NOAA Tech Memo NMFS F/ NWC 200: Status Review for Snake River Spring and Summer Chinook Salmon U. S. Dept Commerce/ NOAA/ NMFS/ NWFSC/ Tech Memos STATUS REVIEW FOR SNAKE RIVER SPRING AND SUMMER CHINOOK SALMON by Gene M. Matthews and Robin S. Waples National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest Fisheries Science Center Coastal Zone and Estuarine Studies Division 2725 Montlake Blvd. E. Seattle WA 98112 June 1991 http:// www. nwfsc. noaa. gov/ publications/ techmemos/ tm200/ tm200. htm ( 1 of 3) [ 9/ 30/ 2003 10: 12: 34 AM] NOAA Tech Memo NMFS F/ NWC 200: Status Review for Snake River Spring and Summer Chinook Salmon CONTENTS Summary Acknowledgments Introduction Key Questions in ESA Evaluations l The " Species" Question l Thresholds for Threatened or Endangered Status Summary of Biological Information l Distribution and Abundance l Life History Characteristics m Run timing m Other Life History Characteristics l Phenotypic Characteristics l Stock Histories l Straying l Genetics Discussion and Conclusions l Differences in Run timing l Distinct Population Segments m Reproductive Isolation m Ecological/ Genetic Diversity m Species Determination l Status of the Evolutionarily Significant Unit Citations Appendix 1  Data Summaries Appendix 2  Glossary http:// www. nwfsc. noaa. gov/ publications/ techmemos/ tm200/ tm200. htm ( 2 of 3) [ 9/ 30/ 2003 10: 12: 34 AM] NOAA Tech Memo NMFS F/ NWC 200: Status Review for Snake River Spring and Summer Chinook Salmon Hardcopies of NOAA Technical Memorandums are available from:

National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, VA 22167 Telephone: ( 703) 487 4650; fax: ( 703) 321 8547 Paper copies vary in price http:// www. nwfsc. noaa. gov/ publications/ techmemos/ tm200/ tm200. htm ( 3 of 3) [ 9/ 30/ 2003 10: 12: 34 AM]


[Federal Register: September 22, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 183)]
[Notices]
[Page 57785-57787]
[DOCID:fr22se10-73]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0117; FRL-8841-8]

Notice of Receipt of Request to Voluntarily Cancel Certain
Pesticide Registrations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 6(f)(1) of the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended, EPA is issuing a
notice of receipt of request by a registrant to voluntarily cancel
certain pesticide registrations. EPA intends to grant this request at
the close of the comment period for this announcement unless the Agency
receives substantive comments within the comment period that would
merit its further review of the request, or unless the registrant
withdraws its request. If this request is granted, any sale,
distribution, or use of products listed in this notice will be
permitted after the registration has been canceled only if such sale,
distribution, or use is consistent with the terms as described in the
final order.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 22, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0117, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Submit written withdrawal request by mail to: Pesticide Re-
evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001. Attention: K. Avivah Jakob.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2010-0117. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line 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 regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov website 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 regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the 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.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. 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, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  K. Avivah Jakob, Pesticide Re-
evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide
users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution,
or use of pesticides. If you have any questions regarding the
information in this notice, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1.  Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2.  Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
     ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    This notice announces receipt by the Agency of a request from a
registrant to cancel five pesticide products registered under FIFRA
section 3 or 24(c). These registrations are listed in sequence by
registration number (or company number and 24(c) number) in Table 1 of
this unit.
     Unless the Agency determines that there are substantive comments
that warrant further review of the request or the registrant withdraws
their request, EPA intends to issue an order in the Federal Register
canceling all of the affected registrations.

     Table 1.--Registrations with Pending Requests for Cancellation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Registration No.            Product Name        Chemical Name
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7969-78                         BASAGRAN[reg] M-   Bentazon
                                 60 Herbicide
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7969-122                        BASAGRAN[reg] DF   Bentazon
                                 Herbicide
------------------------------------------------------------------------
51036-363                       PROMPT[reg] 5L     Bentazon
                                 Herbicide
------------------------------------------------------------------------
51036-415                       LADDOCK[reg] 5L    Bentazon
                                 Herbicide
------------------------------------------------------------------------
51036-421                       BASAGRAN[reg] AG   Bentazon
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 2 of this unit includes the name and address of record for
the registrant of the products in Table 1 of this unit. This number
corresponds to the first part of the EPA registration numbers of the
products listed in this unit.

         Table 2.--Registrants Requesting Voluntary Cancellation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              EPA Company No.                 Company Name and Address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7969                                        BASF Corporation
51036.....................................  26 Davis Dr.
                                            P.O. Box 13528
                                            Research Triangle Park, NC
                                             27709-3528
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

    Section 6(f)(1) of FIFRA provides that a registrant of a pesticide
product may at any time request that any of its pesticide registrations
be canceled. FIFRA further provides that, before acting on the request,
EPA must publish a notice of receipt of any such request in the Federal
Register.
     Section 6(f)(1)(B) of FIFRA requires that before acting on a
request for voluntary cancellation, EPA must provide a 30-day public
comment period on the request for voluntary cancellation or use
termination. In addition, FIFRA section 6(f)(1)(C) requires that EPA
provide a 180-day comment period on a request for voluntary
cancellation or termination of any minor agricultural use before
granting the request, unless:
    1. The registrants request a waiver of the comment period, or
    2. The EPA Administrator determines that continued use of the
pesticide would pose an unreasonable adverse effect on the environment.
    The registrant in Table 2 of Unit II. has requested that EPA waive
the 180-day comment period. Accordingly, EPA will provide a 30-day
comment period on the proposed requests.

IV. Procedures for Withdrawal of Request

    Registrants who choose to withdraw a request for cancellation
should submit such withdrawal in writing to the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. If the products have been subject to a
previous cancellation action, the effective date of cancellation and
all other provisions of any earlier cancellation action are
controlling.

V. Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks

     Existing stocks are those stocks of registered pesticide products
that are currently in the United States and that were packaged,
labeled, and released for shipment prior to the effective date of the
cancellation action. Because the Agency has identified no significant
potential risk concerns associated with these pesticide products, upon
cancellation of the products identified in Table 1 of Unit II., EPA
anticipates allowing registrants to sell and distribute existing stocks
of these products for 1 year after publication of the Cancellation
Order in the Federal Register. Thereafter, registrants will be
prohibited from selling or distributing the pesticides identified in
Table 1 of Unit II., except for export consistent with FIFRA section 17
or for proper disposal. Persons other than registrants will generally
be allowed to sell, distribute, or use existing stocks until such
stocks are exhausted, provided that such sale, distribution, or use is
consistent with the terms of the previously approved labeling on, or
that accompanied, the canceled products.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    September 13, 2010.
Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, Pesticide Re-evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.

[FR Doc. 2010-23413 Filed 9-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 8, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76453-76455]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30757]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP11-14-000]

Columbia Gulf Transmission Company and Southern Natural Gas
Company; Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Assessment for
the Proposed East Cameron Block 23A Field Line Abandonment Project and
Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

December 1, 2010.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of the East Cameron Block 23A Field
Line Abandonment Project involving abandonment of facilities by
Columbia Gulf Transmission Company (Columbia Gulf) and Southern Natural
Gas Company (Southern) in Cameron Parish, Louisiana. This EA will be
used by the Commission in its decision-making process to determine
whether the project is in the public convenience and necessity.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the
Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested
agencies on the project. Your input will help the Commission staff
determine what issues need to be evaluated in the EA. Please note that
the scoping period will close on January 3, 2011.
    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental
mailing list for this project. State and local government
representatives are asked to notify their constituents of this planned
project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural
Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?'' was attached to the
project notice Columbia Gulf provided to landowners. This fact sheet
addresses a number of typically-asked questions, including how to
participate in the Commission's proceedings. It is also available for
viewing on the FERC Web site (http://www.ferc.gov).

Summary of the Proposed Project

    Columbia Gulf and Southern propose to abandon approximately 9.3
miles of pipeline in Cameron Parish, Louisiana. Approximately 3.0 miles
of pipeline would be abandoned onshore, and approximately 6.3 miles of
pipeline would be abandoned offshore.
    The project would abandon:
     Approximately 6.3 miles of 16-inch diameter pipeline
(known as Segment 5823 [OCS-G04321]) and appurtenances extending from
the producer's platform located in East Cameron Block 23 Offshore
Facilities to the shoreline;
     Approximately 3.0 miles of 16-inch diameter pipeline
onshore to a point near the site of Meter No. 4216 where a blind flange
would be installed that physically separates the offshore pipeline from
the remainder of the onshore pipeline located in Cameron Parish,
Louisiana;
     Meter No. 641 (near the producer's platform) and
appurtenances; and
     The gas transportation services provided by Columbia Gulf
and Southern through the East Cameron Block 23 Offshore Facilities, if
any.
    The general location of the project facilities is shown in Appendix
1.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The appendices referenced in this notice are not being
printed in the Federal Register. Copies of appendices were sent to
all those receiving this notice in the mail and are available at
http://www.ferc.gov using the link called ``eLibrary'' or from the
Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, or call<PHONE_NUMBER>. For instructions on
connecting to eLibrary, refer to the last page of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements for Construction

    Abandonment of the facilities would disturb a total of about 0.37
acre (including all necessary workspaces) at three discrete onshore and
offshore locations:
     One 60-foot by 20-foot excavation area within the existing
pipeline right-of-way at Meter Station 4216 (29[deg] 39[min] 49.50[sec]
North Latitude, 92[deg] 43[min] 51.00[sec] West Longitude);
     One 60-foot by 30-foot spoil placement area within and
immediately adjacent to the existing pipeline right-of-way at Meter
Station 4216; and
     One 15-foot by 25-foot excavation (hand-jetted) area
within the existing right-of-way at a pipeline interconnect in State
waters (29[deg] 34[min] 34.24[sec] North Latitude, 92[deg] 45[min]
9.83[sec] West Longitude).

The EA Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
\2\ to discover and address concerns the public may have about
proposals. This process is referred to as ``scoping''. The main goal of
the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important
environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests public
comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA. All comments
received will be considered during the preparation of the EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``We'', ``us'', and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the Commission's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the EA we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of
the construction and operation of the proposed project under these
general headings:
     Geology and soils;
     Land use;
     Water resources and wetlands;
     Cultural resources;
     Vegetation and wildlife;
     Air quality and noise; and
     Endangered and threatened species.
    We will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed
project or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to
lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    Our independent analysis of the issues will be presented in the EA.
The EA will be placed in the public record and, depending on the
comments received during the scoping process, may be published and
distributed to the public. A comment period will be allotted if the EA
is published for review. We will consider all comments on the EA before
we make our recommendations to the Commission. To ensure your comments
are considered, please carefully follow the instructions in the Public
Participation section beginning on page 4.
    With this notice, we are asking agencies with jurisdiction and/or
special expertise with respect to environmental issues to formally
cooperate with us in the preparation of the EA. These agencies may
choose to participate once they have evaluated the proposal relative to
their responsibilities. Agencies that would like to request cooperating
agency status should follow the instructions for filing comments
provided under the Public Participation section of this notice.

Consultations under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, we are using this notice to initiate consultation
with the applicable State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and to
solicit their views and those of other government agencies, interested
Indian Tribes, and the public on the project's potential effects on
historic properties.\3\ We will define the project-specific Area of
Potential Effects (APE) in consultation with the SHPO as the project is
further developed. On natural gas facility projects, the APE at a
minimum encompasses all areas subject to ground disturbance (examples
include construction right-of-way, contractor/pipe storage yards,
compressor stations, and access roads). Our EA for this project will
document our findings on the impacts on historic properties and
summarize the status of consultations under section 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's regulations
are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 800. Historic
properties are defined in those regulations as any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in
or eligible for inclusion in the National Register for Historic
Places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the project. Your comments should focus on
the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and
measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. The more specific
your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your
comments are timely and properly recorded, please send your comments so
that they will be received in Washington, DC on or before January 3,
2011.
    For your convenience, there are three methods which you can use to
submit your comments to the Commission. In all instances please
reference the project docket number (CP11-14-000) with your submission.
The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has expert
eFiling staff available to assist you at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (1) You may file your comments electronically by using the eComment
feature, which is located on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov under the link to Documents and Filings. An eComment is an
easy method for interested persons to submit brief, text-only comments
on a project;
    (2) You may file your comments electronically by using the eFiling
feature, which is located on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov under the link to Documents and Filings. With eFiling you
can provide comments in a variety

of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission. New
eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on
``eRegister.'' You will be asked to select the type of filing you are
making. A comment on a particular project is considered a ``Comment on
a Filing''; or
    (3) You may file a paper copy of your comments at the following
address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes Federal, State, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other
interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also
includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's
regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property
may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within
certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits
comments on the project. We will update the environmental mailing list
as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related
to this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and
government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the
proposed project.
    If the EA is published for distribution, copies will be sent to the
environmental mailing list for public review and comment. If you would
prefer to receive a paper copy of the document instead of the CD
version or would like to remove your name from the mailing list, please
return the attached Information Request (Appendix 2).

Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an ``intervenor'' which is an official party to the
Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the
process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard
by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling.
An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a
request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are
included in the User's Guide under the ``e-filing'' link on the
Commission's Web site.

Additional Information

    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 at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Click
on the eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field
(i.e., CP11-14). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range.
For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. 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 http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.
    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-30757 Filed 12-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 30 (Thursday, February 13, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8637-8639]
[FR Doc No: 2014-03181]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 30 / Thursday, February 13, 2014 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0960; Airspace Docket No. 13-AGL-17]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Modification and Revocation of Air Traffic Service (ATS)
Routes; Northcentral United States

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to modify three jet routes and four VOR
Federal airways and to remove three jet routes in the northcentral
United States. The FAA is proposing this action due to the scheduled
decommissioning of the Peck, MI, VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR), which
provides navigation guidance for portions of the affected routes. The
Tactical Air Navigation (TACAN) facility will remain in service. This
action would promote the safety and efficient management of aircraft
within the National Airspace System.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 31, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2013-
0960 and Airspace Docket No. 13-AGL-17 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Airspace Policy and
Regulations Group, Office of Airspace Services, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they
may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2013-0960 and Airspace Docket No. 13-AGL-17) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to FAA Docket No. FAA-2013-0930 and Airspace Docket No. 13-AGL-17.''
The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified comment
closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the comment
closing date. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the Central Service Center, Operations
Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 2601 Meacham Blvd.,
Fort Worth, TX 76137.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

Background

    The Peck, MI (ECK), VOR is being decommissioned due to signal
interference impacts to the facility created by a power line project
that is being constructed in the proximity of the ECK VOR; however, the
collocated TACAN facility will remain in service. The power line
project is a State of Michigan initiative to provide renewable energy
to the State by 2015 with a plan to construct power line towers and
route transmission lines within 1,400 feet of the ECK VOR facility.
Modeling impacts of the proposed power line construction project on the
ECK VOR determined that the project will cause bearing errors in excess
of flight check tolerances at multiple azimuths around the facility,
thereby compromising the integrity of the existing airways supported by
the ECK VOR. A determination has been made to permanently decommission
the facility due to the projected signal degradation from the planned
power line nearby. Additionally, the ECK VOR is not on the list of VORs
planned for retention in the VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON). As
a result, the ATS routes that utilize the ECK VOR must be amended.
    The affected routes are: jet route J-16, J-38, J-94, J-546, J-551,
and J-553, and VOR Federal airways V-84, V-216, V-320, and V-337. With
the decommissioning of the ECK VOR, ground-based navigation aid
(NAVAID) coverage is insufficient to enable the continuity of all the
airways. Therefore, the proposed modifications to jet routes J-16 and
J-94, and VOR Federal airways V-84 and V-337 would result in a gap in
the route structures. To overcome the gaps created in the route
structures, air traffic control (ATC) would either provide radar
vectoring or reroute affected aircraft using the remaining

route structure, as determined appropriate.
    This action also proposes to modify V-216 further by removing the
route segment that is charted unusable from the Janesville, WI (JVL),
VOR to the Muskegon, MI (MKG), VHF Omnidirectional Range/Tactical Air
Navigation (VORTAC) facility, as well as removing the route segment
from MKG to the Saginaw, MI (MBS), VOR due to low usage and large
portions of V-216 to the west and east being removed. The route segment
from JVL to MKG has been unusable since 2009 as a result of the MKG
radial supporting V-216 failing flight inspection and the FAA being
unable to resolve the associated MKG VOR radial restrictions. The route
segment from MKG to MBS is also proposed to be removed due to its
limited use (less than six aircraft per day, on average), and being
bracketed by substantial airway segments to the west and east being
removed. As mentioned previously, ATC would either provide radar
vectoring or reroute affected aircraft using remaining route structure
to overcome this gap in V-216.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to amend jet routes J-16, J-38, and J-94,
and VOR Federal airways V-84, V-216, V-320, and V-337. The FAA also
proposes to remove jet routes J-546, J-551, and J-553. The scheduled
decommissioning of the ECK VOR facility has made this action necessary.
The proposed route changes are outlined below.
    J-16: J-16 currently extends between Battle Ground, WA (BTG) and
Boston, MA (BOS), excluding the airspace within Canada. The FAA would
eliminate the part of the route between Badger, WI (BAE) and London,
ON, Canada (YXU). The unaffected portions of the existing route will
remain as charted in the two remaining segments.
    J-38: J-38 currently extends between Duluth, MN (DLH) and Peck, MI
(ECK). The FAA would eliminate the part of the route between Green Bay,
WI (GRB) and ECK. The unaffected portion of the existing route will
remain as charted.
    J-94: J-94 currently extends between Oakland, CA (OAK) and Boston,
MA (BOS), excluding the airspace within Canada. The FAA would eliminate
the part of the route between Flint, MI (FNT) and London, ON, Canada
(YXU). The unaffected portions of the existing route will remain as
charted in the two remaining segments.
    V-84: V-84 currently extends between Northbrook, IL (OBK) and
Syracuse, NY (SYR), excluding the airspace within Canada. The FAA would
eliminate the part of the route between Flint, MI (FNT) and London, ON,
Canada (YXU). The unaffected portions of the existing route will remain
as charted in the two remaining segments.
    V-216: V-216 currently extends between Lamar, CO (LAA) and Toronto,
ON, Canada (YYZ), excluding the airspace within Canada. The FAA would
eliminate the part of the route between Janesville, WI (JVL) and YYZ.
The unaffected portions of the existing route will remain as charted in
the two remaining segments.
    V-320: V-320 currently extends between Pellston, MI (PLN) and
Toronto, ON, Canada (YYZ), excluding the airspace within Canada. The
FAA would eliminate the part of the route between Saginaw, MI (MBS) and
YYZ. The unaffected portions of the existing route will remain as
charted in the two remaining segments.
    V-337: V-337 currently extends between the intersection of the
Briggs, OH (BSV), 077[deg] and Youngstown, OH (YNG), 177[deg] radials
and White Cloud, MI (HIC). The FAA would eliminate the part of the
route between Akron, OH (ACO) Saginaw, MI (MBS). The unaffected
portions of the existing route will remain as charted in the two
remaining segments.
    The navigation aid radials cited in the proposed route
descriptions, below, are unchanged from the existing routes and stated
relative to True north.
    Jet routes are published in paragraph 2004 and VOR Federal airways
are published in paragraph 6010(a), respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9X
dated August 7, 2013, and effective September 15, 2013, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The jet routes and VOR
Federal airways listed in this document would be subsequently published
in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation: (1) is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
``significant rule'' under Department of Transportation (DOT)
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
would only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would modify the route structure as necessary to preserve the
safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the NAS.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

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

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9X,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 7, 2013 and
effective September 15, 2013, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 2004 Jet Routes

J-16 [Amended]

    From Battle Ground, WA; Pendleton, OR; Whitehall, MT; Billings,
MT; Dupree, SD; Sioux Falls, SD; Mason City, IA; to Badger, WI. From
London, ON, Canada; Buffalo, NY;

Albany, NY; to Boston, MA; excluding the airspace within Canada.
* * * * *

J-38 [Amended]

    From Duluth, MN; to Green Bay, WI.
* * * * *

J-94 [Amended]

    From Oakland, CA; Manteca, CA; INT Manteca 047[deg] and Mustang,
NV, 208[deg] radials; to Mustang; Lovelock, NV; Battle Mountain, NV;
Lucin, UT; Rock Springs, WY; Scottsbluff, NE; O'Neill, NE; Fort
Dodge, IA; Dubuque, IA; Northbrook, IL; Pullman, MI; to Flint, MI.
From London, ON, Canada; Buffalo, NY; Albany, NY; to Boston, MA;
excluding the airspace within Canada.
* * * * *

J-546 [Removed]

* * * * *

J-551 [Removed]

* * * * *

J-553 [Removed]

* * * * *

Paragraph 6010 Domestic VOR Federal Airways

V-84 [Amended]

    From Northbrook, IL; Pullman, MI; Lansing, MI; to Flint, MI.
From London, ON, Canada; Buffalo, NY; Geneseo, NY; INT Geneseo
091[deg] and Syracuse, NY, 240[deg] radials; to Syracuse; excluding
the airspace within Canada.
* * * * *

V-216 [Amended]

    From Lamar, CO; Hill City, KS; Mankato, KS; Pawnee City, NE;
Lamoni, IA; Ottumwa, IA; Iowa City, IA; INT Iowa City 062[deg] and
Janesville, WI, 240[deg] radials; to Janesville.
* * * * *

V-320 [Amended]

    From Pellston, MI; Traverse City, MI; Mount Pleasant, MI; to
Saginaw, MI.
* * * * *

V-337 [Amended]

    From INT Briggs, OH, 077[deg] and Youngstown, OH, 177[deg]
radials; to Akron, OH. From Saginaw, MI; Mount Pleasant, MI; to
White Cloud, MI.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 10, 2014.
Ellen Crum,
Acting Manager, Airspace Policy & Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2014-03181 Filed 2-12-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: March 30, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 60)]
[Notices]
[Page 15702-15703]
[DOCID:fr30mr10-63]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

March 23, 2010.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC10-53-000.
    Applicants: Sharyland Utilities, L.P.
    Description: Sharyland Utilities, L.P., Joint Application for
Approval of the Disposition of Jurisdictional Facilities Under Section
203 of the Federal Power Act.
    Filed Date: 03/18/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100318-5078.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: EC10-54-000.
    Applicants: Larswind, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization for Disposition of
Jurisdictional Facilities and Request for Expedited Action of Larswind,
LLC.
    Filed Date: 03/22/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100322-5110
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 12, 2010.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER02-2551-005.
    Applicants: Cargill Power Markets, LLC.

    Description: Cargill Power Markets, LLC submits additional
information re their 1/29/10 notification of change in status filing
and a substitute page of their market-based rate wholesale power sales
tariff.
    Filed Date: 03/19/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100322-0001.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 9, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1063-003.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, LLC.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, LLC submits Sixth Revised Sheet
No. 571 et al to its Open Access Transmission Tariff etc.
    Filed Date: 03/18/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100319-0214.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-572-001.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corporation
submits Study Service Agreement, Service Agreement No. 1432 with San
Diego Gas & Electric Company.
    Filed Date: 03/18/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100319-0207.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-668-001.
    Applicants: Medicine Bow Power Partners, LLC.
    Description: Medicine Bow Power Partners, LLC submits a Notice of
Cancellation of its market-based rate tariff, effective as of 1/29/
2010.
    Filed Date: 03/18/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100319-0208.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-712-001.
    Applicants: AES ES WESTOVER, LLC.
    Description: AES ES Westover, LLC submits explanation that they
should be designated as a Category 1 Seller in the Northwest Regions et
al, as indicated in the Tariff submitted with its Application etc.
    Filed Date: 03/18/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100319-0209.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-769-001.
    Applicants: Glenwood Energy Partners, LTD.
    Description: Glenwood Energy Partners, LTD submits Amended Petition
for Acceptance of Initial Rate Schedule, Waivers and Blanket Authority.
    Filed Date: 03/15/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100315-0155.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 5, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-895-001.
    Applicants: The Detroit Edison Company.
    Description: The Detroit Edison Company submits supplement to the
Notice of Cancellation and Second Revised Service Agreement 12 to FERC
Electric Tariff, Original Volume 1 to be effective 5/15/10.
    Filed Date: 03/22/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100322-0207.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 12, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-907-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, LLC.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, LLC submits amendments to
Schedule 12 Appendix of the PJM Tariff to incorporate cost
responsibility assignments for 110 baseline upgrades etc.
    Filed Date: 03/18/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100319-0203.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 19, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-915-000.
    Applicants: CPN Pryor Funding Corporation.
    Description: CPN Pryor Funding Corporation submits notice of
cancellation of its market-based rate tariff.
    Filed Date: 03/19/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100322-0202.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 9, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-916-000.
    Applicants: Westar Energy, Inc.
    Description: Westar Energy, Inc submits an executed Cost-Based
Agreement for Wholesale Power Sales Service from Generating Assets
Likely to Participate etc.
    Filed Date: 03/22/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100322-0210.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 12, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-917-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, LLC.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, LLC submits an executed interim
interconnection service agreement et al with P.H. Glatfelter Company et
al.
    Filed Date: 03/22/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100322-0209.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 12, 2010.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also 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 e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-7007 Filed 3-29-10; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation on November 7, 2005

NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-2001-10707

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).

Applicant:  CENTAERO AVIATION LIMITED					 Date Filed:  July 19, 2005

Relief requested:  Renewal of exemption from 49 USC § 41301 to permit
the applicant to conduct passenger charter operations between: 1) Canada
and the United States; 2) third countries and the United States, via
Canada, that make a stopover in Canada for at least two consecutive
nights; and 3) other charters to/from the United States in accordance
with 14 CFR Part 212.

If renewal, date and citation of last action:  September 1, 2004, in
this Docket.

Applicant representative:  Victor A. Dominato,<PHONE_NUMBER>         DOT
analyst:  Robert J. Finamore,<PHONE_NUMBER>

Responsive pleadings:  None.

	DISPOSITION

Action:  Approved								Action date:  November 7, 2005

Effective dates of authority granted:  November 7, 2005, through
November 7, 2006.

Basis for approval (bilateral agreement/reciprocity):  United
States-Canada Air Transport Agreement.

Except to the extent exempted/waived, this authority is subject to the
terms, conditions, and limitations of our standard exemption conditions
(attached).

Special conditions/Remarks:  In the conduct of these operations, the
carrier must adhere to all applicable provisions of

the U.S.-Canada Agreement, and may only use aircraft designed to have a
maximum passenger capacity of not more

than 60 seats or a maximum payload capacity of not more than 18,000
pounds.  We note that under this authority the

carrier may conduct charter operations between: 1) Canada and the United
States; and 2) third countries and the

United States, via Canada, with a stopover in Canada for at least two
consecutive nights.  Other charters to be

conducted under this authority, however, are subject to prior approval
under 14 CFR Part 212.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director, Office of International
Aviation

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our action was consistent with Department
policy; (2) the applicant was qualified to perform its proposed
operations; (3) grant of the authority was consistent with the public
interest; and (4) grant of the authority would not constitute a major
regulatory action under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.
To the extent not granted/deferred/dismissed, we denied all requests in
the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify, or revoke the authority
granted in this Notice at any time without hearing at our discretion.

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:

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

FOREIGN CARRIER EXEMPTION CONDITIONS
                              ATTACHMENT

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the foreign carrier
applicant(s) shall:

1) Not conduct any operations unless it holds a currently effective
authorization from its homeland for such operations, and it has filed a
copy of such authorization with the Department;

2) Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration, including, but not limited to, 14 CFR Parts 129, 91, and
36, and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements concerning
security, including, but not limited to, 49 CFR Part 1546 or 1550, as
applicable.  To assure compliance with all applicable U.S. Government
requirements concerning security, the holder shall, before commencing
any new service (including charter flights) from a foreign airport that
would be the holder’s last point of departure for the United States,
contact its International Principal Security Inspector (IPSI) to advise
the IPSI of its plans and to find out whether the Transportation
Security Administration has determined that security is adequate to
allow such airport(s) to be served;

3) Comply with the requirements for minimum insurance coverage contained
in 14 CFR Part 205, and, prior to the commencement of any operations
under this authority, file evidence of such coverage, in the form of a
completed OST Form 6411, with the Federal Aviation Administration’s
Program Management Branch (AFS-260), Flight Standards Service (any
changes to, or termination of, insurance also shall be filed with that
office);

4) Not operate aircraft under this authority unless it complies with
operational safety requirements at least equivalent to Annex 6 of the
Chicago Convention;

5) Conform to the airworthiness and airman competency requirements of
its Government for international air services;

6) Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 203,
concerning waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

7) Agree that operations under this authority constitute a waiver of
sovereign immunity, for the purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a), but only with
respect to those actions or proceedings instituted against it in any
court or other tribunal in the United States that are: a) based on its
operations in international air transportation that, according to the
contract of carriage, include a point in the United States as a point of
origin, point of destination, or agreed stopping place, or for which the
contract of carriage was purchased in the United States; or b) based on
a claim under any international agreement or treaty cognizable in any
court or other tribunal of the United States.  In this condition, the
term “international air transportation” means “international
transportation” as defined by the Warsaw Convention, except that all
States shall be considered to be High Contracting Parties for the
purpose of this definition;

8) Except as specifically authorized by the Department, originate or
terminate all flights to/from the United States in its homeland;

9) Comply with the requirements of 14 CFR Part 217, concerning the
reporting of scheduled, nonscheduled, and charter data;

10) If charter operations are authorized, except as otherwise provided
in the applicable aviation agreement, comply with the Department’s
rules governing charters (including 14 CFR Parts 212 and 380); and

11) Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and limitations
required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the Department,
with all applicable orders or regulations of other U.S. agencies and
courts, and with all applicable laws of the United States.

This authority shall not be effective during any period when the holder
is not in compliance with the conditions imposed above.  Moreover, this
authority cannot be sold or otherwise transferred without explicit
Department approval under Title 49 of the U.S. Code.

 05/2004


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 151 (Wednesday, August 5, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47464-47465]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17014]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Receipt of Noise Compatibility Program and Request for Review

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announces that it is
reviewing a proposed noise compatibility program that was submitted for
San Carlos Airport under the provisions of the Aviation Safety and
Noise Abatement Act, hereinafter referred to as ``the Act,'' by the
County of San Mateo. This program was submitted subsequent to a
determination by FAA that associated noise exposure maps for San Carlos
Airport were in compliance with applicable requirements, effective
April 23, 2019. The proposed 2019 noise compatibility program will be
approved or disapproved on or before January 26, 2021.

DATES: The effective date of the start of FAA's review of the noise
compatibility program 2019 is July 30, 2020. The public comment period
ends September 28, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Camille Garibaldi, Environmental
Protection Specialist, SFO-613, Federal Aviation Administration, San
Francisco Airports District Office, 1000 Marina Boulevard, Suite 220,
Brisbane, California 94005-1835; or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Comments on the proposed noise compatibility program 2019 should be
emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or mailed to the above
office.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces that the FAA is
reviewing a proposed 2019 noise compatibility program for San Carlos
Airport, which will be approved or disapproved on or before January 26,
2021. This notice also announces the

availability of the San Carlos Airport noise compatibility program 2019
for public review and comment. An airport operator who has submitted
noise exposure maps that are found by FAA to be in compliance with the
requirements of 14 CFR part 150, promulgated pursuant to the Act, may
submit a noise compatibility program for FAA approval which sets forth
the measures the operator has taken or proposes to reduce existing non-
compatible uses and prevent the introduction of additional non-
compatible uses. The FAA has formally received the noise compatibility
program 2019 for San Carlos Airport, effective on July 30, 2020. The
airport operator has requested that the FAA review this material and
that the noise mitigation measures, to be implemented jointly by the
airport and surrounding communities, be approved as a noise
compatibility program under section 47504 of the Act. Preliminary
review of the submitted material for the proposed 2019 indicates that
it conforms to 14 CFR part 150 requirements for the submittal of noise
compatibility programs, but that further review will be necessary prior
to approval or disapproval of the program. The formal review period,
limited by law to a maximum of 180 days, will be completed on or before
January 26, 2021.
    The FAA's detailed evaluation will be conducted under the
provisions of 14 CFR part 150, Section 150.33. The primary
considerations in the evaluation process are whether the proposed
measures may reduce the level of aviation safety or create an undue
burden on interstate or foreign commerce, and whether they are
reasonably consistent with obtaining the goal of reducing existing non-
compatible land uses and preventing the introduction of additional non-
compatible land uses.
    Interested persons are invited to comment on the proposed noise
compatibility program 2019 with specific reference to these factors.
All comments relating to these factors, other than those properly
addressed to local land use authorities, will be considered by the FAA
to the extent practicable. Copies of the noise exposure maps, and the
noise compatibility program 2019 are available for examination at the
following locations:

http://sancarlosnoise.airportstudy.com/noise-study-documents/
San Mateo County Airports
San Carlos Airport, 620 Airport Drive, Suite 10, San Carlos, CA 94070-
2714

Questions may be directed to the individual named above under the
heading, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Issued in El Segundo, California on July 30, 2020.
Mark A. McClardy,
Director, Office of Airports, Western-Pacific Region, AWP-600.
[FR Doc. 2020-17014 Filed 8-4-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 114 (Thursday, June 15, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27428-27430]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12342]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0748; FRL-9963-48-Region 4]

Air Plan Approvals; TN; Prong 4-2010 NO2, SO2, and 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is conditionally
approving the visibility transport (prong 4) portions of revisions to
the Tennessee State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by the
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), addressing
the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) infrastructure SIP requirements for the
2010 1-hour Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), 2010 1-hour Sulfur
Dioxide (SO2), and 2012 annual Fine Particulate Matter
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The
CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated
by EPA, commonly referred to as an ``infrastructure SIP.''
Specifically, EPA is conditionally approving the prong 4 portions of
Tennessee's March 13, 2014, 2010 1-hour NO2 and 2010 1-hour
SO2 infrastructure SIP submission and December 16, 2015,
2012 annual PM2.5 infrastructure SIP submission. All other
applicable infrastructure requirements for these SIP submissions have
been or will be addressed in separate rulemakings.

DATES: This rule is effective July 17, 2017.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0748. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Lakeman of the Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Mr. Lakeman can be reached by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>
or via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    By statute, SIPs meeting the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and
(2) of the CAA are to be submitted by states within three years after
promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS to provide for the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the new or revised
NAAQS. EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for
the purpose of satisfying the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) as ``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Sections 110(a)(1) and
(2) require states to address basic SIP elements such as for
monitoring, basic program requirements, and legal authority that are
designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the newly established
or revised NAAQS. More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the
procedural and timing requirements for infrastructure SIPs. Section
110(a)(2) lists specific elements that states must meet for the
infrastructure SIP requirements related to a newly established or
revised NAAQS. The contents of an infrastructure SIP submission may
vary depending upon the data and analytical tools available to the
state, as well as the provisions already contained in the state's
implementation plan at the time in which the state develops and submits
the submission for a new or revised NAAQS.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) has two components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and
110(a)(2)(D)(ii). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) includes four distinct
components, commonly referred to as ``prongs,'' that must be addressed
in infrastructure SIP submissions. The first two prongs, which are
codified in section

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), are provisions that prohibit any source or other
type of emissions activity in one state from contributing significantly
to nonattainment of the NAAQS in another state (prong 1) and from
interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state (prong 2).
The third and fourth prongs, which are codified in section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are provisions that prohibit emissions activity in
one state from interfering with measures required to prevent
significant deterioration of air quality in another state (prong 3) or
from interfering with measures to protect visibility in another state
(prong 4). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to include provisions
insuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating to
interstate and international pollution abatement.
    Tennessee's March 13, 2014, 2010 1-hour NO2 and 2010 1-
hour SO2 submission cites to the State's regional haze SIP
and Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) SIP as satisfying prong 4
requirements.\1\ In its December 16, 2015, 2012 annual PM2.5
submission, the State notes that it is developing a regional haze SIP
revision with the intent to obtain a fully-approved regional haze SIP
and that Tennessee's SIP will be adequate with regard to prong 4 if EPA
approves that revision. As explained in a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) published on March 2, 2017 (82 FR 12328), EPA has not yet fully
approved Tennessee's existing regional haze SIP because the SIP relies
on CAIR to satisfy the nitrogen oxides (NOX) and
SO2 Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) requirements
for the CAIR-subject electric generating units (EGUs) in the State and
the requirement for a long-term strategy sufficient to achieve the
state-adopted reasonable progress goals.\2\ Therefore, on December 7,
2016, Tennessee submitted a commitment letter to EPA requesting
conditional approval of the prong 4 portions of the aforementioned
infrastructure SIP revisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In its March 13, 2014, submission, Tennessee states that its
regional haze SIP and its ``CAIR SIP are sufficient to ensure
emissions within its jurisdiction do not interfere with other
agencies' plans to protect visibility.'' However, as Tennessee notes
in its submittal, a state's infrastructure SIP submission can
satisfy prong 4 solely through confirmation that the state has a
fully approved regional haze SIP.
    \2\ CAIR, promulgated in 2005, required 27 states and the
District of Columbia to reduce emissions of NOX and
SO2 that significantly contribute to, or interfere with
maintenance of, the 1997 NAAQS for fine particulates and/or ozone in
any downwind state. CAIR imposed specified emissions reduction
requirements on each affected State, and established several EPA-
administered cap and trade programs for EGUs that States could join
as a means to meet these requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its commitment letter, Tennessee commits to submit an
infrastructure SIP revision, within one year of final conditional
approval, that will satisfy the prong 4 requirements for the 2010 1-
hour NO2 NAAQS, 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, and 2012
annual PM2.5 NAAQS through reliance on a fully-approved
regional haze SIP or through an analysis showing that emissions from
sources in Tennessee will not interfere with the attainment of the
reasonable progress goals of other states. If the revised
infrastructure SIP revision relies on a fully-approved regional haze
SIP revision to satisfy prong 4 requirements, Tennessee also commits to
providing the necessary regional haze SIP revision to EPA within one
year of EPA's final conditional approval.
    If Tennessee meets its commitment within one year of final
conditional approval, the prong 4 portions of the conditionally
approved infrastructure SIP submissions will remain a part of the SIP
until EPA takes final action approving or disapproving the new SIP
revision(s). However, if the State fails to submit these revisions
within the one-year timeframe, the conditional approval will
automatically become a disapproval one year from EPA's final
conditional approval and EPA will issue a finding of disapproval. EPA
is not required to propose the finding of disapproval. If the
conditional approval is converted to a disapproval, the final
disapproval triggers the FIP requirement under CAA section 110(c).
    In the March 2, 2017, NPRM, EPA proposed to conditionally approve
the prong 4 portions of the aforementioned infrastructure SIP
submissions. The NPRM provides additional detail regarding the
rationale for EPA's action, including further discussion of the prong 4
requirements and the basis for Tennessee's commitment letter. Comments
on the proposed rulemaking were due on or before April 3, 2017. EPA
received no adverse comments on the proposed action.

II. Final Action

    As described above, EPA is conditionally approving the prong 4
portions of Tennessee's March 13, 2014, 2010 1-hour NO2 and
2010 1-hour SO2 infrastructure SIP submission and December
16, 2015, 2012 PM2.5 infrastructure SIP submission. All
other outstanding applicable infrastructure requirements for these SIP
submissions have been or will be addressed in separate rulemakings.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9,

2000), nor will it impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by August 14, 2017. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.

    Dated: May 25, 2017.
V. Anne Heard,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart RR--Tennessee

0
2. Add Sec.  52.2219 to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2219  Conditional approval.

    Tennessee submitted a letter to EPA on December 7, 2016, with a
commitment to address the State Implementation Plan deficiencies
regarding requirements of Clean Air Act section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)
related to interference with measures to protect visibility in another
state (prong 4) for the 2010 1-hour NO2, 2010 1-hour
SO2, and 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA
conditionally approved the prong 4 portions of Tennessee's March 13,
2014, 2010 1-hour NO2 and 2010 1-hour SO2
infrastructure SIP submission and December 16, 2015, 2012 annual
PM2.5 infrastructure SIP submission in an action published
in the Federal Register on June 15, 2017. If Tennessee fails to meet
its commitment by June 15, 2018, the conditional approval will
automatically become a disapproval on that date and EPA will issue a
finding of disapproval.

[FR Doc. 2017-12342 Filed 6-14-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 23, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32846-32848]
[FR Doc No: 2021-12870]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2021-0416]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Sabine River, Orange, TX

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a temporary safety
zone for certain navigable waters of the Sabine River, extending the
entire width of the river, adjacent to the public boat ramp located in
Orange, TX. The safety zone is necessary to protect persons and vessels
from hazards associated with a high-speed boat race competition in
Orange, TX. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone would be
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Marine Safety
Unit Port Arthur or a designated representative. We invite your
comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before July 8, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2021-0416 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email Mr. Scott Whalen, Marine Safety Unit
Port Arthur, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<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, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On April 29, 2021, the Coast Guard published a temporary safety
zone to protect persons and vessels from the hazards associated with
high speed boat races in Orange, TX (86 FR 22610). That event was
cancelled due to weather. On May 19, 2021 the City of Orange, TX
notified the Coast Guard that they rescheduled the races for September
18 and 19, 2021, in the same location, adjacent to the public boat ramp
in Orange, TX. The Captain of the Port Port Arthur (COTP) has
determined that potential hazards associated with high speed boat races
would be a safety concern for spectator craft and vessels in the
vicinity of these race events.
    The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels
and the navigable waters of the Sabine River adjacent to the public
boat ramp in Orange, TX before, during, and after the scheduled event.
The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under

authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231).

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The COTP is proposing to establish a safety zone from 7:30 a.m. on
September 18, 2021 through 6 p.m. on September 19, 2021. The safety
zone would be enforced from 7:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. on both the 18th and
the 19th. The safety zone would cover all navigable waters of the
Sabine River, extending the entire width of the river, adjacent to the
public boat ramp located in Orange, TX bounded to the north by the
Orange Public Wharf and latitude 30[deg]05'50'' N and to the south at
latitude 30[deg]05'33'' N. The duration of the safety zone is intended
to protect participants, spectators, and other persons and vessels, in
the navigable waters of the Sabine River during high-speed boat races
and will include breaks and opportunity for vessels to transit through
the regulated area.
    No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the safety zone
without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated
representative. They will be available on VHF-FM or by telephone.
    The COTP or a designated representative may prohibit or control the
movement of all vessels in the zone. The COTP or a designated
representative may terminate the operation of any vessel at any time it
is deemed necessary for the protection of life or property. The COTP or
a designated representative may terminate enforcement of the safety
zone at the conclusion of the event.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed 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 NPRM has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM
has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the proposed size,
location and duration of the rule. The safety zone will encompass a
less than half-mile stretch of the Sabine River for 10.5-hours on each
of two days. The Coast Guard will notify the public by issuing Local
Notice to Mariners (LNM), and/or Marine Safety Information Bulletin
(MSIB) and Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM radio and the rule
will allow vessels to seek permission to enter the zone during
scheduled breaks.

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 certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
temporary safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in
section IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant
economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. 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. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would 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 proposed 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 proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

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 proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed 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 made
a preliminary determination 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 proposed rule involves a safety
zone that would last 8 hours on each of two days and that would
prohibit entry on less than a half-mile stretch of the Sabine River in

Orange, TX. Normally such actions are 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 preliminary 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. We seek any comments or information
that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact
from this proposed rule.

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.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. Comments we post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and submissions in response to this
document, see DHS's eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226,
March 11, 2020).
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's
instructions. We review all comments received, but we will only post
comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may choose not
to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we
receive. If you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts,
you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is
published.

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 is
proposing to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREA 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.T08-0416 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0416  Safety Zone; Sabine River, Orange, Texas.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters of the Sabine River, extending the entire width of the river,
adjacent to the public boat ramp located in Orange, TX bounded to the
north by the Orange Public Wharf and latitude 30[deg]05'50'' N and to
the south at latitude 30[deg]05'33'' N. The duration of the safety zone
is intended to protect participants, spectators, and other persons and
vessels, in the navigable waters of the Sabine River during high-speed
boat races and will include breaks and opportunity for vessels to
transit through the regulated area.
    (b) Enforcement periods. This section will be enforced from 7:30
a.m. through 6 p.m. daily on September 18, 2021 and September 19, 2021.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry of vessels or persons into this zone
is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Marine
Safety Unit Port Arthur (COTP) or a designated representative. They may
be contacted on VHF-FM channel 13 or 16, or by phone at by telephone at
409-719-5070.
    (2) The COTP or a designated representative may forbid and control
the movement of all vessels in the regulated area. When hailed or
signaled by an official patrol vessel, a vessel shall come to an
immediate stop and comply with the directions given. Failure to do so
may result in expulsion from the area, citation for failure to comply,
or both.
    (3) The COTP or a designated representative may terminate the event
or the operation of any vessel at any time it is deemed necessary for
the protection of life or property.
    (4) The COTP or a designated representative will terminate
enforcement of the special local regulations at the conclusion of the
event.
    (d) Informational broadcasts. The COTP or a designated
representative will inform the public of the effective period for the
safety zone as well as any changes in the dates and times of
enforcement through Local Notice to Mariners (LNMs), Broadcast Notices
to Mariners (BNMs), and/or Marine Safety Information Bulletins (MSIBs)
as appropriate.

     Dated: June 8, 2021.
Molly A. Wike,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Marine Safety Zone Port
Arthur.
[FR Doc. 2021-12870 Filed 6-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P