[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 175 (Friday, September 9, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55825-55829]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23047]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA-2011-0139]
RIN 2127-AJ44

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, Child Restraint Systems

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule, the first of two under the designation RIN
2127-AJ44, amends a provision in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
No. 213, ``Child restraint systems,'' that permits NHTSA to allow
manufacturers of child restraint systems (CRSs) manufactured before
August 1, 2010, to choose to have NHTSA test the CRSs with either the
Hybrid II 6-year old child (H2-6C) dummy or the Hybrid III 6-year-old
child (HIII-6C) dummy. This final rule amends the provision to permit
manufacturers of currently-manufactured CRSs the choice of

NHTSA testing their child restraints with either the H2-6C dummy or the
HIII-6C dummy until further notice. While the HIII-6C is an advanced
test dummy with state-of-the-art capabilities, NHTSA believes the
agency should complete ongoing research programs to improve the
usability of the HIII-6C dummy in FMVSS No. 213 before testing child
restraints solely with this crash test dummy.

DATES: This final rule is effective September 9, 2011. If you wish to
petition for reconsideration of this rule, your petition must be
received by October 24, 2011.

ADDRESSES: If you wish to petition for reconsideration of this rule,
you should refer in your petition to the docket number of this document
and submit your petition to: Administrator, National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building,
Washington, DC 20590.
    The petition will be placed in the docket. Anyone is able to search
the electronic form of all documents received into any of our dockets
by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the
comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor
union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in
the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70;
Pages 19477-78).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical issues, you may call
Cristina Echemendia, Office of Rulemaking (Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>)
(Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>). For legal issues, you may call Deirdre Fujita,
Office of Chief Counsel (Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) (Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>).
You may send mail to these officials at the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building, Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: S7.1.3 of FMVSS No. 213 permits NHTSA to
allow manufacturers of CRSs manufactured before August 1, 2010, to
choose to have NHTSA test the CRSs with either the H2-6C dummy or the
HIII-6C dummy when the CRS is subject to testing with a test dummy
representative of a 6-year-old child.\1\ NHTSA is amending S7.1.3 to
permit manufacturers of currently-manufactured CRSs the choice of NHTSA
testing their child restraints with either the H2-6C dummy or the HIII-
6C dummy until further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ These are CRSs that are recommended by the manufacturer for
use by children in a specified mass range that includes any children
having a mass greater than 18 kilograms (40 pounds) or by children
in a height range greater than 1100 millimeters. See S7.1.2(d) of
FMVSS No. 213.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) preceding this
final rule was published on November 24, 2010 (75 FR 71648, Docket No.
NHTSA-2010-0158). This final rule is the first of two under the
designation RIN 2127-AJ44. The second decisional document will be
published later this year.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Pending proposals made by the agency in NPRMs published
August 31, 2005, January 23, 2008, and November 24, 2010 will be
addressed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background

    The agency adopted the HIII-6C into FMVSS No. 213 in a final rule
\3\ published in response to a mandate in the Transportation Recall
Enhancement, Accountability and Documentation Act (the TREAD Act)
(November 1, 2000, Public Law 106-414, 114 Stat. 1800) that required
NHTSA undertake rulemaking on child restraint systems. Section 14 of
the TREAD Act directed NHTSA to initiate a rulemaking for the purpose
of improving the safety of child restraints by November 1, 2001, and to
complete it by issuing a final rule or taking other action by November
1, 2002. Section 14 specified nine elements for consideration by NHTSA
in improving child restraint safety, including considering whether to
require the use of the HIII-6C and other Hybrid III ATDs in FMVSS No.
213 compliance tests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ June 24, 2003, 68 FR 37620, Docket No. NHTSA-2003-15351.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the TREAD Act, NHTSA decided in its rulemaking to
adopt the HIII-6C into FMVSS No. 213. NHTSA considered the dummy to be
``considerably more biofidelic'' than its predecessor, the H2-6C dummy,
and with enhanced potential to measure an array of impact responses
never before measured by a child ATD, such as neck moments and chest
deflections.
    However, the agency acknowledged there was mixed acceptance by the
commenters of the HIII-6C dummy. Some commenters believed that the
HIII-6C exhibited large neck elongation in the FMVSS No. 213 test
environment that resulted in chin-to-chest and head-to-knee contact and
correspondingly high head injury criterion (HIC) values. In evaluating
those comments, NHTSA carefully analyzed its test data of sled testing
conducted with the HIII-6C, but found no data indicating that head-to-
chest or head-to-knee impacts were an issue or were typical. 68 FR at
37644. Accordingly, the HIII-6C was adopted into the standard, with
what was then considered to be sufficient lead time to enable
manufacturers to become familiar with the dummy. The compliance date
for the mandatory use of the HIII-6C dummy was set as August 1, 2005.
    Eventually, after examining the performance of the HIII-6C in the
FMVSS No. 213 environment, NHTSA extended the compliance date to August
1, 2010.\4\ We reiterated our belief that the HIII-6C dummy is more
biofidelic in its components than its predecessor the H2-6C, and that
the HIII-6C also has more extensive instrumentation to measure impact
responses such as forces, accelerations, moments and deflections, which
are crucial in evaluating vehicle occupant protection systems.\5\ Some
CRS manufacturers have found the HIII-6C to be a satisfactory test
instrument and are using the dummy to certify the compliance of their
CRSs to FMVSS No. 213. These manufacturers are positioning the test
dummy and measuring the head injury criterion (HIC) as currently
required by FMVSS No. 213.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ August 5, 2008, 73 FR 45355, Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0137.
    \5\ FMVSS No. 208, ``Occupant crash protection,'' uses Hybrid
III dummies, including the HIII-6C dummy, in its compliance tests.
The HIII-6C has been suitable for FMVSS No. 208 testing because the
test environment for that standard is different than the FMVSS No.
213 environment, due to the presence of the air bag.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, while the HIII-6C is an advanced test dummy with state-of-
the-art capabilities and is being used to an extent today, NHTSA
proposed \6\ that the agency should complete ongoing efforts to improve
the HIII-6C dummy to make it more useful as an FMVSS No. 213 test
device before testing child restraints solely with this device. The
HIII-6C dummy has a softer neck than the H2-6C, which results in
slightly greater head excursion results and larger HIC values (chin-to-
chest contact) than the H2-6C. This, coupled with the stiff thorax of
the HIII-6C dummy, accentuates the HIC values recorded by the dummy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 75 FR 71648, November 24, 2010, Docket No. NHTSA-2010-0158.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Several measures are underway to improve the Hybrid III dummy (see
discussion in 75 FR at 71660). Until such time the HIII-6C is improved,
we proposed on November 24, 2010 that FMVSS No. 213 should be amended
to permit NHTSA to allow manufacturers the option of specifying that
NHTSA use either the H2-6C or the HIII-6C dummy to test the
manufacturer's child restraints until further notice.

Summary of Comments

    The agency received three comments on the November 24, 2010
proposal, from: the Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association (JPMA),
Evenflo Company Inc. (Evenflo), and the Advocates for Highway Safety
(Advocates).
    JPMA and Evenflo expressed support for the proposal to reinstate
the optional use of the H2-6C and HIII-6C dummies in compliance testing
until such time that design issues with the HIII-6C dummy are
addressed. JPMA noted that both the HIII-6C and H2-6C dummies are being
used to test and certify CRS models to FMVSS No. 213 by various CRS
manufacturers. Evenflo noted that the H2-6C has been used for many
years to permit qualification of CRSs which have provided good crash
protection for children in real world crashes. Both JPMA and Evenflo
expressed support of NHTSA's effort to fully implement the HIII-6C
dummy into FMVSS No. 213, but noted that it must not be done until the
issues with this dummy are addressed.
    Advocates stated that it generally opposes allowing alternative
compliance options because it allows manufacturers to select the option
that affords the widest degree of manufacturing latitude, not
necessarily safety protection, and may lead to confusion and ambiguous
results. However, it stated that in this particular case, in light of
concerns expressed about the biofidelity of the HIII-6C dummy, it
understands the necessity to extend the optional use of the H2-6C
dummy. Nonetheless, Advocates requested that the period of the
extension be limited, and better defined, than simply left open-ended
to ``until such time FMVSS [No.] 213 is further amended to specify
otherwise,'' as stated in the preamble of the SNPRM. Advocates
suggested that a date certain be established for termination of the
optional use of the H2-6C dummy in compliance testing.

Response and Decision

    For the reasons stated in the November 2010 SNPRM and after
consideration of the comments on the proposed optional use of the H2-6C
dummy, NHTSA has decided to adopt the proposed amendment to FMVSS No.
213 that allows, at the manufacturer's option, the use of either the
H2-6C or the HIII-6C dummy in the agency compliance tests of child
restraints.
    We understand and generally concur with Advocates' concerns about
the potential for compliance options to engender opportunities for
confusion and ambiguity about compliance test results. For reasons such
as those described by Advocates, NHTSA seeks to avoid incorporating
compliance options into the FMVSSs whenever possible. However, in the
case at hand, we have decided against establishing a termination date
on the optional use of the H2-6C dummy.
    As noted in the November 2010 SNPRM and earlier in this document,
the agency has research projects underway to improve the capability of
child dummies to assess CRS performance.\7\ After the agency fully
evaluates the new dummy, the improved HIII-6C dummy will be considered
for incorporation into FMVSS No. 213 and 49 CFR Part 572. At that time,
the agency will consider the mandatory use of the improved dummy in
FMVSS No. 213 and the termination of the optional use of the H2-6C
dummy in the agency's compliance tests. If a termination date were
included in S7.1.3, as the termination date approached, CRS
manufacturers using the H2-6C to certify their CRSs may question
whether their continued use of the dummy is well-advised. If the HIII-
6C dummy were not sufficiently improved by the termination date, as the
termination date approached, all CRS manufacturers would again be faced
with uncertainty about how NHTSA would test their child restraints. To
avoid these uncertainties, we have decided against including a
termination date for the optional use of the H2-6C dummy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The near-term Phase I upgrades to the HIII-6C dummy that are
expected to be completed in the 2013 timeframe include improvements
in the biofidelity of the dummy kinematics. The Phase II research is
directed toward developing biomechanical response data for
developing future improved child dummies. The Phase III of this
research includes design, development, and evaluation of a new
prototype 6-year old child dummy which is expected to be completed
in the 2015 timeframe. 75 FR at 71660.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Compliance Date

    This final rule is effective on publication in the Federal
Register. There is good cause for this effective date, as this final
rule clarifies FMVSS No. 213 requirements as to how NHTSA will test
child restraints and provides relief to manufacturers by allowing
flexibility in the test dummy used in agency compliance tests of child
restraints.

Regulatory Analyses and Notices

Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), E.O.
13563, and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    The agency has considered the impact of this rulemaking action
under E.O. 12866, E.O. 13563, and the Department of Transportation's
regulatory policies and procedures. This action was not reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget under E.O. 12866. This action is not
``significant'' under the Department of Transportation's regulatory
policies and procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979). The final
rule does not impose any new requirements on manufacturers that produce
child restraint systems, but only reinstates a provision that allowed
NHTSA to provide flexibility to manufacturers in directing NHTSA which
test dummy (the H2-6C or the HIII-6C) to use in testing their
restraints. The agency believes that the impact is so minimal as to not
warrant the preparation of a full regulatory evaluation.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, we have considered the
impacts of this rulemaking action will have on small entities (5 U.S.C.
601 et seq.). I certify that this rulemaking action will not have a
significant economic impact upon a substantial number of small entities
within the context of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The following is the agency's statement providing the factual basis
for the certification (5 U.S.C. 605(b)). This final rule affects child
restraint manufacturers. According to the size standards of the Small
Business Association (at 13 CFR part 121.601), the small business size
standard for manufacturers of ``Motor Vehicle Seating and Interior Trim
Manufacturing'' (NAICS Code 336360) is 500 employees or fewer. Many
child restraint manufacturers would be classified as small businesses
under this standard. However, the final rule does not impose any new
requirements on manufacturers that produce child restraint systems, but
only reinstates a provision that allowed manufacturers flexibility in
telling NHTSA which test dummy to use in testing their restraints.
Accordingly, we have not prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis.

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    NHTSA has examined today's rule pursuant to Executive Order 13132
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and concluded that no additional

consultation with States, local governments or their representatives is
mandated beyond the rulemaking process. The agency has concluded that
the rulemaking would not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant consultation with State and local officials or the preparation
of a federalism summary impact statement. The rule would not have
``substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    NHTSA rules can preempt in two ways. First, the National Traffic
and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an express preemption provision:
When a motor vehicle safety standard is in effect under this chapter, a
State or a political subdivision of a State may prescribe or continue
in effect a standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of a
motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment only if the standard is
identical to the standard prescribed under this chapter. 49 U.S.C.
30103(b)(1). It is this statutory command by Congress that preempts any
non-identical State legislative and administrative law addressing the
same aspect of performance.
    The express preemption provision described above is subject to a
savings clause under which ``[c]ompliance with a motor vehicle safety
standard prescribed under this chapter does not exempt a person from
liability at common law.'' 49 U.S.C. 30103(e). Pursuant to this
provision, State common law tort causes of action against motor vehicle
manufacturers that might otherwise be preempted by the express
preemption provision are generally preserved. However, the Supreme
Court has recognized the possibility, in some instances, of implied
preemption of such State common law tort causes of action by virtue of
NHTSA's rules, even if not expressly preempted. This second way that
NHTSA rules can preempt is dependent upon there being an actual
conflict between an FMVSS and the higher standard that would
effectively be imposed on motor vehicle manufacturers if someone
obtained a State common law tort judgment against the manufacturer,
notwithstanding the manufacturer's compliance with the NHTSA standard.
Because most NHTSA standards established by an FMVSS are minimum
standards, a State common law tort cause of action that seeks to impose
a higher standard on motor vehicle manufacturers will generally not be
preempted. However, if and when such a conflict does exist--for
example, when the standard at issue is both a minimum and a maximum
standard--the State common law tort cause of action is impliedly
preempted. See Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000).
    Pursuant to Executive Order 13132 and 12988, NHTSA has considered
whether this rule could or should preempt State common law causes of
action. The agency's ability to announce its conclusion regarding the
preemptive effect of one of its rules reduces the likelihood that
preemption will be an issue in any subsequent tort litigation. To this
end, the agency has examined the nature (e.g., the language and
structure of the regulatory text) and objectives of today's rule and
finds that this rule, like many NHTSA rules, would prescribe only a
minimum safety standard. As such, NHTSA does not intend that this rule
would preempt state tort law that would effectively impose a higher
standard on motor vehicle manufacturers than that established by
today's rule. Establishment of a higher standard by means of State tort
law would not conflict with the minimum standard adopted here. Without
any conflict, there could not be any implied preemption of a State
common law tort cause of action.

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    With respect to the review of the promulgation of a new regulation,
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform'' (61 FR
4729; Feb. 7, 1996), requires that Executive agencies make every
reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies
the preemptive effect; (2) clearly specifies the effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct, while promoting simplification and burden reduction;
(4) clearly specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) specifies
whether administrative proceedings are to be required before parties
file suit in court; (6) adequately defines key terms; and (7) addresses
other important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship
under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General. This document is
consistent with that requirement.
    Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes as follows. The issue of
preemption is discussed above. NHTSA notes further that there is no
requirement that individuals submit a petition for reconsideration or
pursue other administrative proceedings before they may file suit in
court.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) requires
agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits and
other effects of proposed or final rules that include a Federal mandate
likely to result in the expenditure by State, local or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than
$100 million annually. This action will not result in additional
expenditures by state, local or tribal governments or by any members of
the private sector. Therefore, the agency has not prepared an economic
assessment pursuant to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.),
a person is not required to respond to a collection of information by a
Federal agency unless the collection displays a valid OMB control
number. This final rule does not impose any new collection of
information requirements for which a 5 CFR part 1320 clearance must be
obtained.

Privacy Act

    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78).

Environmental Impacts

    We have considered the impacts of this final rule under the
National Environmental Policy Act. This rulemaking action only
reinstates a provision that allowed NHTSA to provide flexibility to
manufacturers in directing NHTSA which test dummy (the H2-6C or the
HIII-6C) to use in testing their restraints. This rulemaking does not
require any change that would have any environmental impacts.
Accordingly, no environmental assessment is required.

Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

    The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this

document to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

Plain Language

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in
plain language. Application of the principles of plain language
includes consideration of the following questions:
     Have we organized the material to suit the public's needs?
     Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
     Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that
isn't clear?
     Would a different format (grouping and order of sections,
use of headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
     Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
     Could we improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or
diagrams?
     What else could we do to make the rule easier to
understand?
    If you have any responses to these questions, please send them to
NHTSA.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571

    Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles, and Tires.

    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR part 571 as
set forth below.

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

0
1. The authority citation for part 571 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117 and 30166;
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

0
2. Section 571.213 is amended by revising S7.1.3 to read as follows:

Sec.  571.213  Standard No. 213; Child restraint systems.

* * * * *
    S7.1.3 Voluntary use of alternative dummies. At the manufacturer's
option (with said option irrevocably selected prior to, or at the time
of, certification of the restraint), when this section specifies use of
the 49 CFR part 572, subpart N (Hybrid III 6-year-old dummy) test
dummy, the test dummy specified in 49 CFR part 572, subpart I (Hybrid
II 6-year-old dummy) may be used in place of the subpart N test dummy.
* * * * *

    Issued: September 1, 2011.
David L. Strickland,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2011-23047 Filed 9-8-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 108 (Wednesday, June 7, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26495-26497]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11817]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2017-N-2730]

Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting;
Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for Comments

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; establishment of a public docket; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) announces a
forthcoming public advisory committee meeting of the Oncologic Drugs
Advisory Committee. The general function of the committee is to provide
advice and recommendations to the Agency on FDA's regulatory issues.
The meeting will be open to the public. FDA is establishing a docket
for public comment on this document.

DATES: The public meeting will be held on July 11, 2017, from 12:30
p.m. to 5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: FDA White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31
Conference Center, the Great Room (Rm. 1503), Silver Spring, MD 20993-
0002. Answers to commonly asked questions including information
regarding special accommodations due to a disability, visitor parking,
and transportation may be accessed at: https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm408555.htm.
    FDA is establishing a docket for public comment on this meeting.
The docket number is FDA-2017-N-2730. The docket will close on July 10,
2017. Submit either electronic or written comments on this public
meeting by July 10, 2017. Late, untimely filed comments will not be
considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before July 10,
2017. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will
accept comments until midnight Eastern Time at the end of July 10,
2017. Comments received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/
paper submissions) will be considered timely if they are postmarked or
the delivery service acceptance receipt is on or before that date.
    Comments received on or before June 26, 2017, will be provided to
the committee. Comments received after that date will be taken into
consideration by the Agency.
    You may submit comments as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
      Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of
Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2017-N-2730 for ``Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of
Meeting; Establishment of a Public Docket; Request for Comments.''
Received comments, those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will
be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as
``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not
wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available,
you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body
of your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Shepherd, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, Rm. 2417, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-9001, FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or FDA Advisory
Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138<PHONE_NUMBER> in the
Washington, DC area). A notice in the Federal Register about last
minute modifications that impact a previously announced advisory
committee meeting cannot always be published quickly enough to provide
timely notice. Therefore, you should always check the Agency's Web site
at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm and scroll down
to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link, or call the
advisory committee information line to learn about possible
modifications before coming to the meeting.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Agenda: The committee will discuss biologics license application
(BLA) 761060, MYLOTARG (gemtuzumab ozogamicin) for intravenous use,
submitted by Wyeth Pharmaceuticals Inc., a subsidiary of Pfizer Inc.
The proposed indication (use) for this product is in combination
therapy with daunorubicin (DNR) and cytarabine (AraC) for the treatment
of adult patients with previously untreated, de novo acute myeloid
leukemia (AML).
    FDA intends to make background material available to the public no
later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post
the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the
background material will be made publicly available at the location of
the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be
posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is
available at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm. Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting
link.
    Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or
views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee.
All electronic and written submissions submitted to the Docket (see the
ADDRESSES section) on or before June 26, 2017, will be provided to the
committee. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled between
approximately 3 p.m. and 4 p.m. Those individuals interested in making
formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and submit a
brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they
wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and
an indication of the approximate time requested to make their
presentation on or before June 16, 2017. Time allotted for each
presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants requesting to
speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated during the
scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to
determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing session.
The contact person will notify interested persons regarding their
request to speak by June 19, 2017.
    Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised
that the Agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical
outlets.
    FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee
meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with
disabilities. If you require special accommodations

due to a disability, please contact Jennifer Shepherd at least 7 days
in advance of the meeting.
    FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee
meetings. Please visit our Web site at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures
on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.
    Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

    Dated: June 1, 2017.
Anna K. Abram,
Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2017-11817 Filed 6-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: October 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 198)]
[Notices]
[Page 60506]
[DOCID:fr13oc06-68]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PR04-6-000]

Cranberry Pipeline Corp.; Notice of Technical Conference

October 6, 2006.
    Take notice that the Commission will convene a technical conference
on Wednesday, November 8, 2006, at 10 a.m., in a room to be designated
at the offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    On November 14, 2005, Cranberry Pipeline Corp. (Cranberry) filed a
revised statement of operating conditions in order to comply with the
Commission's September 13, 2005 order in this proceeding. Cranberry
Pipeline Corp., 112 FERC ] 61,268 (2005). In its filing, Cranberry
stated that, if the Consumer Advocate Division of the State of West
Virginia Public Service Commission (CAD) renewed its protests of the
Statement of Operating Conditions, Cranberry requested that a technical
conference be convened. In its December 18, 2005 protest of the
compliance filing, CAD stated it had no objection to Cranberry's
request for a technical conference.
    On January 4, 2006, Cranberry answered the protests of CAD and the
Public Service Commission of West Virginia, and reiterated that, in
light of the two protests, it requested a technical conference to
permit it to support its proposed terms and conditions for storage
service, and to permit the parties to explain their respective
positions.
    FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free (866) 208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a FAX to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.
    All interested parties and staff are permitted to attend. For
further information please contact Eric Winterbauer at<PHONE_NUMBER>
or e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-16963 Filed 10-12-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 20, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 223)]
[Notices]
[Page 60254]
[DOCID:fr20no09-59]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER10-226-000]

Clean Currents, L.L.C.; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

November 13, 2009.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Clean Currents, L.L.C.'s application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and Sec.
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is December 3, 2009.
    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 Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding 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. E9-27918 Filed 11-19-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 49 (Friday, March 13, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13241-13244]
[FR Doc No: 2015-05744]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2015-0076]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Tuscaloosa Regional Air Show; Black Warrior River;
Tuscaloosa, AL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone
encompassing the waters of the Black Warrior River in Tuscaloosa, AL.
This action is necessary for the safeguard of participants and
spectators, including all crews, vessels, and persons on

navigable waters during the Tuscaloosa Regional Air Show. Entry into or
transiting in this zone is prohibited to all vessels, mariners, and
persons unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port
Mobile or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective on March 26-29, 2015, from 11:30 a.m.
until 5 p.m. each day.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
USCG-2015-0076. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH''. Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also
visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or email LT Stanley A. Tarrant, Sector Mobile,
Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 251-441-
5940, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Cheryl F. Collins,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

APA Administrative Procedures Act
BNM Broadcast Notice to Mariners
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FR Federal Register
LNM Local Notice to Mariners
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Regulatory History and Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) with respect to this rule because the Coast Guard did not
receive the necessary information from The City of Tuscaloosa of their
intentions to conduct an air show on March 26-29, 2015 over a portion
of the Black Warrior River, in Tuscaloosa, AL until January 29, 2015.
The City of Tuscaloosa informed Coast Guard Sector Mobile that a
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) rule prohibits all vessel traffic
and persons within the exclusion area where the air craft will be
flying overhead and therefore, requested a safety zone to keep all
vessels out of the exclusion area that crosses over the Black Warrior
River. As a result, the Coast Guard did not have sufficient time to
publish an NPRM and to receive public comments prior to the event. Any
delay in the effective date of this rule would be contrary to public
interest because immediate action is needed to protect persons and
vessels from the safety hazards associated with the planned event.
Additionally, delaying the safety zone for the NPRM process would
unnecessarily interfere with the Tuscaloosa Regional Air Show flight
schedule, compliance with federal regulations enforced by the FAA, and
potential contractual obligations.
    For the same reasons, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard
finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than
30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis and authorities for this rule are found in 33
U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, 1 which
collectively authorize the Coast Guard to propose, establish, and
define regulatory safety zones.
    The City of Tuscaloosa plans to conduct an air show for the public,
over a portion of the Black Warrior River in Tuscaloosa, AL on March,
26-29, 2015 between the hours of 11:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. each day.
    The hazards associated with the air show poses safety hazards to
both vessels and mariners while airplanes fly over the Black Warrior
River, in Tuscaloosa, AL. The (Captain of the Port) COTP Mobile is
establishing a temporary safety zone encompassing the waters of the
Black Warrior River between Mile Marker (MM) 335.8 to MM 336.3, in
Tuscaloosa, AL, to protect persons and vessels, during the air show.
    The COTP anticipates minimal impact on vessel traffic due to this
regulation. However, this safety zone is deemed necessary for the
protection of life and property within the COTP Mobile zone.

C. Discussion of the Final Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone
encompassing the waters of the Black Warrior River between MM 335.8 to
MM 336.3, in Tuscaloosa, AL. This temporary rule will protect the
safety of life and property in this area. Entry into or transiting in
this zone is prohibited to all vessels, mariners, and persons unless
specifically authorized by the COTP Mobile or a designated
representative. The COTP may be contacted by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The COTP Mobile or a designated representative will inform the
public through broadcast notice to mariners (BNM) of changes in the
effective period for the safety zone. This rule will be enforced from
March 26-29, 2015 at 11:30 a.m. until 5 p.m. each day.
    BNMs will be used to inform waterway users of the exact enforcement
times and any changes in this safety zone or its enforcement prior to
the Tuscaloosa Regional Air Show.

D. Regulatory Analyses

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

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    The safety zone listed in this rule will restrict vessel traffic
from entering or transiting in a small portion of the Black Warrior
River, in Tuscaloosa, AL. The effect of this regulation will not be
significant for several reasons: (1) This rule will only affect vessel
traffic for a short duration; (2) vessels may request permission from
the COTP to transit through the safety zone; and (3) impacts on routine
navigation are expected to be minimal. Notifications to the marine
community will be made through BNMs. These notifications will allow the
public to plan operations around the affected area.

2. 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 rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. This rule will affect the following entities, some of
which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels
intending to transit in the affected portions of the Black Warrior
River during the Tuscaloosa Regional Air Show. This safety zone will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities for the following reasons. The zone is limited in size, is of
short duration and vessel traffic may request permission from the COTP
Mobile or a designated representative to enter or transit through the
zone.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this 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
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact 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.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

8. Taking of Private Property

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

9. Civil Justice Reform

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

10. Protection of Children

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

11. Indian Tribal Governments

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

12. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
that this action is one of a category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves a safety zone on a waterway during the
Tuscaloosa Regional Air Show and is not expected to result in any
significant adverse environmental impact as described in NEPA. This
rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph
(34)(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental
analysis checklist supporting this determination and a categorical
exclusion determination will be made available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
rule.

List of Subjects 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 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 temporary Sec.  165.T08-0076 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0076  Safety Zone; Tuscaloosa Regional Air Show; Black
Warrior River; Tuscaloosa, AL.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: all waters
encompassing the waters of the Black Warrior River between MM 335.8 to
MM 336.3, in Tuscaloosa, AL.
    (b) Effective dates and enforcement period. This rule is effective
on March 26-29, 2015, from 11:30 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. each day.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port Mobile or a designated
representative.
    (2) Persons or vessels desiring to enter into or passage through
the zone must request permission from the Captain of the Port Mobile or
a designated representative. They may be contacted on VHF-FM channels
16 or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) If permission is granted, all persons and vessels shall comply
with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Mobile or designated
representative.
    (d) Informational broadcasts. The Captain of the Port Mobile or a
designated representative will inform the public through broadcast
notices to mariners of the enforcement period for the safety zone as
well as any changes in the safety zone or the planned schedule.

    Dated: February 2, 2015.
S. Walker,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Mobile.
[FR Doc. 2015-05744 Filed 3-12-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: March 31, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 62)]
[Notices]
[Page 17854-17855]
[DOCID:fr31mr11-53]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1891-000.
    Applicants: Dauphin Island Gathering Partners.
    Description: Dauphin Island Gathering Partners submits tariff
filing per 154.204: Negotiated Rates 2011-03-24 to be effective 3/25/
2011.
    Filed Date: 03/24/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110324-5047.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, April 05, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1892-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gulf Transmission Company.
    Description: Columbia Gulf Transmission Company's Request for
Limited Waiver of Gas Quality Tariff Provision.
    Filed Date: 03/24/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110324-5080.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, April 05, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1893-000.
    Applicants: Southeast Supply Header, LLC.
    Description: Southeast Supply Header, LLC submits tariff filing per
154.204: Modifications to Rate Schedule FTS, PPAs and Waiver to be
effective 4/24/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/24/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110324-5129.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, April 05, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1894-000.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP submits tariff filing
per 154.204: EnCana 38560 Negotiated Rate Agreement to be effective 4/
1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/25/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110325-5028.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 06, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1895-000.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP submits tariff filing
per 154.204: Mobile Gas Negotiated Rate Agreement to be effective 4/1/
2011.
    Filed Date: 03/25/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110325-5029.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 06, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1896-000.
    Applicants: Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC.
    Description: Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC submits tariff
filing per 154.204: Curtailment Priority to be effective 4/25/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/25/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110325-5033.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 06, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1897-000.
    Applicants: Northern Natural Gas Company.
    Description: Northern Natural Gas Company submits tariff filing per
154.204: 20110325 MidAmerican Non-Conforming to be effective 4/25/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/25/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110325-5036.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 06, 2011.

    Docket Numbers: RP11-1898-000.
    Applicants: Centra Pipelines Minnesota Inc.
    Description: Centra Pipelines Minnesota Inc. submits tariff filing
per 154.203: Compliance Filing to Modify Section 4 of FERC Gas Tariff
to be effective 2/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 03/25/2011.
    Accession Number: 20110325-5052.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 06, 2011.

    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>.

    Dated: March 25, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-7561 Filed 3-30-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 172 (Thursday, September 9, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50454-50456]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19426]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2021-0710]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Anacostia River, Washington, DC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
certain waters of the Anacostia River. The safety zone is needed to
protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment on these
navigable waters near Washington, DC, on September 4, 2021, and
September 17, 2021, from potential hazards during fireworks displays
occuring after Washington Nationals baseball games. Entry of vessels or
persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by
the Captain of the Port, Maryland-National Capital Region or a
designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from September 9,
2021 until 11 p.m. on September 17, 2021. For the purposes of
enforcement, actual notice will be used from 8 p.m. on September 4,
2021, until September 9, 2021.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2021-0710 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Next, in the
Document Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email MST3 Melissa Kelly, Sector Maryland-National Capital
Region Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 410-
576-2596, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

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

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is impracticable and contrary to
the public interest to do so. We must establish this safety zone by
September 4, 2021, to protect the public from hazards associated with
the fireworks events. Hazards include explosive materials, dangerous
projectiles, and falling debris. The fireworks fall out zone extends
across the navigable channel.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest
because immediate action is needed to respond to the potential safety
hazards associated with the fireworks displays.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port, Maryland-
National Capital Region (COTP) has determined that potential hazards
associated with the fireworks to be used in the September 4, 2021, and
September 17, 2021, displays will be a safety concern for anyone near
the fireworks barges. This rule is needed to protect personnel,
vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters within the
safety zone before, during, and after the scheduled event.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone from 8 p.m. on
September 4, 2021, through 11 p.m. on September 17, 2021. The safety
zone will be enforced from 8 p.m. to 11 p.m. on September 4, 2021, and
from 8 p.m. to 11 p.m. on September 17, 2021. The safety zone

covers all navigable waters of the Anacostia River within 600 feet of
the fireworks barge in approximate position latitude 38[deg]52'14.29''
N, longitude 077[deg]00'12.00'' W, located near Nationals Park in
Washington, DC. The size of the zone and duration of the rule are
intended to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in
these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled
fireworks displays. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the
safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated
representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone, which will impact a small
designated area of the Anacostia River for 2 hours during evening hours
when vessel traffic is normally low. Moreover, the Coast Guard will
issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about
the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a
safety zone that will be enforced for 6 hours that will prohibit entry
within a portion of the Anacostia River. It is categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of
DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket.
For instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of
this preamble.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T05-0710 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-0710  Safety Zone; Anacostia River, Washington, DC

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters of the Anacostia River within 600 feet of the fireworks barge in
approximate position latitude 38[deg]52'14.29'' N, longitude
077[deg]00'12.00'' W, located near Nationals Park, in Washington, DC.
These coordinates are based on datum NAD 83.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section--
    Captain of the Port (COTP) means the Commander, U.S. Coast Guard
Sector Maryland-National Capital Region.
    Designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the
Port Maryland-National Capital Region to assist in enforcing the safety
zone described in paragraph (a) of this section.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in
subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative.
    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's
representative by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or on Marine Band Radio
VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz). The Coast Guard vessels enforcing this
section can be contacted on Marine Band Radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8
MHz). Those in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or
directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative.
    (d) Enforcement officials. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in
the patrol and enforcement of the safety zone by Federal, State, and
local agencies.
    (e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 8 p.m.
to 11 p.m. on September 4, 2021, and from 8 p.m. to 11 p.m. on
September 17, 2021.

    Dated: September 2, 2021.
David E. O'Connell,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Maryland-National
Capital Region.
[FR Doc. 2021-19426 Filed 9-8-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 44 (Wednesday, March 6, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14474-14475]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05217]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2012-1335; Airspace Docket No. 12-ASO-19]

Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Captiva, FL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish Class E Airspace at Captiva,
FL, to accommodate a new Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning
System (GPS) special Standard Instrument Approach Procedure (SIAP)
serving Upper Captiva Island Heliport. This action would enhance the
safety and airspace management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR)
operations within the National Airspace System.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 22, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001; Telephone: 1-
800-647-5527; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify the Docket Number
FAA-2012-1335; Airspace Docket No. 12-ASO-19, at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit and review received comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire.
Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and
suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned
regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited
on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and
energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2012-1335; Airspace Docket No. 12-ASO-19) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on
this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket
No. FAA-2012-1335; Airspace Docket No. 12-ASO-19.'' The postcard

will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded from and
comments submitted through http://www.regulations.gov. Recently
published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's
Web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 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 Eastern Service Center, Federal
Aviation Administration, Room 350, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park,
Georgia 30337.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
to request a copy of Advisory circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to establish Class E airspace at Captiva,
FL providing the controlled airspace required to support the new Copter
RNAV (GPS) special standard instrument approach procedures for Upper
Captiva Island Heliport. Controlled airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface is required for IFR operations within a 6-mile
radius of the point in space coordinates of the heliport.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005 of
FAA order 7400.9W, dated August 8, 2012, and effective September 15,
2012, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This proposed rulemaking is promulgated under the authority
described in Subtitle VII, Part, A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under
that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign
the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This proposed regulation is within the scope
of that authority as it would establish Class E airspace at Upper
Captiva Island Heliport, Captiva, FL.
    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND CLASS 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 Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9W, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 8, 2012, effective September 15, 2012, is amended
as follows:

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

* * * * *

ASO FL E5 Captiva, FL [New]

Upper Captiva Island Heliport, FL
    (Lat. 26[deg]36'11'' N., long. 82[deg]13'0'' W.)
Point in Space Coordinates
    (Lat. 26[deg]36'11'' N., long. 82[deg]13'0'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6-mile radius of the Point in Space Coordinates (lat.
26[deg]36'11'' N., long. 82[deg]13'0'' W.) serving Upper Captiva
Island Heliport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on February 15, 2013.
Barry A. Knight,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
[FR Doc. 2013-05217 Filed 3-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P