish or garbage
except under variance by the hearing board as follows:
    ``5.53 Variance: Temporary exemption from DISTRICT rules or
regulations granted to sources by the DISTRICT Hearing Board.
    6.5 It is unlawful to burn rubbish or garbage at dumps, landfills,
or refuse disposal areas, or at any solid waste dump, whether public or
private, or to burn garbage anywhere else in the County of Butte,
except under variance.''
    2. Sections 8.24 allows the APCO to waive drying time requirements:
    ``8.2.4 The drying time requirements stated in Sections 8.2.1 and
8.2.2 may be waived by the APCO for good cause at the discretion of the
APCO. The adequacy of cause to waive the drying time requirements shall
be decided on a case-by-case basis by the APCO.''

D. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule

    The TSD describes additional rule revisions that we recommend for
the next time the local agency modifies the rule.

E. Public Comment and Proposed Action

    As authorized in sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, EPA is
proposing a limited approval of the submitted rule to improve the SIP.
If finalized, this action would incorporate the submitted rule into the
SIP, including those provisions identified as deficient. This approval
is limited because EPA is simultaneously proposing a limited
disapproval of the rule under section 110(k)(3). If this disapproval is
finalized, sanctions will be imposed under section 179 of the Act
unless EPA approves subsequent SIP revisions that correct the rule
deficiencies within 18 months of the disapproval. These sanctions would
be imposed according to 40 CFR 52.31. A final disapproval would also
trigger the 2-year clock for the federal implementation plan (FIP)
requirement under section 110(c).
    Note that the submitted rule has been adopted by the BCAQMD, and
EPA's final limited disapproval would not prevent the local agency from
enforcing it. The limited disapproval also would not prevent any
portion of the rule from being incorporated by reference into the
federally enforceable SIP as discussed in a July 9, 1992 EPA memo
titled ``Processing of State Implementation Plan (SIP) Submittals.''
    We will accept comments from the public on the proposed limited
approval and limited disapproval for the next 30 days.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory
Planning and Review.''

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
    This rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities because SIP approvals or disapprovals under
section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create
any new requirements but simply approve or disapprove requirements that
the State is already imposing. Therefore, because EPA's proposed
limited approval/limited disapproval does not create any new
requirements, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under
the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of State action. The
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a) (2).

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Under sections 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    EPA has determined that the limited approval/limited disapproval
action proposed does not include a Federal mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more to either State, local, or
tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This
Federal action proposes to approve and disapprove pre-existing
requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new requirements.
Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal
governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces
Executive Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 (Enhancing the
Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA
consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the
Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation.
    This rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, because it
merely proposes to approve or disapprove a State rule implementing a
federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air
Act. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not
apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed rule does not
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. It
will not

have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
    EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed rule
from tribal officials.

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

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045, because it proposes to
approve a State rule implementing a Federal standard.

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

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards''
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical.
    The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's
action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to
the use of VCS.

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

    Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this rulemaking.

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: January 23, 2015.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2015-02700 Filed 2-10-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 149 (Thursday, August 2, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45985-45987]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18926]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0764; Airspace Docket No. 12-ANE-12]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Lincoln, ME

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E Airspace at Lincoln, ME,
as the Lincoln Non-Directional Radio Beacon (NDB) has been
decommissioned and new Standard Instrument Approach Procedures have
been developed at Lincoln Regional Airport. This action would enhance
the safety and airspace management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR)
operations at the airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 17, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey SE., Washington, DC 20590-

0001; Telephone: 1-800-647-5527; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify
the Docket Number FAA-2012-0764; Airspace Docket No. 12-ANE-12, at the
beginning of your comments. You may also submit and review received
comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire.
Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and
suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned
regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited
on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and
energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2012-0764; Airspace Docket No. 12-ANE-12) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on
this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket
No. FAA-2012-0764; Airspace Docket No. 12-ANE-12.'' The postcard will
be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded from and
comments submitted through http://www.regulations.gov. Recently
published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's
Web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays. An
informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at
the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation
Administration, Room 350, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia
30337.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
to request a copy of Advisory circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to amend Class E airspace extending upward
from 700 feet above the surface to support new Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures developed at Lincoln Regional Airport, Lincoln, ME.
Airspace reconfiguration is necessary due to the decommissioning of the
Lincoln NDB and cancellation of the NDB approach, and for continued
safety and management of IFR operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.9V, dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15,
2011, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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. This proposed rulemaking is promulgated under the authority
described in Subtitle VII, Part, A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under
that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign
the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This proposed regulation is within the scope
of that authority as it would amend Class E airspace at Lincoln
Regional Airport, Lincoln, ME.
    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

    1. The authority citation for Part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854,
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 9, 2011, effective September 15, 2011,
is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ANE ME E5 Lincoln, ME [Amended]

Lincoln Regional Airport, ME
    (Lat. 45[deg]21'44'' N., long. 68[deg]32'05'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within an 11.8-mile radius of Lincoln Regional Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on July 27, 2012 .
Barry A. Knight,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
[FR Doc. 2012-18926 Filed 8-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 73 (Monday, April 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20368-20369]
[FR Doc No: 2021-07982]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG21-121-000.
    Applicants: Kei Mass Energy Storage I, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Kei Mass Energy Storage I, LLC.
    Filed Date: 4/12/21.
    Accession Number: 20210412-5882.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/3/21.

    Docket Numbers: EG21-122-000.
    Applicants: Niyol Wind, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Self-Certification of Exempt Wholesale
Generator Status of Niyol Wind, LLC.
    Filed Date: 4/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20210413-5203.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/21.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER20-2379-002.
    Applicants: Sugar Creek Wind One LLC.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Sugar Creek
Wind One LLC.
    Filed Date: 4/12/21.
    Accession Number: 20210412-5886.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/3/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-679-001.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: 2021-04-13_Compliance Filing re
Spinning Reserves to be effective 6/1/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20210413-5207.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1663-000.
    Applicants: Old Dominion Electric Cooperative, PJM Interconnection,
L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Revised SA No. 3746, NITSA
Among PJM and Old Dominion Electric Cooperative to be effective 4/1/
2021.
    Filed Date: 4/12/21.
    Accession Number: 20210412-5770.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/3/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1664-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Original ISA, Service
Agreement No. 6007; Queue No. AD2-115 to be effective 3/15/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20210413-5054.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1665-000.
    Applicants: AEP Texas Inc..
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: AEPTX-Wind Energy
Transmission Texas Interconnection Agreement to be effective 4/1/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20210413-5069.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1666-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., New England Power Pool
Participants Committee.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Rev to List the Min Ethics
Stndards for Mkt Monitoring w/out Ref Code of Conduct to be effective
6/12/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20210413-5070.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1667-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association,
Inc..
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of Rate
Schedule FERC No. 257 to be effective 4/14/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20210413-5078.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1668-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to WMPA, First
Revised SA No. 4644; Queue No. AB1-163 (amend) to be effective 2/8/
2017..
    Filed Date: 4/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20210413-5103.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1669-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2021-04-13_SA 3423 ATC-WPSC
1st Rev GIA (J870) to be effective 3/30/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20210413-5104.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1670-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2021-04-13_SA 3424 ATC-
Wisconsin Electric Power 1st Rev GIA (J871) to be effective 3/30/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20210413-5140.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1671-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to ISA, SA No.
5596; Queue Position AD1-020 to be effective 4/29/2020.

    Filed Date: 4/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20210413-5195.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1672-000.
    Applicants: Alabama Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Neoen U.S. (Lydia Solar)
LGIA filing to be effective 3/30/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20210413-5197.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/21.

    Docket Numbers: ER21-1673-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Submission of Normalization
Filing to be effective 6/12/2021.
    Filed Date: 4/13/21.
    Accession Number: 20210413-5206.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/4/21.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 13, 2021.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-07982 Filed 4-16-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 111 (Monday, June 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34697-34698]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13655]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69693; File No. SR-CBOE-2013-053]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change To Update a Reference in Rule 8.51

June 4, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on May 23, 2013, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (the
``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described
in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to update a reference in Rule 8.51. The text
of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site
(http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the
Exchange's Office of the Secretary, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    As of August 29, 2005, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') adopted new rules under Regulation National Market
System (``Regulation NMS''), which redesignated the national market
system rules that previously existed under Rule 11Ac1-1. In SR-CBOE-
2012-072, the Exchange amended its rules to update references to Rule
11Ac1-1 in the CBOE Rules.\3\ However, the Exchange missed one such
reference in that rule change. As such, the Exchange hereby proposes to
amend two references in Interpretation and Policy .01 to Rule 8.51 that
refer to Securities Exchange Act Rule 11Ac1-1(a)(21) to accurately
refer to Rule 600(b)(65) of Regulation NMS under the Exchange Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67560 (August 1,
2012), 77 FR 47147 (August 7, 2012) (SR-CBOE-2012-072).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the
Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the
Act.\4\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is
consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \5\ requirements that the rules of
an exchange be designed to promote just and equitable principles of
trade, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts, to remove
impediments to and to perfect the mechanism for a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and
the public interest. Updating Exchange rules to include accurate
references provides clarity to the Exchange's rules. The proposed rule
update eliminates confusion, thereby removing impediments to, and
perfecting the mechanism for a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general, protecting investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not believe
that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on intramarket
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because the proposed change is technical and does
not have an effect on trading, and will eliminate any confusion for all
market participants who operate under Exchange rules. The Exchange does
not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on
intermarket competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act because the proposed change is
technical in nature and does not affect trading on the Exchange.
Further, the proposed change only affects the CBOE Rules. To the extent
that the Exchange rules with more accurate references may make the
Exchange a more attractive venue for market participants on other
exchanges, such market participants may elect to become CBOE market
participants.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:
    A. Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest;
    B. impose any significant burden on competition; and
    C. become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was
filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has
become effective

pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \6\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \7\
thereunder.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \7\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \8\ In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires the Exchange to
give the Commission written notice of the Exchange's intent to file
the proposed rule change along with a brief description and text of
the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the
date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as
designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied the pre-
filing requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \9\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\10\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has
requested that the Commission waive the operative delay so that the
proposed rule change may take effect immediately, thereby immediately
preventing any confusion that could arise from the current references.
The Commission notes that the proposed rule change does not present any
new, unique or substantive issues, but rather is merely updating an out
of date rule reference in one CBOE rule. Therefore, the Commission
believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest and designates the
proposed rule change as operative upon filing.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \11\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2013-053 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2013-053. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2013-053 and should be
submitted on or before July 1, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Kevin M O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-13655 Filed 6-7-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17107-17108]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7121]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-1999-5748; FMCSA-1999-6156; FMCSA-
1999-6480; FMCSA-2003-15892; FMCSA-2003-16564; FMCSA-2005-22194; MCSA-
2005-23099; FMCSA-2005-23238; FMCSA-2006-23773; FMCSA-2009-0303; FMCSA-
2009-0321]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
28 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals
from the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not
compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these
exemption renewals will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to
or greater than the level of safety maintained without the exemptions
for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective April 14, 2012. Comments must be
received on or before April 23, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) numbers: FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-1999-5748;
FMCSA-1999-6156; FMCSA-1999-6480; FMCSA-2003-15892; FMCSA-2003-16564;
FMCSA-2005-22194; FMCSA-2005-23099; FMCSA-2005-23238; FMCSA-2006-23773;
FMCSA-2009-0303; FMCSA-2009-0321, using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: 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.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the FDMS published in
the Federal Register on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-785.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption (including
renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381.

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 28 individuals who have requested renewal of
their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 28 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:

Bradley T. Alspach (IL)
Scott E. Ames (ME)
Otto J. Ammer, Jr. (PA)
Nick D. Bacon (KY)
Mark A. Baisden (OH)
Johnny W. Bradford, Sr. (KY)
Levi A. Brown (MT)
Charlie F. Cook (GA)
Curtis J. Crowston (ND)
Clifford H. Dovel (WA)
Arthur L. Fields (SC)
Rupert G. Gilmore, III (AL)
Albert Gschwind (WI)
Walter R. Hardiman (WV)
Michael W. Jones (IL)
Matthew J. Konecki (MT)
Paul E. Lindon (KY)
Travis J. Luce (MI)
Jack D. Miller (OH)
Eric M. Moats, Sr. (MD)
Robert W. Nicks (NY)
Joseph S. Nix, IV (MO)
Monte L. Purciful (IN)
Luis F. Saavedra (FL)
Earl W. Sheets (OH)
Robert V. Sloan (NC)
Steven L. Valley (ME)
Darel G. Wagner (MN)

    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual has a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10),
and (b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is
otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each
individual provides a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's
report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical
examination; and (3) that each individual provide a copy of the annual
medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's
qualification file and retains a copy of the certification on his/her
person while driving for presentation to a duly authorized Federal,
State, or local enforcement official. Each exemption will be valid for
two years unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be
rescinded

    if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of
the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of
safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3) continuation
of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives
of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 28 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (64 FR 27027; 64 FR 40404; 64 FR 51568; 64 FR 66962; 64 FR
54948; 64 FR 68195; 65 FR 159; 65 FR 20251; 66 FR 66969; 67 FR 10475;
67 FR 17102; 68 FR 52811; 68 FR 61860; 68 FR 69432; 68 FR 74699; 68 FR
75715; 69 FR 8260; 69 FR 10503; 69 FR 17267; 70 FR 57353; 70 FR 61165;
70 FR 72689; 71 FR 4194; 71 FR 5105; 71 FR 6824; 71 FR 6825; 71 FR
6826; 71 FR 13450; 71 FR 16410; 71 FR 19600; 71 FR 19602; 73 FR 8392;
73 FR 11989; 74 FR 60022; 75 FR 1835; 75 FR 462375 FR 9482; 75 FR
13653). Each of these 28 applicants has requested renewal of the
exemption and has submitted evidence showing that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the requirement specified at 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10) and that the vision impairment is stable. In addition, a
review of each record of safety while driving with the respective
vision deficiencies over the past two years indicates each applicant
continues to meet the vision exemption requirements. These factors
provide an adequate basis for predicting each driver's ability to
continue to drive safely in interstate commerce. Therefore, FMCSA
concludes that extending the exemption for each renewal applicant for a
period of two years is likely to achieve a level of safety equal to
that existing without the exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by April 23, 2012.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 28 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was made on the merits of each
case and made only after careful consideration of the comments received
to its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

    Issued on: March 9, 2012.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2012-7121 Filed 3-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 243 (Monday, December 19, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78729-78730]
[FR Doc No: 2011-32449]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2000-7363; FMCSA-2001-10578; FMCSA-2003-15268; FMCSA-
2003-16241; FMCSA-2005-22194]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
10 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals
from the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not
compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these
exemption renewals will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to
or greater than the level of safety maintained without the exemptions
for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective December 31, 2011. Comments must be
received on or before January 18, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) numbers: FMCSA-2000-7363; FMCSA-2001-10578;
FMCSA-2003-15268; FMCSA-2003-16241; FMCSA-2005-22194, using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: 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.
     Fax: 1-(202) 493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the FDMS published in
the Federal Register on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-785.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical

Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption (including
renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381.

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 10 individuals who have requested renewal of
their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 10 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are:

Ronald G. Austin (AL)
Morris R. Beebe, II (CO)
Martiniano L. Espinosa (FL)
James G. LaBair (MI)
Norman R. Lamy (MA)
Lonnie Lomax, Jr. (IL)
John D. McCormick (WY)
Eugene C. Murphy (ME)
John H. Voigts (AZ)
Daniel G. Wilson (IL)

    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual has a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10),
and (b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is
otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each
individual provides a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's
report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical
examination; and (3) that each individual provide a copy of the annual
medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's
qualification file and retains a copy of the certification on his/her
person while driving for presentation to a duly authorized Federal,
State, or local enforcement official. Each exemption will be valid for
two years unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be
rescinded if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and
conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower
level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3)
continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals
and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 10 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (65 FR 45817; 65 FR 77066; 66 FR 53826; 66 FR 66966; 67 FR
71610; 68 FR 37197; 68 FR 48989; 68 FR 61857; 68 FR 69434; 68 FR 75715;
70 FR 25878; 70 FR 42615; 70 FR 57353; 70 FR 72689; 70 FR 74102; 71 FR
646; 72 FR 40360; 72 FR 62897; 72 FR 71993; 72 FR 71998; 74 FR 34632;
74 FR 64124; 74 FR 60021;74 FR 65846). Each of these 10 applicants has
requested renewal of the exemption and has submitted evidence showing
that the vision in the better eye continues to meet the requirement
specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the vision impairment is
stable. In addition, a review of each record of safety while driving
with the respective vision deficiencies over the past two years
indicates each applicant continues to meet the vision exemption
requirements. These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting
each driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate
commerce. Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for
each renewal applicant for a period of two years is likely to achieve a
level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by January 18, 2012.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 10 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was made on the merits of each
case and made only after careful consideration of the comments received
to its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

    Issued on: December 14, 2011.
 Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-32449 Filed 12-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 155 (Friday, August 12, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 49796]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17365]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0049; FRL-8150-04-OAR]
RIN 2060-AU96

Standards of Performance for Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces
Constructed After 10/21/74 & On or Before 8/17/83; Standards of
Performance for Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces & Argon-Oxygen
Decarburization Constructed After 8/17/83; Extension of Comment Period;
Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a
document in the Federal Register of July 13, 2022, extending the
comment period for the Standards of Performance for Steel Plants:
Electric Arc Furnaces Constructed After 10/21/74 & On or Before 8/17/
83; Standards of Performance for Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces &
Argon-Oxygen Decarburization Constructed After 8/17/83 proposed rule;
amendments action. The document contained incorrect dates.

DATES: The public comment period for the proposed rule published in the
Federal Register on May 16, 2022 (87 FR 29710), originally ending July
15, 2022, is being extended by 31 days. Written comments must be
received on or before August 15, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this action,
contact Donna Lee Jones, Metals and Inorganic Chemicals Group, Sector
Policies and Programs Division (D243-02), Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number:
(919) 541-5251 fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER> email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Correction

    In the Federal Register of July 13, 2022, in FR Doc. 2022-14897, on
page 41639, the following corrections are made:
    1. On page 41639, in the second column, correct the SUMMARY to
read: SUMMARY: On May 16, 2022, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) proposed a rule titled ``Standards of Performance for
Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces Constructed After 10/21/74 & On or
Before 8/17/83; Standards of Performance for Steel Plants: Electric Arc
Furnaces & Argon-Oxygen Decarburization Constructed After 8/17/83.''
The EPA is extending the comment period on this proposed rule that
currently closes on July 15, 2022, by 31 days. The comment period will
now remain open until August 15, 2022, to allow additional time for
stakeholders to review and comment on the proposal.
    2. On page 41639, in the second column, correct the DATES caption
to read: DATES: The public comment period for the proposed rule
published in the Federal Register on May 16, 2022 (87 FR 29710),
originally ending July 15, 2022, is being extended by 31 days. Written
comments must be received on or before August 15, 2022.
    3. On page 41639, in the third column, in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION caption, correct the ``Rationale'' to read: SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:
    Rationale. Based on consideration of requests received from
environmental organizations (GASP (AL), GASP (PA), Fairfield
Environmental Justice Alliance, and California Communities Against
Toxics) and industry (Steel Manufacturers Association, American Iron
and Steel Institute, and Specialty Steel Industry of North America),
the EPA is extending the public comment period for an additional 31
days. Therefore, the public comment period will end on August 15, 2022.

Penny Lassiter,
Director, Sector Policies and Programs Division.
[FR Doc. 2022-17365 Filed 8-11-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P