 [Federal Register Volume 82, Number 159 (Friday, August 18, 2017)] [Notices] [Pages 39459-39460] [FR Doc No: 2017-17505]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2011-0028]

Grain Handling Facilities; Extension of the Office of Management

and Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information Collection (Paperwork)

Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning its proposal to

extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the

information collection requirements contained in the standard on Grain

Handling Facilities.

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by

October 17, 2017.

ADDRESSES:

    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments

electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal

eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting

comments.

    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer

than 10 pages you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-

1648.

    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:

When using this method, you must submit a copy of your comments and

attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, OSHA Docket No. OSHA-2011-0028,

U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health

Administration, Room N-3653, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,

DC 20210. Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier

service) are accepted during the Department of Labor's and Docket

Office's normal business hours, 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., e.t.

    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and the

OSHA docket number for the Information Collection Request (ICR) (OSHA-

2011-0028). All comments, including any personal information you

provide, are placed in the public docket without change, and may be

made available online at http://www.regulations.gov. For further

information on submitting comments see the ``Public Participation''

heading in the section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the

docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at

the address above. All documents in the docket (including this Federal

Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;

however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly

available to read or download through the Web site. All submissions,

including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and

copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Theda Kenney at

the address below to obtain a copy of the ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Owen or Theda Kenney, Directorate

of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3609,

200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-

2222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce

paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a

preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an

opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information

collection requirements in accord with the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that information

is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs) is minimal,

collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's estimate of

the information collection burden is accurate. The Occupational Safety

and Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.) authorizes

information collection by employers as necessary or appropriate for

enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing information regarding the

causes and prevention of occupational injuries, illnesses, and

accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also requires that OSHA obtain

such information with minimum burden upon employers, especially those

operating small businesses, and to reduce to the maximum extent

feasible unnecessary duplication of effort in obtaining information (29

U.S.C. 657).

    The Grain Handling Facilities Standard specifies a number of

paperwork requirements. The following sections describe who uses the

information collected under each requirement as well as how they use

it. The purpose of the requirements is to reduce employees' risk of

death or serious injury while working in grain handling facilities.

    Paragraph (d) of the Standard requires the employer to develop and

implement an emergency action plan so that employees will be aware of

the appropriate actions to take in the event of an emergency.

    Paragraph (e)(1) requires that employers provide training to

employees at least annually and when changes in job assignment will

expose them to new hazards. Paragraph (f)(1) requires the employer to

issue a permit for all hot work. Under paragraph (f)(2) the permit

shall certify that the requirements contained in 1910.272(a) have been

implemented prior to beginning the hot work operations and shall be

kept on file until completion of the hot work operation.

    Paragraph (g)(1)(i) requires the employer to issue a permit for

entering bins, silos, or tanks unless the employer or the employer's

representative is present during the entire operation. The permit shall

certify that the precautions contained in paragraph (g) have been

implemented prior to employees entering bins, silos or tanks and shall

be kept on file until completion of the entry operations.

    Paragraph (g)(1)(ii) requires that the employer de-energize,

disconnect, lockout and tag, block off or otherwise prevent operation

of all mechanical, electrical, hydraulic, and pneumatic equipment which

presents a danger to employees inside grain storage structures.

    Paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) require the employer to inform

contractors performing work at the grain handling facility of known

potential fire and explosion hazards related to the contractor's work

and work area, and to

explain to the contractor the applicable provisions of the emergency

action plan.

    Paragraph (j)(1) requires the employer to develop and implement a

written housekeeping program that establishes the frequency and

method(s) determined to best reduce accumulations of fugitive grain

dust on ledges, floors, equipment, and other exposed surfaces.

    Under paragraph (m)(1), the employer is required to implement

preventive maintenance procedures consisting of regularly scheduled

inspections of at least the mechanical and safety control equipment

associated with dryers, grain stream processing equipment, dust

collection equipment including filter collectors, and bucket elevators.

Paragraph (m)(3) requires a certification be maintained of each

inspection. Paragraph (m)(4) requires the employer to implement

procedures for the use of tags and locks which will prevent the

inadvertent application of energy or motion to equipment being

repaired, serviced, or adjusted.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:

     Whether the proposed information collection requirements

are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions,

including whether the information is useful;

     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and

costs) of the information collection requirements, including the

validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information

collected; and

     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;

for example, by using automated or other technological information

collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting that OMB extend its approval of the information

collection requirements contained in the standard on Grain Handling

Facilities (29 CFR 1910.272). The Agency is requesting a reduction in

the current burden hours from 68,782 to 24,392 (difference of 44,390

hours). This decrease is due to the reduction of grain handling

facilities from 9,025 to 5,500. The Agency will summarize any comments

submitted in response to this notice and will include this summary in

the request to OMB.

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

    Title: Grain Handling Facilities Standard (29 CFR 1910.272).

    OMB Control Number: 1218-0206.

    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits.

    Number of Respondents: 47,007.

    Frequency of Responses: On occasion.

    Average Time per Response: Various.

    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 24,392.

    Total Responses: 514,721.

    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on This Notice and

Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:

(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal

eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (fax); or (3) by hard copy. All

comments, attachments, and other material must identify the Agency name

and the OSHA docket number for the ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2011-0028). You

may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files

electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference

to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit them to the

OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES).

The additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments

by your name, date, and the docket number so the Agency can attach them

to your comments.

    Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a

significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about

security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,

express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the

OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>, (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>).

    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about

submitting personal information such as Social Security numbers and

date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted

material) is not publicly available to read or download through this

Web site.

    All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available for

inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on using

the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments and access

the docket is available at the Web site's ``User Tips'' link. Contact

the OSHA Docket Office for information about materials not available

from the Web site, and for assistance in using the Internet to locate

docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    Loren Sweatt, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational

Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this notice. The

authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012 (77 FR

3912).

Loren Sweatt,

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.

[FR Doc. 2017-17505 Filed 8-17-17; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register: July 15, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 134)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 34248-34251]
[DOCID:fr15jy09-19]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2009-0568]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; James River, Navy Live Fire and Explosive Training

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone
encompassing the M/V Del Monte. This safety zone will restrict vessel
traffic on a portion of the James River within a 1,500-foot radius of
the M/V Del Monte. This action is intended to restrict vessel traffic
movement in the vicinity of the James River Reserve Fleet to protect
mariners from the hazards associated with live fire and explosive
training events.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8 a.m. on July 30, 2009, to 11 p.m.
on August 8, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2009-0568 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, selecting the Advanced Docket
Search option on the right side of the screen, inserting USCG-2009-0568
in the Docket ID box, pressing Enter, and then clicking on the item in
the Docket ID column. They are also available for inspection or copying
at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or e-mail LT Tiffany Duffy, Chief Waterways
Management, Sector Hampton Roads, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the
docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because delaying the effective date would be
contrary to the public interest since immediate action is needed to
ensure the public's safety during the Navy's live fire and explosive
training event.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date would
be contrary to the public interest since immediate action is needed to
ensure the public's safety during the Navy's live fire and explosive
training event.

Background and Purpose

    Coast Guard Sector Hampton Roads has been notified that the U.S.
Navy will conduct a live fire and explosive training event onboard the
M/V Del Monte in the vicinity of the James River Reserve Fleet. The
event is scheduled to take place from July 30, 2009, to August 8, 2009.
Due to the need to protect mariners transiting on James River in the
vicinity of the exercise from the hazards associated with live fire and
explosive events, the Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone bound
by a 1,500-foot radius around approximate position 37[deg]06'11'' N/
076[deg]38'40'' W (NAD 1983). Access to this area will be temporarily
restricted for public safety purposes.

Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a 1,500-foot radius safety zone on
specified waters of James River around approximate position
37[deg]06'11'' N/076[deg]38'40'' W (NAD 1983) in the vicinity of the
James River Reserve Fleet. This safety zone is being established in the
interest of public safety during the live fire and explosive training
exercise and will be enforced from 8 a.m. to 11 p.m. on July 30, 2009,
to August 8, 2009. Access to the safety zone will be restricted during
the specified dates and times. Except for vessels authorized by the
Captain of the Port or his Representative, no person or vessel may
enter or remain in the safety zone.

Regulatory Analyses

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

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order. Although this regulation restricts access
to the safety zone, the effect of this rule will not be significant
because: (i) The safety zone will be in effect for a limited duration;
(ii) the zone is of limited size; and (iii) the Coast Guard will make
notifications via maritime advisories so mariners can adjust their
plans accordingly. For the above reasons, the Coast Guard does not
anticipate any significant economic impact.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to
transit or anchor in a portion of the James River from 8 a.m. to 11
p.m. from July 30, 2009, to August 8, 2009. This safety zone will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities because the safety zone will only be in place for a limited
duration. Before the effective period beginning July 30, 2009, maritime
advisories will be issued allowing mariners to adjust their plans
accordingly.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247).

The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question
or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

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

Federalism

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

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

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

Indian Tribal Governments

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

Energy Effects

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

Technical Standards

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

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves a temporary safety zone
that will be in effect for only ten days and is intended to keep
mariners safe from the hazards associated with live fire and explosive
exercises. An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical
exclusion determination are available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306,
3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6 and 160.5;
Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T05-0568 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-0568  Safety Zone; James River, Navy Live Fire and
Explosive Training.

    (a) Regulated Area. The following area is a safety zone: All waters
in the vicinity of the James River Reserve Fleet on the James River
within a 1,500-foot radius of position 37[deg]06[min]11[sec] N/
076[deg]38[min]40[sec] W (NAD 1983).
    (b) Definition: For the purposes of this section, Captain of the
Port Representative means any U.S. Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or
petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the Port,
Hampton Roads, Virginia to act on his behalf.
    (c) Regulations: (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads or his designated
representatives.
    (2) The operator of any vessel in the immediate vicinity of this
safety zone shall:
    (i) Stop the vessel immediately upon being directed to do so by any
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer on shore or on board a vessel
that is displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign.
    (ii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant, or petty
officer on shore or on board a vessel that is displaying a U.S. Coast
Guard Ensign.
    (3) The Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads can be reached through
the Sector Duty Officer at Sector Hampton Roads in Portsmouth, Virginia
at telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) The Coast Guard Representatives enforcing the safety zone can
be

contacted on VHF-FM marine band radio channel 13 (165.65 Mhz) and
channel 16 (156.8 Mhz).
    (d) Enforcement Period: This regulation will be enforced from 8
a.m. to 11 p.m. beginning July 30, 2009, to August 8, 2009.

    Dated: July 2, 2009.
M.S. Ogle,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port Hampton Roads.
[FR Doc. E9-16829 Filed 7-14-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


                 Planning for Natural Disaster Debris Guidance                      Comment Summary and Response Document

US EPA Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OLEM-2017-0657  November 2018

INTRODUCTION On April 27, 2018, EPA released three draft documents for public comment: 1) Planning for Natural Disaster Debris guidance ("PNDD"); 2) Pre-incident All-hazards Waste Management Plan Guidelines: Four-step Waste Management Planning Process ("4 Steps Document"); and 3) All-hazards Waste Management Decision Diagram ("Decision Diagram"). The comment period for these documents concluded on June 26, 2018. During that time, EPA received a total of 12 comments -- 6 general comments (i.e., comments that apply to all 3 documents or are not addressed to a particular document, including comments that are deemed to be outside the scope of these documents), 5 comments on the PNDD, 0 comments on the 4 Steps Document, and 1 comment on the Decision Diagram. This Comment Summary and Response Document addresses each of these comments individually. EPA's summary of the comment is presented followed by EPA's response. The comments are organized in the following manner:

      General Comments (page 2)             Comment #0008: Anonymous public comment (page 2)             Comment #0009: Anonymous public comment (page 2)       Comment #0011: Anonymous public comment (page 2)             Comment #0012: J. Castro (page 2)             Comment #0013: Anonymous public comment (page 2)             Comment #0015: Environmental Waste Systems (EWS) (page 3)              PNDD             Comment #0014: North Carolina Health Hazards Control Unit (NC HHCU) (page 3)             Comment #0016: Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO) (page 3)             Comment #0017: Utility Solid Waste Activities Group (USWAG) (page 4)             Comment #0018: Anonymous public comment (page 5)             Comment #0019: Anonymous public comment (page 5)              Decision Diagram             Comment #0010: Anonymous public comment (page 5)

INDIVIDUAL COMMENTS AND AGENCY RESPONSE

General Comments Comment #0008: Anonymous public comment        Summary: The commenter expressed general opposition to the President.        Response: EPA believes this comment is outside the scope of these documents.

Comment #0009: Anonymous public comment        Summary: The commenter does not support providing tax credits and subsidies for renewable energy projects to wealthy businesses.        Response: EPA believes this comment is outside the scope of these documents.

Comment #0011: Anonymous public comment        Summary: In light of the natural disasters of 2017 and the debris they generated, the commenter supports providing updated guidance on planning for natural disaster debris. The guidance can help communities prepare for and recover from future natural disasters.        Response: EPA appreciates the comments in support of the Planning for Natural Disaster Debris and Related Guidance.

Comment #0012: J. Castro        Summary: The commenter supports providing updated guidance on planning for natural disaster debris to help reduce the impacts of natural disasters and help communities recover faster.         Response: EPA appreciates the comments in support of the Planning for Natural Disaster Debris and Related Guidance.

Comment #0013: Anonymous public comment        Summary: The commenter does not want EPA to withdraw regulations on disaster planning that are designed to make first responders, plant workers, and citizens living near chemical plants safer in the event of a disaster.         Response: EPA agrees that planning for disasters can help improve public safety. EPA wants to take this opportunity to clarify that this action does not withdraw regulations but rather sought public comments on EPA's updated Planning for Natural Disaster Debris guidance and two related documents on all-hazards waste management before they were finalized and issued.       Comment #0015: Environmental Waste Systems (EWS)

   Summary: The commenter states that the use of innovative technologies during disaster responses could reduce the costs associated with managing disaster debris and increase environmental protection but notes that EPA's current policy does not allow for the injection of innovative technology into the process. The commenter requests that EPA include opportunities for using innovative technology in its policy.        Response: All disaster debris should be managed, including its staging, sampling, characterization, packaging, transportation, reuse, recycling, treatment, and disposal, in accordance with all applicable federal, state, local, territorial, and tribal laws and regulations. While EPA can provide support and technical assistance, emergency planners and responders and other individuals involved in the management of disaster debris decide how disaster debris is to be specifically managed in accordance with existing requirements, including which technologies should be used. Therefore, EPA is making no changes to these documents in response to this comment.

PNDD

Comment #0014: North Carolina Health Hazards Control Unit (NC HHCU)        Summary: NC HHCU, which administers the federal National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) in North Carolina, requested that EPA insert in the discussion on construction and demolition debris (C&D Debris) in the "Reuse and Recycling by Debris Stream" section a reference back to the section on NESHAP and a statement to contact the state or local agency regarding asbestos-related issues before recycling large quantities of C&D Debris resulting from a disaster.        Response: EPA agrees and incorporated appropriate language in the guidance in response to these comments.

Comment #0016: Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO)        Summary: ASTSWMO's Materials Management Subcommittee appreciates EPA's update to its 2008 guidance. ASTSWMO recommends that EPA continue to encourage the consideration of non-disposal options for disaster debris and work with FEMA to ensure that FEMA's public assistance and related guidance reference EPA's guidance. In addition, ASTSWMO suggests that EPA verify and correct, as needed, the links in the PNDD, including one from ASTSWMO.         Response: EPA thanks ASTSWMO for their support and agrees with their recommendations. EPA deleted the reference to the 2009 list of state solid waste management plans, as requested.

Comment #0017: Utility Solid Waste Activities Group (USWAG)

   Summary: USWAG urges EPA to provide clarity and regulatory relief to utilities in the context of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) cleanup and disposal after a natural disaster, when compliance with certain federal requirements governing PCB waste may not be practicable or achievable during a disaster response. Specifically, USWAG requests that EPA include in the PNDD a PCB cleanup and disposal guidance template that can be quickly adapted and issued, as appropriate, by EPA Regions after a natural disaster. The template would ensure that consistent PCB cleanup and disposal guidance is applied to every disaster in every region, as appropriate. In addition, while USWAG appreciates the inclusion of a discussion in the PNDD on the PCB guidance that was issued by EPA Regions 6 and 4 in connection with Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, respectively, USWAG requests that EPA acknowledge that these guidance documents provided nearly identical substantive relief that would also be appropriate and applicable to other natural disasters. USWAG notes that the current region-by-region, storm-by-storm approach that EPA has with respect to the issuance of PCB guidance has the potential to create confusion where multiple EPA Regions are affected, can divert critical agency and utility resources from disaster responses, and is unnecessary because the disaster-specific guidance documents that have been issued by different EPA Regions are very similar in substance.         Response: EPA thanks USWAG for their thoughtful comments on EPA's update of its PNDD guidance. USWAG expressed in detail their appreciation for EPA's 2005 and 2017 guidance memoranda, which allowed for limited, temporary modifications to the PCB spill cleanup policy in response to specific natural disasters. EPA agrees that these storm-related modifications were necessary and appropriate in light of storm-specific conditions and considerations. EPA is open to issuing similar storm-specific guidance in the future when the specific circumstances warrant additional flexibility in accordance with applicable provisions of the PCB regulations, including 40 CFR 761.61 (providing for temporary emergency measures), 761.120(a)(4), and 761.125(b)(2) and (c)(1).          The content of these guidance memoranda varies for each disaster -- for instance, guidance memoranda which rely on 40 CFR 761.120(a)(4) must be based upon "factors associated with the particular spill." Although EPA acknowledges that a template could expedite EPA's drafting of such storm-specific guidance, decisions regarding the contents of any potential future guidance memoranda will be made on a case-by-case basis amongst EPA Headquarters and the EPA Region(s) in which the disaster occurs. Publishing a template for disasters that have not yet occurred would likely lead to problematic presumptions on the part of the public and regulated entities that all modifications listed in the template would be available for all manner of natural disasters. Finally, such a template is beyond the scope of the PNDD guidance. A template covering disaster management of PCBs under federally implemented regulations would be out of place in a guidance aimed at state, local, and tribal governments, where PCBs are one of many contaminants of concern. EPA appreciates USWAG's feedback and will continue to discuss the comments internally.        For reference -- 40 CFR 761.120(a)(4): "There may also be exceptional spill situations that requires less stringent cleanup or a different approach to cleanup because of factors associated with the particular spill. These factors may mitigate expected exposures and risks or make cleanup to these requirements impracticable."     Comment #0018: Anonymous public comment     Summary: The commenter requests that EPA include "contaminated soil" as a type of debris in the PNDD, noting that recent wildfires in California that destroyed structures generated significant amounts of contaminated soil that needed to be managed.        Response: EPA disagrees with the commenter that "contaminated soil" should be added as a separate debris stream. "Soils, sediments, and sandbags" is already listed as a potential debris stream in the PNDD. In addition, the guidance provides a detailed discussion of soils, sediments, and sandbags in the "Reuse and Recycling by Debris Stream" section, which acknowledges the potential for contamination. However, in response to this comment, EPA added "ash" to the list of debris streams that can be generated by natural disasters. Ash may be a major debris stream, as demonstrated by recent wildfires in California. Because any debris stream can be contaminated as a result of a natural disaster and ash may not always contain contamination, EPA chooses not to describe this debris stream as "contaminated ash."

Comment #0019: Anonymous public comment

   Summary: The commenter asks EPA to specify that the amount of recyclable debris generated by wildfires that destroy structures can vary considerably, noting that separate wildfires in California, while similar, generated vastly different amounts of recyclable debris.        Response: EPA agrees that the amount of debris from wildfires and other natural disasters that can be recycled varies disaster-to-disaster and depends on many factors. Therefore, EPA added this consideration to the PNDD guidance.

Decision Diagram

Comment #0010: Anonymous public comment

   Summary: The commenter supports EPA's decision diagram as a simple way for individuals to understand the debris management process after a disaster and recommends that EPA assess the effectiveness of the decision diagram through test trials with ordinary people.        Response: EPA appreciates the commenter's support. While this decision diagram is intended to assist emergency planners and managers with the waste management decision-making process after a disaster occurs, EPA acknowledges that it can help others understand the waste-related considerations and decisions that make up the process. EPA does not believe that this diagram needs to be tested with the public but notes that this diagram has been reviewed by multiple federal agencies. EPA is confident that the diagram portrays many of the waste management decisions that are typically made during a response.


			  DELTA STATES OF AMERICA

		        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

			  OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

			          WASHINGTON, D.C.

	Issued by the Department of Transportation on August 22, 2002

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKETS OST-2001-10354 & 2000-6939

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no

additional confirming order will be issued in this matter).

Joint Motion:  Brit Air & Delta Air Lines, Inc.					Date Filed:  August
12, 2002

Relief requested:  Amend Notice of Action Taken dated August 2, 2002
(NOAT), in the above-referenced dockets, to recognize that Brit Air is a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Air France, and delete footnote 1 of that
NOAT.   The joint movants state that Brit Air has been a wholly-owned
(100%) Air France subsidiary since no later than September 30, 2001, and
they have submitted supporting information to this effect.

Applicant representatives:  Michael Goldman (Brit Air)<PHONE_NUMBER>;
Robert Cohn (Delta)<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None

	DISPOSITION

Action:  We grant the motion.								Action date:  August 22, 2002

Remarks:  The information provided in the joint Brit Air/Delta motion
supplements the record on which we had acted in our August 2 Notice by
demonstrating that Brit Air is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Air France.
Based on this information, we amend the Notice of Action Taken dated
August 2, 2002, in Dockets OST-2001-10354 and OST-2000-6939, by deleting
footnote 1 of that Notice.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		      Office of International Aviation

________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

  HYPERLINK "http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp"
http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

  Based on the record then before us, the footnote in question had
stated that Brit Air was not a wholly-owned subsidiary of Air France.

  This means that Brit Air comes within the purview of Order 2002-1-6,
which granted antitrust immunity for, inter alia, wholly-owned
subsidiaries of Air France.  In this connection, we will add the
standard condition, which we routinely impose in such circumstances as
this, to those already included in the August 2, 2002, Notice:

	All operations conducted under the August 2, 2002, authorization must
comply with the terms, conditions, and

	limitations of Order 2002-1-6 (Delta/Delta Connection, Air France,
Alitalia and Czech Airlines antitrust

	immunity order) and any subsequent order(s) of the Department regarding
the alliance.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 36 (Wednesday, February 24, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9177-9178]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03833]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP15-492-000]

Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of Schedule for Environmental
Review of the Leidy South Project

    On May 15, 2015, Dominion Transmission, Inc. (DTI) filed an
application in Docket No. CP15-492-000 requesting a Certificate of
Public Convenience and Necessity pursuant to Section 7(c) of the
Natural Gas Act to construct and operate certain natural gas pipeline
facilities. The proposed project is known as the Leidy South Project
(Project), and would provide an incremental 155 MMcf per day of firm
transportation service in the Mid-Atlantic region and to meet the need
of increasing demand for natural gas at existing and new power
generation facilities.
    On May 27, 2015, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission or FERC) issued its Notice of Application for the Project.
Among other things, that notice alerted agencies issuing federal
authorizations of the requirement to complete all necessary reviews and
to reach a final decision on a request for a federal authorization
within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Project. This instant notice
identifies the FERC staff's planned schedule for the completion of the
EA for the Project.

Schedule for Environmental Review

Issuance of EA March 30, 2016
90-day Federal Authorization Decision Deadline June 28, 2016

    If a schedule change becomes necessary, additional notice will be
provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the
Project's progress.

Project Description

    DTI proposes the following facilities in Pennsylvania to replace
two 1,100 horsepower (hp) compressor units with one 10,915 hp unit at
the Finnefrock Compressor Station in Clinton County; install one
suction filter/separator at the Centre Compressor Station in Centre
County; and install one 13,220 hp unit at the Chambersburg Compressor
Station in Franklin County. DTI would also install the following
facilities in Virginia, a new cooler and filter separator at the
Quantico Compressor Station in Fauquier County; one 8,000 hp unit at
the Leesburg Compressor Station and construct a new meter

station at the Panda Stonewall Power Project both in Loudoun County.
Finally, DTI would install one 15,900 hp unit at the Myersville
Compressor Station in Frederick County, Maryland.

Background

    On July 23, 2015, the Commission issued a Notice of Intent to
Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Leidy South
Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues (NOI). The NOI
was sent to affected landowners; federal, state, and local government
agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups;
Native American tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries
and newspapers. In response to the NOI, the Commission received
comments from several state and federal agencies and from the Allegheny
Defense Project, Wild Virginia, and Chesapeake Climate Action Network.
The primary issues raised by the commentors are the purpose and need
for the Project; potential impacts on wildlife, surface water, drinking
water, and wetland resources; the potential for increased soil
compactions and watershed impacts on the Tamarack Swamp Natural Area;
noise impacts; climate change; and cumulative impacts.

Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to
keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets,
the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription. This can
reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by
automatically providing you with notification of these filings,
document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Additional information about the Project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs at (866) 208-FERC or on the
FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov). Using the ``eLibrary'' link, select
``General Search'' from the eLibrary menu, enter the selected date
range and ``Docket Number'' excluding the last three digits (i.e.,
CP15-492), and follow the instructions. For assistance with access to
eLibrary, the helpline can be reached at<PHONE_NUMBER>, TTY (202) 502-
8659, or at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The eLibrary link on the FERC
Web site also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued
by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rule makings.

    Dated: February 18, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-03833 Filed 2-23-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 173 (Monday, September 8, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 53189]
[FR Doc No: 2014-21301]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL14-37-000]

PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of Institution of Section 206
Proceeding and Refund Effective Date

    On August 29, 2014, the Commission issued an order in Docket No.
EL14-37-000, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16
U.S.C. 824e (2012), instituting an investigation into the justness and
reasonableness of provisions in PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.'s (PJM)
Open Access Transmission Tariff and Operating Agreement relating to Up-
to Congestion transactions. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., 148 FERC ]
61,144 (2014).
    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL14-37-000, established
pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication
of this notice in the Federal Register.

    Dated: August 29, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-21301 Filed 9-5-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 58 (Tuesday, March 26, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18329-18330]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06834]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP13-96-000; PF12-21-000]

Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP; Petal Gas Storage, L.L.C.;
Notice of Application

    Take notice that on March 8, 2013, Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP
(Gulf South), 9 Greenway Plaza, Suite 2800, Houston, Texas 77046, and
Petal Gas Storage, L.L.C. (Petal), 9 Greenway Plaza, Suite 2800,
Houston, Texas 77046, (collectively, the Applicants) jointly filed an
application pursuant to sections 7(b) and 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act
(NGA) for authorization for: (i) Gulf South to construct approximately
70 miles of new natural gas pipeline in Mississippi and Alabama; (ii)
Gulf South to construct 34,215 horsepower of compression in
Mississippi; (iii) Petal to abandon capacity by lease to Gulf South;
and (iv) Gulf South to acquire that lease capacity (Southeast Market
Expansion Project). The Applicants state that the Southeast Market
Expansion Project will provide 510,500 dekatherms per day of firm
transportation capacity. The Applicants estimate the total cost of the
Southeast Market Expansion Project to be approximately $283,846,000,
all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with
the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing is available
for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be
viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the
``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-
free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to J.
Kyle Stephens, Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, Boardwalk Pipeline
Partners, LP, 9 Greenway Plaza, Houston, Texas 77046, by facsimile at
(713) 479-1846, or by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    On September 17, 2012, the Commission staff granted the Applicants'
request to utilize the Pre-Filing Process and assigned Docket No. PF12-
21-000 to staff activities involving the Southeast Market Expansion
Project. Now as of the filing the March 8, 2013 application, the Pre-
Filing Process for this project has ended. From this time forward, this
proceeding will be conducted in Docket No. CP13-96-000, as noted in the
caption of this Notice.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit seven copies of filings made in the proceeding with the
Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other
party. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of
Commission orders in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors

will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or
issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental
documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek
court review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and five copies of the protest or intervention to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: April 10, 2013.

    Dated: March 20, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-06834 Filed 3-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 105 (Thursday, May 31, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 24920]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11639]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 385

[Docket No. RM18-7-000; Order No. 846]

Withdrawal of Pleadings

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; errata notification.

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

SUMMARY: This document contains corrections to the final rule (RM18-7-
000) which published in the Federal Register of Wednesday, May 23,
2018.

DATES: Effective June 22, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vince Mareino, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    1. On May 17, 2018, the Commission issued a Final Rule in the above
captioned proceeding. Withdrawal of Pleadings, 163 FERC ] 61,118
(2018), see 83 FR 23807. This errata notification hereby corrects
paragraph 11 of the Final Rule by deleting the second sentence that was
inadvertently included. Accordingly, paragraph 11 is corrected to read
as follows: ``These regulations are effective June 22, 2018.''

    Issued: May 24, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-11639 Filed 5-30-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 187)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 56422-56425]
[DOCID:fr27se06-34]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0087; FRL-8223-5]
RIN-2060-AM24

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Listing of Substitutes for
Ozone-Depleting Substances--Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to list
four substitutes for ozone-depleting substances (ODSs) in the fire
suppression and explosion protection sector as acceptable subject to
use conditions under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program. SNAP implements
section 612 of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990, which requires
EPA to evaluate substitutes for ODSs and find them acceptable where
they do not pose a greater overall risk to human health and the
environment than other acceptable substitutes.

DATES: Comments must be received in writing by October 27, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2005-0087 by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
     Mail: OAR Docket and Information Center, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. To expedite review, a second copy of
the comments should be sent to Bella Maranion at the address listed
below under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
     Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation Docket, EPA Docket
Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20004. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2005-0087. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,

unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.

The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,

which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov

your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation Docket,

EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the
Air and Radiation Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bella Maranion, Stratospheric
Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs (6205J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 343-2363; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The published
versions of notices and rulemakings under the SNAP program are
available on EPA's Stratospheric Ozone Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/regs
.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Elsewhere in today's Federal Register, EPA
is taking this action as a direct final rule without prior proposal
because EPA views this as a non-controversial revision and anticipates
no adverse comments. A rationale for this action is set forth in the
preamble to the direct final rule.
    If we receive no adverse comments and no requests for public
hearings in response to this action, we will take no further activity
in relation to this rule. If EPA receives adverse comments or a request
for public hearing, we will withdraw this direct final action as it
applies to the substitute or substitutes on which the Agency has
received adverse comment and will consider and respond to any comments
prior to taking any new, final action for the substitute or
substitutes. If a public hearing is requested, EPA will provide notice
in the Federal Register as to the location, date, and time. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at that this time.

I. EPA Proposal

    EPA would add four fire suppression agents to the list of
acceptable substitutes subject to use conditions. The regulations
implementing the SNAP program are codified at 40 CFR Part 82, Subpart
G. The appendices to Subpart G list substitutes for ODSs that are
unacceptable or that have restrictions imposed on their use. Today's
action will add the four halon substitutes acceptable subject to use
conditions to the appendices to Subpart G.
    The direct final rule will be effective on November 27, 2006
without further notice unless we receive adverse comment (or a request
for a public hearing) by October 27, 2006. If EPA receives adverse
comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register
informing the public that all or part of this rule will not take
effect. EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. We will not institute a second public
comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting
must do so at this time.
    You may claim that information in your comments is confidential
business information, as allowed by 40 CFR Part 2. If you submit
comments and include information that you claim as confidential
business information, we request that you submit them directly to Bella
Maranion in two versions: one clearly marked ``Public'' to be filed in
the public docket, and the other marked ``Confidential'' to be reviewed
by authorized government personnel only.

II. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
is therefore not subject to review under the EO.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    EPA has determined that this proposed rule contains no information
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., that are not already approved by the OMB. OMB has reviewed and
approved two Information Collection Requests (ICRs) by EPA which are
described in the March 18, 1994 rulemaking (59 FR 13044, at 13121,
13146-13147) and in the October 16, 1996 rulemaking (61 FR 54030, at
54038-54039). These ICRs included five types of respondent reporting
and record-keeping activities pursuant to SNAP regulations: submission
of a SNAP petition, filing a SNAP/TSCA Addendum, notification for test
marketing activity, record-keeping for substitutes acceptable subject
to narrowed use limits, and record-keeping for small volume uses. The
OMB Control Numbers are 2060-0226 and 2060-0350. The EPA ICR Numbers
are 1596.06 and 1774.03.
    Copies of the ICR document(s) may be obtained from Susan Auby, by
mail at the Office of Environmental Information, Collection Strategies
Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2822T); 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, by e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. Include the ICR and/

or OMB number in any correspondence.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency to
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice
and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure
Act or any other statutes 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
organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impact of today's rule on small
entities, small entities are defined as (1) a small business as defined
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action

will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. This proposed rule will not impose any requirements on
small entities. Today's action effectively supports the introduction of
four new alternatives to the fire protection extinguishing systems
market thus providing additional options for users making the
transition away from ozone-depleting halons.
    Use of halon 1301 total flooding systems have historically been in
specialty fire protection applications including essential electronics,
civil aviation, military mobile weapon systems, oil and gas and other
process industries, and merchant shipping with smaller segments of use
including libraries, museums, and laboratories. The majority of halon
1301 system owners continue to maintain and refurbish existing systems
since halon 1301 supplies continue to be available in the U.S. Owners
of new facilities make up the market for the new alternative agent
systems and may also consider employing other available fire protection
options including new, improved technology for early warning and smoke
detection. Thus, EPA is providing more options to any entity, including
small entities, by finding these substitutes acceptable for use. The
use restrictions imposed on the substitutes in today's rule are
consistent with the applications suggested by the submitters. Thus far,
these alternatives have not been sold or used in the end uses not found
acceptable under today's rule. Until a manufacturer or other party
requests a SNAP review for such end uses, these products may not be
sold for such end uses. Therefore, we conclude that the rule does not
impose a new cost on businesses.
    Although this proposed rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has
tried to reduce the impact of this rule on small entities. By
introducing new substitutes, today's rule gives additional flexibility
to small entities that are concerned with fire suppression. EPA also
has worked closely together with the National Fire Protection
Association, which conducts regular outreach with, and involves small
state, local, and tribal governments in developing and implementing
relevant fire protection standards and codes. We continue to be
interested in the potential impacts of the proposed rule on small
entities and welcome comments on issues related to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector.
    Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA generally must prepare a written
statement, including a cost-benefit analysis, for proposed and final
rules with ``Federal mandates'' that may result in expenditures by
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. Before
promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed,
section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider
a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Section 204 of the UMRA requires the
Agency to develop a process to allow elected state, local and tribal
government officials to provide input in the development of any
proposal containing a significant Federal intergovernmental mandate.
    Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal
governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a
small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying
potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected
small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
    Today's rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector. Because this rule imposes no
enforceable duty on any State, local or tribal government it is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. EPA
has also determined that this rule contains no regulatory requirements
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments;
therefore, EPA is not required to develop a plan with regard to small
governments under section 203. Finally, because this rule does not
contain a significant intergovernmental mandate, the Agency is not
required to develop a process to obtain input from elected state,
local, and tribal officials under section 204.

E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), 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.''
    This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It 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. This proposed rule will provide
additional options for fire protection subject to safety guidelines in
industry standards. These standards are typically already required by
state or local fire codes, and this rule does not require state, local,
or tribal governments to change their regulations. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and 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, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
This proposed rule will provide additional options for fire protection

subject to safety guidelines in industry standards. These standards are
typically already required by state or local fire codes, and this rule
does not require tribal governments to change their regulations. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

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

    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health
or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This proposed rule is not economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and the Agency does not have reason to believe
the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action
present a disproportionate risk to children. The acceptability listings
in this proposed rule primarily apply to the workplace, and thus, do
not put children at risk disproportionately. This rule is not subject
to Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically significant as
defined in Executive Order 12866 and because the Agency does not have
reason to believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by
this action present a disproportionate risk to children.

H. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)

    This rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)) because it is not likely to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The rule allows
wider use of substitutes, providing greater flexibility for industry
related to choices of alternative fire suppression systems to support
the transition away from ozone-depleting substances, but little if any
impact related to energy. Thus, we have concluded that this rule is not
likely to have any adverse energy effects.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113, Section 12(d) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. EPA is not
requiring that specific technical standards be met in these
regulations. EPA defers to existing National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) voluntary consensus standards and Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations that relate to the
safe use of halon substitutes reviewed under SNAP. EPA refers users to
the latest edition of NFPA 2001 Standard on Clean Agent Fire
Extinguishing Systems which provides for exposure guidelines and safe
use of halocarbon and inert gas agents used to extinguish fires. EPA
also refers to the latest edition of NFPA 2010 Standard on Aerosol
Extinguishing Systems, 2005 edition, which provides for safe use of
aerosol extinguishing agents and technologies. Copies of these
standards may be obtained by calling the NFPA's telephone number for
ordering publications at 1-800-344-3555. The NFPA 2001 and 2010
standards meet the objectives of the rule by setting scientifically-
based guidelines for safe exposure to halocarbon and inert gas agents
and aerosol extinguishing agents, respectively. In addition, EPA has
worked in consultation with OSHA to encourage development of technical
standards to be adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 21, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
 [FR Doc. E6-15842 Filed 9-26-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 41 (Thursday, March 2, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 13136]
[FR Doc No: 2023-04278]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4684-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2023-0001]

Alabama; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Alabama (FEMA-4684-DR), dated January 15, 2023, and
related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued January 26, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Alabama is hereby amended to include the following
areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by
the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration
of January 15, 2023.

    Greene, Sumter, and Tallapoosa Counties for Individual
Assistance.
    Greene, Sumter, and Tallapoosa Counties for debris removal and
emergency protective measures (Categories A and B) under the Public
Assistance program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2023-04278 Filed 3-1-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 113 (Tuesday, June 15, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31620-31622]
[FR Doc No: 2021-12552]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2020-0460]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Cocos Lagoon, Merizo, GU

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a recurring safety zone for
navigable waters within Cocos Lagoon. This safety zone will encompass
the designated swim course for the Cocos Crossing swim event in the
waters of Cocos Lagoon, Merizo, Guam. Race participants, chase boats,
and organizers of the event will be exempt from the safety zone. Entry
of persons or vessels into the safety zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) Guam.

DATES: This rule is effective July 15, 2021.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2020-0460 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket

Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email Chief Petty Officer Robert Davis,
Sector Guam, U.S. Coast Guard, by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The purpose of this rule is to ensure the safety of the
participants and the navigable waters in the safety zone before,
during, and after the scheduled swim event. In response, on February
10, 2021, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) titled Safety Zone; Cocos Lagoon, Merizo, GU (86 FR 8879-8881).
There we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on our
proposed regulatory action related to this safety zone. During the
comment period that ended March 12, 2021, we received no comments.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under its authority in 46
U.S.C 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The COTP Guam has determined
this safety zone is necessary to protect all persons and vessels
participating in this marine event from potential safety hazards
associated with vessel traffic in the area

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    As noted above, we received no comments on our NPRM published
February 10, 2021. There are no changes in the regulatory text of this
rule from the proposed rule in the NPRM.
    This rule establishes a safety zone from 06:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. on
the Sunday before Memorial Day every year, unless the event is
cancelled or moved due to weather. The safety zone will cover all
navigable waters within a 100-yard radius of the race participants in
Cocos Lagoon, Merizo, Guam. Race participants, chase boats, and
organizers of the event will be exempt from the safety zone. All
persons and vessels not involved in the event are prohibited from being
in the safety zone unless authorized by the COTP or a designated
representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. Vessel traffic
will be able to safely transit around this safety zone, which will
impact a small designated area of the Cocos Lagoon for approximately 7
hours. Moreover, the Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast Notice to
Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone, and the rule
would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. 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 received no comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    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 rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, 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.

E. 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.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a
safety zone lasting approximately 7 hours that would prohibit entry
within 100-yards for swim participants in Cocos Lagoon. It is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A
Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is
available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see
the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so
that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.1418 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.1418  Safety Zone; Cocos Lagoon, Merizo, GU.

    (a) Location. The following area, within the Guam Captain of the
Port (COTP) Zone (See 33 CFR 3.70-15), all navigable waters within a
100-yard radius of race participants in Cocos Lagoon, Merizo, Guam.
Race participants, chase boats, and organizers of the event will be
exempt from the safety zone.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, ``designated on-scene
representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a
Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast
Guard vessel, and a Federal, State, and local officer either designated
by or assisting the COTP Sector Guam in the enforcement of the safety
zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
section Sec.  165.23, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this
safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or a designated
on-scene representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all persons and vessel traffic,
except as may be permitted by the COTP or a designated on-scene
representative.
    (3) Persons and Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate
within the safety zone must contact the COTP or a designated on-scene
representative to obtain permission to do so. The COTP or a designated
on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16 or at
telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>. Vessel operators given permission to
enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions
given to them by the COTP or a designated on-scene representative.
    (d) Enforcement period. This safety zone will be enforced on the
Sunday before Memorial Day from 6:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. annually, unless
the event is delayed or cancelled due to weather. The Coast Guard will
provide advance notice of enforcement and a broadcast notice to
mariners to inform the public of the specific date of the event.

    Dated: June 9, 2021.
Nicholas R. Simmons,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Guam.
[FR Doc. 2021-12552 Filed 6-14-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: June 17, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 116)]
[Notices]
[Page 34464-34465]
[DOCID:fr17jn10-88]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0004]
FDA 225-09-0012

Memorandum of Understanding Between the Food and Drug
Administration and Drugs.Com; Correction of Effective Date

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is providing

notice to correct the effective date of the memorandum of understanding
(MOU) between FDA and Drugs.Com that published in the Federal Register
of May 26, 2010 (75 FR 29561). The purpose of the cooperative program
is to extend the reach of FDA Consumer Health Information and to
provide consumers with better information and timely content concerning
public health and safety topics, including alerts of emerging safety
issues and product recalls.

DATES: The agreement became effective October 13, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Jason Brodsky, Consumer Health
Information Staff, Office of External Relations, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, rm. 5378, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: June 11, 2010.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-14599 Filed 6-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 214 (Friday, November 4, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 68487]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28598]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4029-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2011-0001]

Texas; Amendment No. 10 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Texas (FEMA-4029-DR), dated September 9, 2011, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: October 25, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Texas is hereby amended to include the following areas
among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the
event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of
September 9, 2011.

    Morris and Panola Counties for Public Assistance, including
direct federal assistance.
    Cass and Navarro Counties for Public Assistance, including
direct federal assistance (already designated for Individual
Assistance).

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011-28598 Filed 11-3-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P