[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 24, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30031-30034]
[FR Doc No: E9-14747]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2009-0453]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Great Egg Harbor Bay, Between
Beesleys Point and Somers Point, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the regulations that govern
the operation of the US Route 9/Beesleys Point Bridge over Great Egg
Harbor Bay, at mile 3.5, between Beesleys Point and Somers Point, NJ.
This proposal would allow the drawbridge to operate on an advance
notice basis during specific dates and times of the year. The proposed
change would result in more efficient use of the bridge during dates
and times of infrequent transit.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before August 10, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2009-0453 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these methods. See the
``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on submitting
comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail Sandra S. Elliott, Bridge Administration Branch,
Fifth Coast Guard District, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted,
without change, to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2009-0453), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online (http://www.regulations.gov), or by fax, mail or hand delivery,
but please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online
via http://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received by the
Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax,
hand delivery, or mail your comment, it will be considered as having
been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the Docket
Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and a
mailing address, an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding
your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
select the Advanced Docket Search option on the right side of the
screen, insert ``USCG-2009-0453'' in the Docket ID box, press Enter,
and then click on the balloon shape in the Actions column. If you
submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than, 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change the rule
based on your comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
select the Advanced Docket Search option on the right side of the
screen, insert USCG-2009-0453 in the Docket ID column. You may visit
either the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an agreement
with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management
Facility.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008 issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one using one of the four methods specified under
ADDRESSES. Please explain why one would be beneficial. If we determine
that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and
place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

Background and Purpose

    The Cape May County Department of Public Works (The County) is
responsible for the operation of the U.S. Route 9 Bridge, at mile 3.5,
across Great Egg Harbor Bay, between Beesleys Point and Somers Point,
NJ. The County requested advance notification for vessel openings
during specific dates and times of the year due to the infrequency of
requests for vessel openings of the drawbridge.
    The U.S. Route 9/Beesleys Point Bridge has a vertical clearance of
eight feet above mean high water in the closed-to-navigation position.
The existing operating schedule is set out in 33 CFR 117.5, which
requires the drawbridge to open promptly and fully for the passage of
vessels when a request to open is given.
    Bridge opening data, supplied by the County, revealed minimal
requests for vessel openings during periods of time that the County
desires to have the bridge unmanned. The numbers of openings vary from
a high number of openings during the summer months and a low number of
openings during the winter season. Similarly, there are very few
opening during the hours of darkness. (See Table)

                                In-Season Bridge Openings--May 15 to September 30
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   2003    2004    2005    2006    2007    2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12 a.m. to 6 a.m................................................       5       6       6       4       4       0
10 p.m. to 6 a.m................................................       5      10       7      10      10       4
8 p.m. to 6 a.m.................................................      25      22      16      22      18      18
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 Off-Season Bridge Openings--October 1 to May 14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   2003    2004    2005    2006    2007    2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12 a.m. to 6 a.m................................................       2       5       4       1       5       5
10 p.m. to 6 a.m................................................       4       5       8       1       5       9
8 p.m. to 6 a.m.................................................       5       5      11       3       7      10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Due to the anticipated infrequency of requests for vessel openings
of the drawbridge during these specific times and dates, the County
requested to change the current operating regulation by requiring the
draw of the bridge to open on signal, except from October 1 to May 14
from 8 p.m. to 6 a.m., and from May 15 to September 30 from 10 p.m. to
6 a.m., need open only if at least two hours notice is given.
    The County requests an additional change to the operating
regulations to allow the U.S. Route 9/Beesleys Point Bridge to operate
on an advance notice on December 24 through December 26 of every year.
    A review of the bridge logs supplied by the County for the past six
years revealed that they have provided only one vessel opening within
that time frame. The County requested to change the current operating
regulations by requiring the draw span to open on signal if at least
two hours notice is given from 8 p.m. on December 24 until and
including 6 a.m. on December 26 of every year. This advance notice
request coincides with other drawbridges operated by the County for the
same dates in December.
    The Coast Guard believes that all of the proposed changes are
reasonable because the drawbridge would still open during specific
dates and times after the advance notice is given.
    The County will install a sign on both faces of the bascule span
indicating the hours of operations and a two-hour advance notice when
the bridge is unmanned. The sign would also list the County Public
Works Department 24-hour telephone number at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to insert new regulations at 33 CFR Sec.
117.722. The draw shall open on signal, except from October 1 through
May 14 from 8 p.m. to 6 a.m., from May 15 through September 30, from 10
p.m. to 6 a.m., and from 8 p.m. on December 24 until 6 a.m. on December
26, the draw need open only if at least two hours notice is given.
    The proposed change would result in more efficient use of the
bridge during dates and times of infrequent transit.

Regulatory Analyses

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

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order.

    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. We reached
this conclusion based on the fact that the proposed changes have only a
minimal impact on maritime traffic transiting the bridge. Mariners can
plan their trips in accordance with the proposed scheduled bridge
openings, to minimize delays.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of
which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels
needing to transit the bridge from October 1 to May 14 from 8 p.m. to 6
a.m., from May 15 to September 30 from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m., and from 8
p.m. on December 24 until 6 a.m. on December 26.
    This action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities because the rule only adds minimal
restrictions to the movement of navigation, and mariners who plan their
transits in accordance with the proposed scheduled bridge openings can
minimize delay.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact Waverly W. Gregory, Jr., Bridge
Administrator, Fifth Coast Guard District,<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Coast
Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or
complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast
Guard.

Collection of Information

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

Federalism

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

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

    This proposed rule would not affect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630,
Governmental Actions and Interference With Constitutionally Protected
Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

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

Indian Tribal Governments

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

Energy Effects

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

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 0023.1, and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions which do no individually or

cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment because
it simply promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for
drawbridges. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR Part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

    1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    2. Add new Sec.  117.722 to read as follows:

Sec.  117.722  Great Egg Harbor Bay.

    The draw of the US Route 9/Beesleys Point Bridge, mile 3.5, shall
open on signal, except from October 1 to May 14 from 8 p.m. to 6 a.m.,
from May 15 to September 30 from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m., and from 8 p.m. on
December 24 until 6 a.m. on December 26, the draw need open only if at
least two hours notice is given.

    Dated:June 8,2009.
Fred M. Rosa, Jr.,
Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard Commander, Fifth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. E9-14747 Filed 6-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register: April 3, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 65)]
[Notices]
[Page 18303-18304]
[DOCID:fr03ap08-89]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. IC-28227]

Notice of Applications for Deregistration under Section 8(f) of
the Investment Company Act of 1940

March 28, 2008.
    The following is a notice of applications for deregistration under
section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for the month of
March, 2008. A copy of each application may be obtained for a fee at
the SEC's Public Reference Branch (tel.<PHONE_NUMBER>). An order
granting each application will be issued unless the SEC orders a
hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by
writing to the SEC's Secretary at the address below and serving the
relevant applicant with a copy of the request, personally or by mail.
Hearing requests should be received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on April
22, 2008, and should be accompanied by proof of service on the
applicant, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate
of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's
interest, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons
who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by
writing to the Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100
F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diane L. Titus at<PHONE_NUMBER>, SEC,
Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company
Regulation, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-4041.

Skyline Funds [File No. 811-5022]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. On December 31, 2007, applicant transferred
its assets to Skyline Special Equities Portfolio, a series of Managers
AMG Funds, based on net asset value. Expenses of $393,155 incurred in
connection with the reorganization were paid by Managers Investment
Group LLC, the acquiring fund's investment adviser, and Skyline Asset
Management, L.P., applicant's investment adviser.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on March 7, 2008, and
amended on March 26, 2008.
    Applicant's Address: 311 South Wacker Dr., Suite 4500, Chicago, IL
60606.

Excelsior Private Equity Fund II, Inc. [File No. 811-8149]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On October
29, 2007, applicant made a final liquidating distribution to its
shareholders, based on net asset value. Expenses of $475,230 incurred
in connection with the liquidation were paid by applicant and UST
Advisers, Inc., applicant's investment adviser.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on January 29, 2008, and
amended on March 26, 2008.
    Applicant's Address: 225 High Ridge Rd., Stamford, CT 06905.

The Munder @Vantage Fund [File No. 811-9937]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On December
14, 2007, applicant transferred its assets to Munder Internet Fund, a
series of Munder Series Trust, based on net asset value. Expenses of
approximately

$155,530 incurred in connection with the reorganization were paid by
Munder Capital Management, applicant's investment adviser. Applicant
has retained approximately $14,200 in cash to pay certain outstanding
liabilities.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on March 3, 2008, and
amended on March 26, 2008.
    Applicant's Address: 480 Pierce St., Birmingham, MI 48009.

Dreyfus Balanced Fund, Inc. [File No. 811-7068]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. On December 17, 2004, applicant transferred
its assets to Dreyfus Premier Balanced Opportunity Fund, a
corresponding series of Dreyfus Premier Manager Funds II, based on net
asset value. Expenses of $64,000 incurred in connection with the
reorganization were paid by The Dreyfus Corporation, applicant's
investment adviser.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on January 30, 2008, and
amended on March 20, 2008.
    Applicant's Address: c/o The Dreyfus Corporation, 200 Park Ave.,
New York, NY 10166.

SEI Index Funds [File No. 811-4283]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. On September 14, 2007, applicant transferred
its assets to S&P 500 Index Fund, a series of SEI Institutional Managed
Trust, based on net asset value. Expenses of $148,500 incurred in
connection with the reorganization were paid by applicant and SEI
Investment Management Corporation, applicant's investment adviser.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on March 3, 2008.
    Applicant's Address: One Freedom Valley Dr., Oaks, PA 19456.

HBI Equity Trust, Series 1 [File No. 811-8184]

    Summary: Applicant, a unit investment trust, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On May 15,
2001, applicant made a liquidating distribution to its unitholders,
based on net asset value. Applicant incurred no expenses in connection
with the liquidation.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on February 19, 2008.
    Applicant's Address: 222 South Riverside Plaza, 7th Floor, Chicago,
IL 60606.

Private Asset Management Fund [File No. 811-21049]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. On December 27, 2007, applicant made a
liquidating distribution to its shareholders based on net asset value.
Expenses of $2,540 incurred in connection with the liquidation were
paid by Private Asset Management, Inc., applicant's investment adviser.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on February 25, 2008.
    Applicant's Address: 11995 El Camino Real, Suite 303, San Diego, CA
92130.

Alliance All-Market Advantage Fund, Inc. [File No. 811-8702]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On February
1, 2008, applicant transferred its assets to AllianceBernstein Large
Cap Growth Fund, Inc., based on net asset value. Expenses of $260,000
incurred in connection with the reorganization were paid by applicant.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on February 21, 2008.
    Applicant's Address: 1345 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY
10105.

Oppenheimer Emerging Technologies Fund [File No. 811-9845]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. On October 26, 2007, applicant transferred
its assets to Oppenheimer Capital Appreciation Fund, based on net asset
value. Expenses of approximately $102,108 incurred in connection with
the reorganization were paid by applicant.
    Filing Date: The application was filed on March 11, 2008.
    Applicant's Address: 6803 South Tucson Way, Centennial, CO 80112.

Fortress Pinnacle Investment Fund LLC [File No. 811-21232]

    Summary: Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order
declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On November
27, 2007, applicant distributed to its preferred shareholders cash
payments equal to the face amount of their securities plus preferred
dividends accrued. On January 22, 2008, applicant made a liquidating
distribution to its common shareholders, based on net asset value.
Expenses of $195,000 incurred in connection with the liquidation will
be paid by applicant. Applicant has retained approximately $260,159 in
cash to cover the outstanding expenses. After these expenses have been
paid, remaining monies will be distributed pro rata to the common
shareholders.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on January 30, 2008, and
amended on March 11, 2008.
    Applicant's Address: c/o Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP,
Four Times Sq., New York, NY 10036.

Atlas Insurance Trust [File No. 811-8041]

    Summary: Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to
be an investment company. On February 26, 2007, applicant made a
liquidating distribution to its shareholders, based on net asset value.
Applicant incurred no expenses in connection with the liquidation.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on December 19, 2007, and
amended on January 31, 2008.
    Applicant's Address: 794 Davis Street, San Leandro, CA 94577.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-6873 Filed 4-2-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 12, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61053-61055]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24572]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0588; FRL-10001-99-OAR]

Alternative Methods for Calculating Off-Cycle Credits Under the
Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Program: Applications From
Nissan North America, Inc.

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is requesting comment on applications from Nissan North
America, Inc. (``Nissan'') for off-cycle carbon dioxide
(CO2) credits under EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas
emissions standards. ``Off-cycle'' emission reductions can be achieved
by employing technologies that result in real-world benefits, but where
that benefit is not adequately captured on the test procedures used by
manufacturers to demonstrate compliance with emission standards. EPA's
light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas program acknowledges these benefits
by giving automobile manufacturers several options for generating
``off-cycle'' CO2 credits. Under the regulations, a
manufacturer may apply for CO2 credits for off-cycle
technologies that result in off-cycle benefits. In these cases, a
manufacturer must provide EPA with a proposed methodology for
determining the real-world off-cycle benefit. Nissan has submitted
applications that describe methodologies for determining off-cycle
credits from technologies described in their application. Pursuant to
applicable regulations, EPA is making Nissan's off-cycle credit
calculation methodologies available for public comment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 12, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2019-0588, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roberts French, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Office of Transportation and Air Quality,
Compliance Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000
Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Fax:
(734) 214-4869. Email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) program provides
three pathways by which a manufacturer may accrue off-cycle carbon
dioxide (CO2) credits for those technologies that achieve
CO2 reductions in the real world but where those reductions
are not adequately captured on the test used to determine compliance
with the CO2 standards, and which are not otherwise
reflected in the standards' stringency. The first pathway is a
predetermined list of credit values for specific off-cycle technologies
that may be used beginning in model year 2014.\1\ This pathway allows
manufacturers to use conservative credit values established by EPA for
a wide range of technologies, with minimal data submittal or testing
requirements, if the technologies meet EPA regulatory definitions. In
cases where the off-cycle technology is not on the menu but additional
laboratory testing can demonstrate emission benefits, a second pathway
allows manufacturers to use a broader array of emission tests (known as
``5-cycle'' testing because the methodology uses five different testing
procedures) to demonstrate and justify off-cycle CO2
credits.\2\ The additional emission tests allow emission benefits to be
demonstrated over some elements of real-world driving not adequately
captured by the GHG compliance tests, including high speeds, hard
accelerations, and cold temperatures. These first two methodologies
were completely defined through notice and comment rulemaking and
therefore no additional process is necessary for manufacturers to use
these methods. The third and last pathway allows manufacturers to seek
EPA approval to use an alternative methodology for determining the off-
cycle CO2 credits.\3\ This option is only available if the
benefit of the technology cannot be adequately demonstrated using the
5-cycle methodology. Manufacturers may also use this option for model
years prior to 2014 to demonstrate off-cycle CO2 reductions
for technologies that are on the predetermined list, or to demonstrate
reductions that exceed those available via use of the predetermined
list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(b).
    \2\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(c).
    \3\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the regulations, a manufacturer seeking to demonstrate off-
cycle credits with an alternative methodology (i.e., under the third
pathway described above) must describe a methodology that meets the
following criteria:
     Use modeling, on-road testing, on-road data collection, or
other approved analytical or engineering methods;
     Be robust, verifiable, and capable of demonstrating the
real-world emissions benefit with strong statistical significance;

     Result in a demonstration of baseline and controlled
emissions over a wide range of driving conditions and number of
vehicles such that issues of data uncertainty are minimized;
     Result in data on a model type basis unless the
manufacturer demonstrates that another basis is appropriate and
adequate.
    Further, the regulations specify the following requirements
regarding an application for off-cycle CO2 credits:
     A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must develop a
methodology for demonstrating and determining the benefit of the off-
cycle technology and carry out any necessary testing and analysis
required to support that methodology.
     A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must conduct
testing and/or prepare engineering analyses that demonstrate the in-use
durability of the technology for the full useful life of the vehicle.
     The application must contain a detailed description of the
off-cycle technology and how it functions to reduce CO2
emissions under conditions not represented on the compliance tests.
     The application must contain a list of the vehicle
model(s) which will be equipped with the technology.
     The application must contain a detailed description of the
test vehicles selected and an engineering analysis that supports the
selection of those vehicles for testing.
     The application must contain all testing and/or simulation
data required under the regulations, plus any other data the
manufacturer has considered in the analysis.
    Finally, the alternative methodology must be approved by EPA prior
to the manufacturer using it to generate credits. As part of the review
process defined by regulation, the alternative methodology submitted to
EPA for consideration must be made available for public comment.\4\ EPA
will consider public comments as part of its final decision to approve
or deny the request for off-cycle credits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Off-Cycle Credit Applications

A. Variable Crankcase Suction Valve Technology in Denso AC Compressors

    Using the alternative methodology approach discussed above, Nissan
is applying for credits for an air conditioning compressor manufactured
by Denso that results in air conditioning efficiency credits beyond
those provided in the regulations. This request is for the 2017 and
subsequent model years. This compressor, known as the Denso SAS
compressor, improves the internal valve system within the compressor to
reduce the internal refrigerant flow necessary throughout the range of
displacements that the compressor may use during its operating cycle.
The addition of a variable crankcase suction valve allows a larger mass
flow under maximum capacity and compressor start-up conditions (when
high flow is ideal), and then it can reduce to smaller openings with
reduced mass flow in mid- or low-capacity conditions. The refrigerant
exiting the crankcase is thus optimized across the range of operating
conditions, reducing the overall energy consumption of the air
conditioning system. EPA first approved credits for General Motors (GM)
for the use of the Denso SAS compressor in 2015,\5\ and has
subsequently approved such credits for BMW, Ford, and Hyundai.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``EPA Decision Document: Off-cycle Credits for Fiat Chrysler
Automobiles, Ford Motor Company, and General Motors Corporation.''
Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. EPA-420-R-15-014, September 2015.
    \6\ EPA Decision Document: Off-cycle Credits for BMW Group, Ford
Motor Company, and Hyundai Motor Company.'' Compliance Division,
Office of Transportation and Air Quality, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. EPA-420-R-17-010, December 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The credits calculated for the Denso SAS compressor would be in
addition to the credits of 1.7 grams/mile for variable-displacement A/C
compressors already allowed under EPA regulations.\7\ However, it is
important to note that EPA regulations place a limit on the cumulative
credits that can be claimed for improving the efficiency of A/C
systems. The rationale for this limit is that the additional fuel
consumption of A/C systems can never be reduced to zero, and the limits
established by regulation reflect the maximum possible reduction in
fuel consumption projected by EPA. These limits, or caps, on credits
for A/C efficiency, must also be applied to A/C efficiency credits
granted under the off-cycle credit approval process. In other words,
cumulative A/C efficiency credits for an A/C system--from the A/C
efficiency regulations and those granted via the off-cycle
regulations--must comply with the stated limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See 40 CFR 86.1868-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nissan is requesting an off-cycle GHG credit of 1.1 grams
CO2 per mile for the Denso SAS compressor. Nissan cited the
bench test modeling analysis referenced in the original GM application,
which demonstrated a benefit of 1.1 grams/mile. Like other
manufacturers, Nissan also ran vehicle tests using the AC17 test to
confirm the credit amount. Seven tests were conducted, resulting in a
calculated benefit of 4.4 grams/mile, thus substantiating the bench
test results. Based on these results, Nissan is requesting a credit of
1.1 grams/mile for all Nissan vehicles equipped with the Denso SAS
compressor with variable crankcase suction valve technology, starting
with 2017 model year vehicles. Details of the testing and analysis can
be found in the manufacturer's application.

B. Off-Cycle GHG Credits for Calsonic Kansei A/C Compressor
Incorporating Flowpath Resistance Reduction Technology

    Using the alternative methodology approach discussed above, Nissan
is applying for credits for an air conditioning compressor manufactured
by Calsonic Kansei that results in air conditioning efficiency credits
beyond those provided in the regulations. This request is for the 2018
and subsequent model years. This compressor (the ``Calsonic Kansei CR-
Phase 4 compressor''), improves the efficiency of the compressor by
changing the contours of the refrigerant flow path, reducing the
pressure loss and improving the efficiency relative to previous
versions of the system.
    The credits calculated for the Calsonic Kansei compressor would be
in addition to the credits of 1.7 grams/mile for variable-displacement
A/C compressors already allowed under EPA regulations.\8\ However, it
is important to note that EPA regulations place a limit on the
cumulative credits that can be claimed for improving the efficiency of
A/C systems. The rationale for this limit is that the additional fuel
consumption of A/C systems can never be reduced to zero, and the limits
established by regulation reflect the maximum possible reduction in
fuel consumption projected by EPA. These limits, or caps, on credits
for A/C efficiency, must also be applied to A/C efficiency credits
granted under the off-cycle credit approval process. In other words,
cumulative A/C efficiency credits for an A/C system--from the A/C
efficiency regulations and those granted via the off-cycle
regulations--must comply with the stated limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See 40 CFR 86.1868-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nissan is requesting an off-cycle GHG credit of 1.1 grams
CO2 per mile for the Calsonic Kansei compressor. Nissan
cited the bench test modeling analysis conducted by Calsonic Kansei,
using the procedures contained in SAE standard J2765, which
characterize a system's coefficient of performance. Nissan also ran six
vehicle tests comparing compressors on the AC17 test protocol; these
tests demonstrated a 1.7 gram/

mile benefit. Finally, Calsonic Kansei used the LCCP model to estimate
the benefits of the technology, and this modeling also supported a
credit value of 1.1 grams/mile. Details of the bench testing, vehicle
testing, and modeling are available in Nissan's application.

III. EPA Decision Process

    EPA has reviewed the applications for completeness and is now
making the applications available for public review and comment as
required by the regulations. The off-cycle credit applications
submitted by the manufacturer (with confidential business information
redacted) have been placed in the public docket (see ADDRESSES section
above) and on EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/vehicle-and-engine-certification/compliance-information-light-duty-greenhouse-gas-ghg-standards.
    EPA is providing a 30-day comment period on the applications for
off-cycle credits described in this notice, as specified by the
regulations. The manufacturers may submit a written rebuttal of
comments for EPA's consideration, or may revise an application in
response to comments. After reviewing any public comments and any
rebuttal of comments submitted by manufacturers, EPA will make a final
decision regarding the credit requests. EPA will make its decision
available to the public by placing a decision document (or multiple
decision documents) in the docket and on EPA's website at the same
manufacturer-specific pages shown above. While the broad methodologies
used by these manufacturers could potentially be used for other
vehicles and by other manufacturers, the vehicle specific data needed
to demonstrate the off-cycle emissions reductions would likely be
different. In such cases, a new application would be required,
including an opportunity for public comment.

    Dated: November 1, 2019.
Byron J. Bunker,
Director, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2019-24572 Filed 11-8-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 219 (Wednesday, November 13, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 68050]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27063]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP14-147-000.
    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Re-release of Neg Rate Agmt (SIGECO 33274 to ETC
ProLiance 33380) to be effective 11/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/4/13.
    Accession Number: 20131104-5021.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/18/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-148-000.
    Applicants: Wyoming Interstate Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Rate Case Settlement First Compliance Filing in Docket
No. RP13-184-000 to be effective 7/1/2013.
    Filed Date: 11/4/13.
    Accession Number: 20131104-5046.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/18/13.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-149-000.
    Applicants: AEP Generation Resources Inc., Ohio Power Company.
    Description: Notice of Change of Ownership, Request for Temporary
Waiver, Request for Expedited Action, and Request for Shortened Notice
Period of AEP Generation Resources, Inc. and Ohio Power Company.
    Filed Date: 11/4/13.
    Accession Number: 20131104-5153.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/12/13.

    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.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP14-148-001.
    Applicants: Wyoming Interstate Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Wyoming Interstate Company, L.L.C. submits tariff
filing per 154.203: Rate Case Settlement Second Compliance Filing in
Docket No. RP13-184-000 to be effective 1/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 11/4/13.
    Accession Number: 20131104-5063.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 11/18/13.

    Any person desiring to protest in any of the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified
comment date.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    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: November 5, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-27063 Filed 11-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 18, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64929-64930]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27341]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0367]

Hours of Service of Drivers: Association of American Railroads
and American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association; Application
for Exemption

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

ACTION: Notice of application for exemption; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces that it has received an application from the
Association of American Railroads and American Short Line and Regional
Railroad Association (AAR/ASLRRA) requesting a limited exemption from
the maximum driving time requirements of the hours-of-service (HOS)
regulations for drivers of property-carrying vehicles. The applicants
request the exemption to enable affected railroad employees, subject to
the HOS rule, to respond to an unplanned event that occurs outside of
or extends beyond the employee's normal work hours. FMCSA requests
public comment on AAR/ASLRRA's application for exemption.

DATES:  Comments must be received on or before January 17, 2019.

ADDRESSES:  You may submit comments identified by Federal Docket
Management System Number FMCSA-2018-0367 by any of the following
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. See the
Public Participation and Request for Comments section below for further
information.
     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, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.
E.T., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket number
for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without
change to 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 www.regulations.gov at any time or visit 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., ET, Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The on-line FDMS is available 24 hours each
day, 365 days each year.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Ms. Pearlie Robinson, FMCSA Driver
and Carrier Operations Division; Office of Carrier, Driver and Vehicle
Safety Standards; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If
you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket,
contact Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    FMCSA encourages you to participate by submitting comments and
related materials.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
notice (FMCSA-2018-0367), indicate the specific section of this
document to which the comment applies, and provide a reason for
suggestions or recommendations. You may submit your comments and
material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only
one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so the Agency can contact you if it has questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to www.regulations.gov and put
the docket number, ``FMCSA-2018-0367'' in the ``Keyword'' box, and
click ``Search.'' When the new screen appears, click on ``Comment
Now!'' button and type your comment into the text box in the following
screen. Choose whether you are submitting your comment as an individual
or on behalf of a third party and then submit. If you submit your
comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no
larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic
filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they
reached the facility, please enclose a stamped, self-

addressed postcard or envelope. FMCSA will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period.

II. Legal Basis

    FMCSA has authority under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 to grant
exemptions from certain Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations. FMCSA
must publish a notice of each exemption request in the Federal Register
(49 CFR 381.315(a)). The Agency must provide the public an opportunity
to inspect the information relevant to the application, including any
safety analyses that have been conducted. The Agency must also provide
an opportunity for public comment on the request.
    The Agency reviews safety analyses and public comments submitted,
and determines whether granting the exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be
achieved by the current regulation (49 CFR 381.305). The decision of
the Agency must be published in the Federal Register (49 CFR
381.315(b)) with the reasons for denying or granting the application
and, if granted, the name of the person or class of persons receiving
the exemption, and the regulatory provision from which the exemption is
granted. The notice must also specify the effective period (up to 5
years) and explain the terms and conditions of the exemption. The
exemption may be renewed (49 CFR 381.300(b)).

III. Request for Exemption

    The Association of American Railroads and American Short Line and
Regional Railroad Association (AAR/ASLRRA) contend that the HOS
prohibitions on driving after a 14-hour period on duty, and after 60 or
70 hours on duty in a 7- or 8-day week without the required off-duty
period, inhibit a railroad's ability to respond expeditiously to
certain types of emergency situations. For this reason AAR/ASLRAA is
requesting that a railroad employee responding to an unplanned event
that affects interstate commerce, service or the safety of railway
operations, including passenger rail operations, and that occurs
outside of or extends beyond the employee's normal shift, be exempt
from the provisions in 49 CFR part 395.3(a) and (b). Unplanned events
include some of the following: A derailment; a rail failure or other
report of dangerous track condition; a disruption to the electric
propulsion system; a bridge-strike; a disabeled vehicle on the track; a
train collision; weather and storm-related events; a matter of national
security; or a matter concerning public safety; a blocked grade
crossing, etc. The applicants request the exemption be granted for five
years. If the exemption is granted it would cover 21,000 drivers and
11,000 commercial motor vehicles (CMVs).
    In their application, AAR/ASLRRA compare the work of railroad
employees responding to an emergency situation to that of utility
employees responding to an emergency situation. The HOS rules do not
apply to a driver of a utility service vehicle as defined in 49 CFR
395.2. In the same respect that utility employees use any CMV to repair
and maintain pertinent services, railroad employees use vehicles as
mobile supply facilities, transporting personnel, equipment and
material needed for the driver to use at worksites within a region.
Like utility employees, railroad employees will have unpredictable work
hours when needed to address operational emergencies.
    AAR/ASLRRA contend that the work done by these employees supports
the railroad's effort to restore essential interstate commerce
passenger rail operations and, in the event of a grade crossing
incident, restore road and pedestrian access to the public. The
applicants assert that there is no principled distinction between
railroad employees responding to an unplanned event and those who
operate utility service vehicles.
    According to AAR/ASLRRA railroads work with local officials who
have authority to declare an emergency in the case of unplanned events.
However, the process is not well-defined and there are no assurances
that a request made during off-hours would be reviewed in a timely
manner. For example, one of AAR's member railroads has an internal
process that often involves coordination among multiple jurisdictions
due to the nature of the interstate railroad system. Despite the
railroad's best efforts, a delay in response from a designated official
outside of the normal work day can reportedly cause up to a five to
seven-hour delay in the railroad's efforts to resolve the unplanned
event. According to the applicants, this type of delay can have a
crippling impact on the rail network, expecially in congested areas of
the country like the Northeast Corridor and Chicago.

IV. Method To Ensure an Equivalent or Greater Level of Safety

    AAR/ASLRRA explained that ``the requested exemption will allow
railroad employees to respond timelier to unplanned events to restore
rail service without incurring extended blocked crossings, cascading
effects to traffic on the rail network, delays to passenger rail
operations, and delayed customer service. Additionally, railroads will
be able to improve public safety to motorists and pedestrians, if they
are able to expeditiously clear blocked grade crossings.''
    The applicants propose to provide any employee required to drive
within the terms of the requested exemption additional time off-duty in
excess of the 10 consecutive hours required by 395.3(a)(1). For ease of
recordkeeping, the applicants propose that:
     Any employee responding to an unplanned event that exceeds
his/her 14 hours of duty time for 5 hours or less be given 5 additional
consecutive hours off-duty for a total of 15 consecutive hours off-duty
before driving again;
     Any employee responding to an unplanned event that exceeds
his/her 14 hours of duty time for 5 hours up to a maximum of 10 hours
be given 10 additional consecutive hours off-duty for a total of 20
consecutive hours off-duty before driving again; and
     Any employee who exceeds 60 or 70 hours on duty in a 7- or
8-day week due to responding to an unplanned event be given 34 hours of
rest as prescribed in section 395.3 (c) prior to driving again.
    A copy of the application for exemption is available for review in
the docket for this notice.

    Issued on: December 7, 2018.
 Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-27341 Filed 12-17-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P