[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 223 (Wednesday, November 19, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68810-68812]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27290]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 10

[Docket No. FDA-2012-D-1002]

Questions and Answers Regarding Food Facility Registration (Sixth
Edition); Guidance for Industry; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing the
availability of a guidance for industry entitled ``Questions and
Answers Regarding Food Facility Registration (Sixth Edition).'' The
guidance includes one additional question and answer regarding FDA's
policy regarding food facility registration for farms that also pack or
hold raw agricultural commodities grown on a farm under different
ownership in light of other ongoing FDA Food Safety Modernization Act
(FSMA) rulemakings.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on FDA guidances at
any time.

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments on the guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. Submit written requests for single
copies of the guidance to the Office of Compliance, Division of Field
Programs and Guidance, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition
(HFS-615), Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy.,
College Park, MD 20740. Send two self-addressed adhesive labels to
assist that office in processing your request. See the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for electronic access to the guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Barringer, Center for Food Safety
and Applied Nutrition (HFS-615), Food and Drug Administration, 5100
Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    We are announcing the availability of a guidance for industry
entitled ``Questions and Answers Regarding Food Facility Registration
(Sixth Edition) available on FDA's Web site at http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/ucm331959.htm.'' We are issuing this guidance consistent with our good
guidance practices (GGP) regulation (Sec.  10.115 (21 CFR 10.115)). In
accordance with Sec.  10.115(g)(2), we are implementing this guidance
without prior public comment because we have determined that prior
public participation is not feasible or appropriate. The guidance
represents a less burdensome policy consistent with the public health.
Although this guidance document is immediately in effect, FDA will
accept comments at any time.
    Section 102 of FSMA (Pub. L. 111-353), signed into law on January
4, 2011, amends section 415 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(21 U.S.C. 350d) (the FD&C Act) regarding requirements for food
facility registration. Further, section 102(a)(3) of FSMA amends
section 415 of the FD&C Act to provide that food facilities required to
register with FDA must renew their registrations with FDA every 2
years, between October 1 and December 31 of each even-numbered year, by
submitting registrations renewals to FDA.
    In addition to amending section 415 of the FD&C Act, FSMA also
amended the FD&C Act such that section 415 functions in connection with
other food safety provisions. For instance, FSMA added section 418 of
the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 350g), which establishes certain preventive
control requirements for food facilities that are required to register
under section 415 of the FD&C Act. In general, section 418(a) of the
FD&C Act requires the owner, operator, or agent in charge of a
``facility'' to evaluate the hazards that could affect food
manufactured, processed, packed, or held by such facility, identify and
implement preventive controls, monitor the performance of those
controls, and maintain records of the monitoring. The term ``facility''
is defined in section 418(o)(2) of the FD&C Act as ``a domestic
facility or a foreign facility that is required to register under
section 415.''
    As part of the rulemaking to implement section 418 of the FD&C Act,
on September 29, 2014 (79 FR 58524), we published a supplemental notice
of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register, ``Current Good
Manufacturing Practice and Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive
Controls for Human Food'' (preventive controls for human food). In that
supplemental proposed rule, we proposed, inter alia, certain changes to
the definition of the term ``farm'' in 21 CFR 1.227 (Sec.  1.227). If
implemented, these changes would impact food facility registration
because the food facility registration requirements of section 415 of
the FD&C Act do not apply to an establishment that meets the definition
of ``farm.'' The current definition of a ``farm'' under Sec.  1.227
describes a farm in relevant part as a facility devoted to the growing
and harvesting of crops, the raising of animals (including seafood), or
both. Although that definition of ``farm'' then provides that farms
also pack or hold food, it limits facilities that fall within the
definition of ``farm'' to those that pack or hold food grown, raised,
or consumed on that farm or another farm under the same ownership.
Thus, under the current definition, an establishment that is devoted to
the growing and harvesting of crops, but also packs and holds food not
grown or raised on that farm or on another farm under the same
ownership, would fall outside the definition of ``farm'' and be
required to register as a food facility. In the supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking for preventive controls for human food, FDA
proposed to revise the ``farm'' definition in relevant part so that it
would no longer limit establishments that fall within the ``farm''
definition to those that pack or hold food grown, raised, or consumed
on that farm or another farm under the same ownership. Under the
revised ``farm'' definition, an establishment devoted to the growing of
crops, the raising of animals, or both, would remain within the
``farm'' definition (and, thus, not be subject to the FD&C Act section
415 registration regulations) even if it packs and holds raw
agricultural commodities grown on another farm.
    In light of this ongoing rulemaking, we are announcing our policy
regarding food facility registration for farms that also pack or hold
raw agricultural commodities grown on a farm under different ownership
and that would no longer be required to register if the proposed
amendments to the ``farm'' definition are finalized as proposed. Under
this policy, as discussed in the guidance, FDA does not intend to
prioritize enforcing the registration requirement for such
establishments. This policy is a less burdensome policy consistent with
the public health. FDA intends to make further updates to this guidance
once certain FSMA rulemakings are final in order to make sure questions
and answers, key terms, and definitions are consistent and accurate
with regard to the registration of food facility requirements.
    The guidance represents our current thinking on this topic. It does
not create or confer any rights for or on any person and does not
operate to bind FDA or the public. An alternative approach may be used
if such approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes
and regulations.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This guidance refers to previously approved collections of
information found in FDA regulations and section 415 of the FD&C Act.
These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in Sec. Sec.
1.230 through 1.235 and section 415 of the FD&C Act have been approved
under OMB control number 0910-0502.

III. Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this guidance to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the

heading of this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division
of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

IV. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the document at
either http://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm
or http://www.regulations.gov. Always access an FDA guidance document
by using FDA's Web site listed in the previous sentence to find the
most current version of the guidance.

    Dated: November 13, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-27290 Filed 11-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 12 (Thursday, January 17, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3960-3964]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00772]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68621; File No. SR-NSCC-2012-810]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Securities Clearing
Corporation; Notice of Filing of Advance Notice To Eliminate the Offset
of Its Obligations With Institutional Delivery Transactions That Settle
at The Depository Trust Company for the Purpose of Calculating Its
Clearing Fund Under Procedure XV of Its Rules & Procedures

January 10, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of the Payment, Clearing, and
Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 (``Clearing Supervision Act'') \1\
and Rule 19b-4(n)(1)(i) \2\ thereunder, notice is hereby given that on
December 18, 2012, the National Securities Clearing Corporation
(``NSCC'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'')

the advance notice described in Items I, II and III below, which Items
have been prepared primarily by NSCC. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the advance notice from interested
persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(n)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Advance
Notice

    NSCC proposes to modify its Rules & Procedures (``Rules'') to
eliminate the offset of NSCC obligations with institutional delivery
(``ID'') transactions that settle at the Depository Trust Company
(``DTC'') for the purpose of calculating the NSCC clearing fund
(``Clearing Fund'') under Procedure XV of the Rules.

II. Clearing Agency's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis
for, the Advance Notice

    In its filing with the Commission, NSCC included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the advance notice and
discussed any comments it received on the advance notice. The text of
these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV
below. NSCC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A) and (B)
below, of the most significant aspects of these statements.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Commission has modified the text of the summaries
prepared by NSCC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(A) Advance Notices Filed Pursuant to Section 806(e) of the Payment,
Clearing and Settlement Supervision Act

Description of Change
Background
    A primary objective of NSCC's Clearing Fund is to have on deposit
from each applicable clearing member (``Member'') assets sufficient to
satisfy losses that may otherwise be incurred by NSCC as the result of
the default of the Member and the resultant close out of that Member's
unsettled positions under NSCC's trade guaranty. Each Member's Clearing
Fund required deposit is calculated daily pursuant to a formula set
forth in Procedure XV of the Rules designed to provide sufficient funds
to cover this risk of loss. The Clearing Fund formula accounts for a
variety of risk factors through the application of a number of
components, each described in Procedure XV.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In addition to those described in this filing, Clearing Fund
components also include (i) A mark-to-market component which, with
certain exclusions, takes into account any difference between the
contract price and market price for net positions of each security
in a Member's portfolio through settlement; (ii) a ``special
charge'' in view of price fluctuations in or volatility or lack of
liquidity of any security; (iii) an additional charge relating to a
Member's outstanding fail positions; (iv) a ``specified activity
charge'' for transactions scheduled to settle on a shortened
settlement cycle (i.e., less than T+3 or T+3 for ``as-of''
transactions); (v) an additional charge that NSCC may require of
Members on surveillance status; and (vi) an ``Excess Capital
Premium'' that takes into account the degree to which a Member's
collateral requirement compares to the Member's excess net capital
by applying a charge if a Member's Required Deposit, minus any
amount applied from the charges described in (ii) and (iii) above,
is above its required capital.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Value-at-Risk component, or ``VaR,'' is a core component of
this formula and is designed to calculate the amount of money that may
be lost on a portfolio over a given period of time assumed necessary to
liquidate the portfolio, within a given level of confidence.\5\ The
Market Maker Domination component, or ``MMDOM,'' is charged to Market
Makers,\6\ or firms that clear for them. In calculating the MMDOM, if
the sum of the absolute values of net unsettled positions in a security
for which the firm in question makes a market is greater than that
firm's excess net capital, NSCC may then charge the firm an amount
equal to such excess or the sum of each of the absolute values of the
affected net unsettled positions, or a combination of both. MMDOM
operates to identify concentration within a given CUSIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ NSCC's equity VaR model assumes a 99% confidence interval,
uses a 150-day historical look-back period, and assumes a three-day
liquidation period. In effect, NSCC assumes the market conditions
observed over the past 150 days are predictive of the market
conditions expected over the course of the next three business days.
Pursuant to Procedure XV, NSCC may exclude from the VaR charge ``Net
Unsettled Positions in classes of securities whose volatility is (x)
less amendable to statistical analysis, such as OTC Bulletin Board
or Pink Sheet issues or issues trading below a designated dollar
threshold, or (y) amendable to generally accepted statistical
analysis in a complex manner, such as municipal or corporate
bonds.'' The charge for such positions is determined by multiplying
the absolute value of the positions by a pre-determined percentage.
    \6\ As used in Procedure XV, the term Market Maker means a firm
that is registered by FINRA as a Market Maker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Procedure XV of the Rules, NSCC may calculate the VaR
and MMDOM components of a Member's Clearing Fund requirement after
taking into account any offsetting pending (i.e., non-fail) ID
transactions that have been confirmed and/or affirmed through an
institutional delivery system acceptable to NSCC (typically Omgeo LLC
(``Omgeo''), a joint venture of the Depository Trust and Clearing
Corporation and Thomson Reuters) (``ID Offset'').\7\ NSCC is proposing
to eliminate the ID Offset from its Clearing Fund calculations in order
to eliminate the market risk that, in the event NSCC ceases to act for
a Member with pending ID transactions, it may be unable to complete
those pending ID transactions in the time frame contemplated by its
current Clearing Fund calculations and, as a result, may have
insufficient margin in its Clearing Fund.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The changes proposed by this advance notice will not impact
NSCC's ID Net Service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

ID Transactions
    The parties involved in an institutional trade include the
institutional investor (such as mutual funds, insurance companies,
hedge funds, bank trust departments, and pension funds), the investment
manager (who enters trade orders on behalf of institutional investors),
the buying broker and the selling broker, and custodian banks.\8\
Trades between the buying broker and the selling broker are typically
settled through NSCC's Continuous Net Settlement system (``CNS'').\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Prime broker ID transactions settling at NSCC are not
included in the ID Offset, as they are included in the Member's NSCC
activity once such transactions are affirmed, and, therefore, are
not addressed in this filing. The ID transactions included in the ID
Offset and described in this advance notice are activity that is
held in custody at a bank.
    \9\ CNS is NSCC's core netting and allotting system, where all
eligible compared and recorded transactions for a particular
settlement date are netted by issue into one net long (buy) or net
short (sell) position, and NSCC becomes the contra-party for
settlement purposes, assuming the obligation of its Members that are
receiving securities to receive and pay for those securities, and
the obligation of Members that are delivering securities to make the
delivery.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Before ID trades are sent to DTC, where they settle delivery versus
payment, the trade allocation details are matched between the executing
broker and the institutional investor. After an executing broker has
provided a final notice of execution associated with the client's
order, most institutional clients will provide trade allocation details
to the executing broker using a service provided by Omgeo. When the
executing broker accepts and processes the trade allocations, an
electronic confirmation is provided through Omgeo's TradeSuite service
to the institutional investor or its agent (typically the institutional
client's custodian bank) for affirmation. Omgeo links with the various
parties to institutional trades to provide real-time central matching
capabilities, electronically comparing trade details and notifying
parties of any exceptions. After the trade allocation details are
affirmed, the trade is considered matched and institutional delivery
details are sent to DTC for settlement.
    Completion of the money and securities settlement of institutional
trades occurs at DTC. Because

investment managers are not participants of and do not have direct
accounts at DTC, their securities are held in custodial accounts with
banks who are participants at DTC. Therefore, when the institutional
delivery details for confirmed and affirmed ID trades are sent to DTC
from Omgeo, the delivering investment manager's custodian bank or
broker, as the case may be, must authorize the delivery, generating a
deliver order that will settle in accordance with DTC's rules.
    NSCC Risk Management receives a daily feed from Omgeo, including
both ID trades that have only been confirmed as well as those that have
also been affirmed. For purposes of the ID Offset, NSCC includes ID
trades that are confirmed and/or affirmed on trade date (T) and those
ID trades which have been affirmed on T+1 and remain affirmed through
settlement date (SD).
ID Offset
    Procedure XV currently allows for a Member's net unsettled NSCC
position in a particular CUSIP to be compared to any pending ID
transactions settling at DTC for potential offset for purposes of
calculating the VaR and the MMDOM components of a Member's Clearing
Fund requirement, defined as the ID Offset. The ID Offset is based on
the assumption that, in the event of a Member insolvency, NSCC will be
able to close out any trades for which there is a corresponding ID
transaction settling at DTC by completing that ID transaction.
Therefore, the VaR and the MMDOM components are calculated after taking
into account any offsetting pending (i.e., non-fail) ID transactions
that have been confirmed and/or affirmed, reducing the Clearing Fund
requirement for those Members with ID transactions. ID transactions are
included in the ID Offset only if they are on the opposite side of the
market from the Member's net NSCC position (i.e., only if they reduce
that net position).
Potential Inability To Complete ID Transactions
    Generally, when NSCC ceases to act for a Member, it is obligated,
for those transactions to which the trade guaranty has attached, to pay
for deliveries made by non-defaulting Members that are due, through
CNS, to the failed Member on the day of insolvency and the days
following. As described above, the current calculation of the VaR and
MMDOM components of NSCC's Clearing Fund are based on the assumption
that, in the event of a Member default, NSCC will be able to complete
the pending ID transactions that were used to offset that Member's
unsettled NSCC position. If NSCC is unable to complete the ID
transactions as contemplated by this calculation, then NSCC may need to
liquidate a portfolio that could be substantially different than the
portfolio that NSCC collected Clearing Fund for, leaving NSCC
potentially under collateralized and exposed to market risk, because
when it calculated the Clearing Fund requirement, NSCC assumed, under
its current rules, a portfolio that included Member positions to be
offset by ID transactions.
    There are a number of reasons why NSCC may not be able to complete
an insolvent Member's open ID transactions. First, NSCC does not
guarantee ID transactions and completion of these transactions by the
counterparty of the ID transaction, which is not a Member of NSCC, is
voluntary. Further, the institutional customer is not a Member of NSCC,
is not bound by NSCC's Rules, and is not party to any legally binding
contract with NSCC that requires the institutional customer or its
custodian to complete the transaction. Finally, based on news that a
Member may be in distress or insolvent, the institutional customer or
its investment advisor may feel compelled to take immediate market
action with respect to the institutional buy or sell transaction, in
order to reduce its market risk; this effectively eliminates the option
for NSCC to complete these transactions, either entirely or on the
timetable assumed by the Clearing Fund calculation.
    While NSCC's Risk Management systems net ID transactions by CUSIP
across all settlement days for the purposes of the ID Offset, ID
transactions settle trade by trade between the executing broker and the
custodian. As a result, the netted ID position used to offset the NSCC
position could potentially be comprised of thousands of individual
trades with hundreds of different counterparties. It would be time
consuming for NSCC to contact each counterparty individually to get
their agreement to complete ID transactions, which would delay the
determination of the portfolio requiring liquidation in the event of a
cease to act, and thus hold up the prompt close out of the defaulter's
open positions, exposing NSCC to additional market risk not covered by
the margin collected.
Implementation Time Frame
    Following Commission approval, in order to mitigate the impact of
this advance notice, NSCC proposes to implement the changes set forth
in this filing on over an 18-month period. On a date no earlier than 10
days following notice to Members by Important Notice (``Initial
Implementation Date''), NSCC proposes to eliminate the ID Offset from
ID transactions that have only been confirmed, but have not yet been
affirmed. At this time, NSCC will continue to apply the ID Offset to ID
transactions that have been affirmed. During the 12-month period
following the Initial Implementation Date, NSCC will discuss with
Members, whose business will be affected by the elimination of the ID
Offset, mechanisms to mitigate this impact.
    Beginning on a date approximately 12 months from the Initial
Implementation Date, and no earlier than 10 days following notice to
Members by Important Notice, NSCC will eliminate from the ID Offset all
affirmed ID transactions that have reached settlement date at the time
the Clearing Fund calculations are run. Three months later, or
approximately 15 months following the Initial Implementation Date, and
on a date no earlier than 10 days following notice to Members by
Important Notice, NSCC will eliminate from the ID Offset all affirmed
ID transactions that have reached either settlement date or the day
prior to settlement date. Finally, on a date approximately 18 months
following the Initial Implementation Date, and no earlier than 10 days
following notice to Members by Important Notice, NSCC will eliminate
the ID Offset entirely for all ID transactions. Members will be advised
of each proposed implementation date through issuance of NSCC Important
Notices, which are publically available at www.dtcc.com.
    The table below illustrates this proposed implementation schedule:

     Proposed Implementation Schedule for Elimination of ID Offsets
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Action                      Scheduled implementation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eliminate from ID Offset those ID        Following approval of rule
 transactions that have only been         filing, and on a date no
 confirmed, but have not yet been         earlier than 10 days following
 affirmed.                                notice to Members by Important
                                          Notice (``Initial
                                          Implementation Date'').
Eliminate from ID Offset all affirmed    12 months following the Initial
 ID transactions that have reached        Implementation Date, and on a
 Settlement Date (``SD'').                date no earlier than 10 days
                                          following notice to Members by
                                          Important Notice.
Eliminate from ID Offset all affirmed    15 months following the Initial
 ID transactions that have reached SD     Implementation Date, and on a
 and the day prior to SD (SD-1).          date no earlier than 10 days
                                          following notice to Members by
                                          Important Notice.
Eliminate from ID Offset all ID          18 months following the Initial
 transactions.                            Implementation Date, and on a
                                          date no earlier than 10 days
                                          following notice to Members by
                                          Important Notice.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Rule Changes
    NSCC proposes to amend Procedure XV to eliminate the ID Offset from
calculation of the VaR and MMDOM components of a Member's Clearing Fund
requirement as currently provided for in, with respect to CNS
transactions, Section I(A)(1)(a)(i) and Section I(A)(1)(d), and, with
respect to Balance Order transactions, Section I(A)(2)(a)(i) and
Section I(A)(2)(c).
Anticipated Effect on and Management of Risk
    As a central counterparty, NSCC occupies an important role in the
securities settlement system by interposing itself between
counterparties to financial transactions and thereby reducing the risk
faced by participants and contributing to global financial stability.
In this role, however, NSCC is necessarily subject to certain risks in
the event of the default or failure of a Member.
    NSCC reviews its risk management processes against federal
securities laws and rulemaking promulgated by the Commission, and
applicable regulatory and industry guidelines, including but not
limited to the Principles for Financial Market Infrastructures
(``PFMI'') of the Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems and the
Technical Committee of the International Organization of Securities
Commissions (``CPSS-IOSCO'').\10\ In accordance with Commission
rules,\11\ specifically Rule 17Ad-22(b)(1) addressing measurement and
management of credit exposures, Rule 17Ad-22(b)(2) addressing margin
requirements, and Rule 17Ad-22(d)(11) addressing default procedures,
and also in accordance with the PFMIs, this advance notice should
enhance NSCC's ability to more effectively manage its credit exposures
to participants, help ensure that it is able to cover its credit
exposures to its participants for all products through an effective,
risk-based margin system, limit NSCC's exposures and losses, and
enhance protections against market risk that may arise when NSCC ceases
to act for a Member with open ID transaction activity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ CPSS-IOSCO PFMI (April 2012), available at http://www.bis.org/publ/cpss101a.pdf.
    \11\ Securities and Exchange Commission Release No. 34-68080
(October 22, 2012), 77 FR 66219 (November 2, 1012; File No. S7-08-11
(available at http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/2012/34-68080.pdf),
effective on January 2, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Clearing Agency's Statement on Comments on the Advance Notice
Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    While written comments relating to the advance notice have not yet
been solicited, NSCC has received a letter on behalf of certain Members
seeking further review of the impact of the proposed changes contained
in the advance notice and consideration of alternatives. NSCC notified
the Commission of the contents of the letter and promptly delivered a
response to those Members addressing their concerns. A Member working
group has been established to discuss mechanisms for impacted Members
to mitigate the potential impact of the rule changes described in this
filing.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Advance Notice and Timing for
Commission Action

    The clearing agency may implement the proposed change pursuant to
Section 806(e)(1)(G) of the Clearing Supervision Act \12\ if it has not
received an objection to the proposed change within 60 days of the
later of (i) the date that the Commission received the advance notice
or (ii) the date the Commission receives any further information it
requested for consideration of the notice. The clearing agency shall
not implement the proposed change if the Commission has any objection
to the proposed change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1)(G).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission may extend the period for review by an additional 60
days if the proposed change raises novel or complex issues, subject to
the Commission providing the clearing agency with prompt written notice
of the extension. A proposed change may be implemented in less than 60
days from the date of receipt of the advance notice, or the date the
Commission receives any further information it requested, if the
Commission notifies the clearing agency in writing that it does not
object to the proposed change and authorizes the clearing agency to
implement the proposed change on an earlier date, subject to any
conditions imposed by the Commission. The clearing agency shall post
notice on its Web site of proposed changes that are implemented.
    The proposal shall not take effect until all regulatory actions
required with respect to the proposal are completed.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ NSCC also filed the proposals contained in this advance
notice as a proposed rule change under Section 19(b)(1) of the Act
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder. 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1); 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, within 45 days of the date
of publication of the proposed rule change in the Federal Register
or within such longer period up to 90 days if the Commission
designates or the self-regulatory organization consents the
Commission will either: (i) By order approve or disapprove the
proposed rule change or (ii) institute proceedings to determine
whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. 17 U.S.C.
78s(b)(2)(A). See Release No. 34-68549 (December 28, 2012), 78 FR
792 (January 4, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NSCC-2012-810 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSCC-2012-810. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the advance notice that are filed
with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the
advance notice between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Washington,
DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of such filings also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of NSCC and on NSCC's Web site at
http://dtcc.com/downloads/legal/rule_filings/2012/nscc/SR-NSCC-2012-10.pdf. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
NSCC-2012-810 and should be submitted on or before February 7, 2013.

    By the Commission.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-00772 Filed 1-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 24, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30047-30048]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12734]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0005; Airspace Docket No. 10-ASO-42]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Lakeland, FL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

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

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 8, 2011. The
Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by
reference action under title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51,
subject to the annual revision of FAA, Order 7400.9 and publication of
conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001;
Telephone: 1-800-647-5527; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify the
Docket Number FAA-2011-0005; Airspace Docket No. 10-ASO-42, 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-2011-0005; Airspace Docket No. 10-ASO-42) 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.
    Annotators 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-2011-0005; Airspace Docket No. 10-ASO-42.'' The postcard will
be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded from and
comments submitted through http://www.regulations.gov. Recently
published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's
web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays. An
informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at
the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation
Administration, room 210, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia
30337.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
to request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to amend Class E airspace at Lakeland, FL
to provide controlled airspace required to support the new standard
instrument approach procedures for Lakeland Linder Regional Airport.
The existing Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface would be modified for the safety and management of IFR
operations.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.9U, dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15,
2010, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator.

Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of
the agency's authority. This proposed rulemaking is promulgated under
the authority described in subtitle VII, part A, subpart I, section
40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing
regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the
safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This proposed
regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would amend
Class E airspace at Lakeland Linder Regional Airport, Lakeland, FL.

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 amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9U, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 18, 2010, effective September 15, 2010,
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 Lakeland, FL [Amended]

Lakeland Linder Regional Airport, FL
    (Lat. 27[deg]59'19'' N., long. 82[deg]00'55'' W.)
Bartow Municipal Airport
    (Lat. 27[deg]56'36'' N., long. 81[deg]47'00'' W.)
Plant City Municipal Airport
    (Lat. 28[deg]00'01'' N., long. 82[deg]09'39'' W.)
Winter Haven's Gilbert Airport
    (Lat. 28[deg]03'46'' N., long. 81[deg]45'12'' W.)
Lakeland VORTAC
    (Lat. 27[deg]59'10'' N., long. 82[deg]00'50'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7-mile radius of Lakeland Linder Regional Airport, and
within a 6.7-mile radius of Bartow Municipal Airport, and within a
6.6-mile radius of Plant City Municipal Airport, and within 3.5
miles each side of the 266[deg] bearing from the Plant City Airport
extending from the 6.6-mile radius to 7.5 miles west of the Airport,
and within a 6.5-mile radius of Winter Haven's Gilbert Airport, and
within 2.5 miles each side of the Lakeland VORTAC 071[deg] radial
extending from the 7-mile radius to the Winter Haven's Gilbert
Airport 6.5-mile radius.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on May 13, 2011.
Barry A. Knight,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Manager, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2011-12734 Filed 5-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 76 (Thursday, April 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 23475]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9370]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER12-91-000, ER12-91-002, ER12-92-002]

PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., Duke Energy Ohio, Inc., Duke Energy
Kentucky, Inc; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on April 5, 2012, Duke Energy Ohio, Inc. and Duke
Energy Kentucky, Inc., tendered for filing a Settlement Agreement on
behalf of themselves and the Indiana Municipal Power Agency, pursuant
to 18 CFR 385.602, in the above-docketed proceeding. Pursuant to 18 CFR
385.602(f)(2) initial comments on the settlement agreement should be
filed on or before April 18, 2012. Reply comments are due on or before
April 20, 2012.

    Dated: April 12, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-9370 Filed 4-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 129 (Thursday, July 5, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31337-31340]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14477]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Parts 59, 61

[Docket ID FEMA-2018-0027]
RIN 1660-AA93

National Flood Insurance Program: Removal of Monroe County Pilot
Inspection Program Regulations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is revising its
regulations to remove a pilot inspection program under the National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). This pilot inspection program applied
to Monroe County, Florida. FEMA terminated this program on June 28,
2013, and is now removing the applicable regulations from the Code of
Federal Regulations because they are no longer necessary.

DATES: This rule is effective July 5, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this rulemaking is available for inspection
using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that website's instructions.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Liza Davis, Associate Chief Counsel,
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or (email) [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background and Discussion of the Rule

    The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended (NFIA), Title
42 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) 4001 et seq., authorizes the
Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to
establish and carry out a National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to
enable interested persons to purchase insurance against loss resulting
from physical damage to or loss of property arising from floods in the
United States.\1\ Under the NFIA, FEMA may only grant flood insurance
to properties within communities that have adopted adequate land use
and control measures.\2\ FEMA implemented a pilot inspection program on
June 27, 2000, at 44 CFR 59.30, which applied to structures located in
Monroe County, the Village of Islamorada in Monroe County, and the City
of Marathon \3\ in Monroe County, Florida. 65 FR 39725, 39748 (June 27,
2000). The pilot program was designed to help the communities verify
that structures in these locations complied with the community's
floodplain management ordinances and to help FEMA ensure that property
owners paid flood insurance premiums to the NFIP commensurate with
their flood risk. See 44 CFR 59.30(a); 79 FR 2468 (Jan. 14, 2014). FEMA
consulted with the participating communities during the pilot program
and in 2013 determined that the communities had fulfilled the
requirements of the inspection procedure. As a result, FEMA notified
the three participating communities that the pilot inspection procedure
under 44 CFR 59.30 would terminate on June 28, 2013, pursuant to 44 CFR
59.30(c)(1), which authorizes the Federal Insurance Administrator to
establish the termination date for the pilot program. FEMA published a
notice in the Federal Register on January 14, 2014, announcing that the
pilot inspection program was terminated for Monroe County, the Village
of Islamorada, and the City of Marathon, Florida. See 79 FR 2468 (Jan.
14, 2014). FEMA is now removing section 59.30 as it is no longer
necessary. FEMA is also removing Appendices A(4) through A(6) of 44 CFR
part 61, which contain the individual endorsements for these three
communities to the Standard Flood Insurance Policy (SFIP), indicating
their participation in the pilot program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 42 U.S.C. 4011(a).
    \2\ See 42 U.S.C. 4022(a)(1).
    \3\ Although 44 CFR 59.30(a) only lists Monroe County and the
Village of Islamorada, Florida, the section provides that the pilot
inspection procedure will cover areas within Monroe County that
incorporate on or after January 1, 1999. The City of Marathon was
incorporated on Nov. 30, 1999, and was therefore also covered by the
program. See City of Marathon Charter Sec.  3, at https://library.municode.com/fl/marathon/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=PTICHRELA_SPACH_S3INMUCOLI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Regulatory Analysis

A. Administrative Procedure Act

    The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) generally requires agencies
to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register and
provide interested persons the opportunity to submit comments. See 5
U.S.C. 553(b) and (c). The APA provides an exception to this prior
notice and comment requirement for rules of agency organization,
procedure, or practice. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A). This final rule is a
procedural rule promulgated for agency efficiency purposes. FEMA is
removing regulations related to the Monroe County pilot inspection
program which has been terminated. Thus, removing these regulations
reflects FEMA's current authority and will not affect the substantive
rights or interests of the public.
    The APA also provides an exception from notice and comment
procedures when an agency finds for good cause that those procedures
are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B). FEMA finds good cause to issue this rule without
prior notice or comment, as such procedures are unnecessary. The
removal of these regulations will have no substantive effect on the
public because the authority for the pilot program has terminated.
    Further, the APA generally requires that substantive rules
incorporate a 30-day delayed effective date. 5 U.S.C. 553(d). This
rule, however, is merely procedural and does not impose substantive
requirements; thus, FEMA finds that a delayed effective date is
unnecessary.

B. Executive Orders 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'', 13563,
``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'', and 13771, ``Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs''

    Executive Orders 13563 (``Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review'') and 12866 (``Regulatory Planning and Review'') 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 (including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts,
and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. Executive Order 13771 (``Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs'') directs agencies to
reduce regulation and control regulatory costs and provides that ``for
every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be
identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be
prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.''
    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not designated this
rule a ``significant regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the rule has not been reviewed by
OMB. As this rule is not a

significant regulatory action, this rule is exempt from the
requirements of Executive Order 13771. See OMB's Memorandum ``Guidance
Implementing Executive Order 13771, Titled `Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs''' (April 5, 2017).
    FEMA is issuing a final rule that will remove the pilot inspection
program at 44 CFR 59.30, which describes inspection procedures to apply
to Monroe County, Florida. The pilot program was designed to help the
community verify that structures in this community complied with the
community's floodplain management ordinances and help the NFIP ensure
that property owners paid flood insurance premiums to the NFIP
commensurate with their flood risk. FEMA terminated the pilot program
on June 28, 2013. FEMA therefore now removes it from regulation.
    This rulemaking does not impose any changes to current programs and
FEMA believes there would not be any costs imposed on State, Federal,
Tribal or industry partners or stakeholders as a result of this rule.
    The benefits of this rule result from removing the codification of
a terminated pilot program. This will simplify the CFR and reduce
confusion, and further align the regulations with FEMA's current
exercises of its authority.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601-612), and
section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996, Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 847, 858--9 (Mar. 29, 1996)
(5 U.S.C. 601 note) require that special consideration be given to the
effects of regulations on small entities. The RFA applies only when an
agency is ``required by section 553 . . . to publish general notice of
proposed rulemaking for any proposed rule.'' 5 U.S.C. 603(a). An RFA
analysis is not required for this rulemaking because FEMA is not
required to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 658, 1501-1504,
1531-1536, 1571, pertains to any rulemaking which is likely to result
in the promulgation of any rule that includes a Federal mandate that
may result in the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments,
in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million (adjusted
annually for inflation) or more in any one year. If the rulemaking
includes a Federal mandate, the Act requires an agency to prepare an
assessment of the anticipated costs and benefits of the Federal
mandate. The Act also pertains to any regulatory requirements that
might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Before
establishing any such requirements, an agency must develop a plan
allowing for input from the affected governments regarding the
requirements.
    FEMA has determined that this rulemaking will not result in the
expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate,
nor by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more in any one year as a
result of a Federal mandate, and it will not significantly or uniquely
affect small governments. Therefore, no actions are deemed necessary
under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.

E. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Pub. L.
104-13, 109 Stat. 163, (May 22, 1995) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), FEMA
may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to,
a collection of information unless FEMA obtains approval from the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the collection and the
collection displays a valid OMB control number. FEMA has determined
that this rulemaking does not contain any collections of information as
defined by that Act.

F. Privacy Act/E-Government Act

    Under the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, an agency must
determine whether implementation of a proposed regulation will result
in a system of records. A ``record'' is any item, collection, or
grouping of information about an individual that is maintained by an
agency, including, but not limited to, his/her education, financial
transactions, medical history, and criminal or employment history and
that contains his/her name, or the identifying number, symbol, or other
identifying particular assigned to the individual, such as a finger or
voice print or a photograph. See 5 U.S.C. 552a(a)(4). A ``system of
records'' is a group of records under the control of an agency from
which information is retrieved by the name of the individual or by some
identifying number, symbol, or other identifying particular assigned to
the individual. An agency cannot disclose any record which is contained
in a system of records except by following specific procedures.
    The E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501 note, also requires
specific procedures when an agency takes action to develop or procure
information technology that collects, maintains, or disseminates
information that is in an identifiable form. This Act also applies when
an agency initiates a new collection of information that will be
collected, maintained, or disseminated using information technology if
it includes any information in an identifiable form permitting the
physical or online contacting of a specific individual.
    The system of record for the NFIP, DHS/FEMA-0003--National Flood
Insurance Program Files, was published in the Federal Register on May
19, 2014 (79 FR 28747). This rule does not impact this existing system
of record, nor does it create a new system of record. Therefore, this
rule does not require coverage under an existing or new Privacy Impact
Assessment or System of Records Notice.

G. Executive Order 13175, ``Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments''

    Executive Order 13175, ``Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments,'' 65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000, applies to agency
regulations that have Tribal implications, that is, regulations that
have substantial direct effects 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. Under this Executive Order, to the extent
practicable and permitted by law, no agency shall promulgate any
regulation that has Tribal implications, that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on Indian Tribal governments, and that is not
required by statute, unless funds necessary to pay the direct costs
incurred by the Indian Tribal government or the Tribe in complying with
the regulation are provided by the Federal government, or the agency
consults with Tribal officials.
    Although Tribes that meet the NFIP eligibility criteria can
participate in the NFIP in the same manner as communities,\4\ FEMA has
reviewed this final rule under Executive Order 13175 and has determined
that 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.

This rule removes the pilot inspection program concerning Monroe
County, Florida, which FEMA has terminated. The removal of these
regulations therefore will have no substantive effect on the public and
will not affect the substantive rights or interests of Indian Tribal
governments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Although the NFIP does not explicitly reference Tribal
governments, FEMA includes Tribal nations in its definition of a
community. See 44 CFR 59.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

H. Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism''

    Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999, sets forth principles and criteria that agencies must adhere to
in formulating and implementing policies that have federalism
implications, that is, regulations that have substantial direct effects
on the States, on the relationship between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among
the various levels of government. Federal agencies must closely examine
the statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the
policymaking discretion of the States, and to the extent practicable,
must consult with State and local officials before implementing any
such action.
    FEMA has determined that this rulemaking does not have 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, and
therefore does not have federalism implications as defined by the
Executive Order.

I. Executive Order 11988, ``Floodplain Management''

    Pursuant to Executive Order 11988, each agency must provide
leadership and take action to reduce the risk of flood loss and to
minimize the impact of floods on human safety, health and welfare. In
addition, each agency must restore and preserve the natural and
beneficial values served by floodplains in carrying out its
responsibilities for (1) acquiring, managing, and disposing of Federal
lands and facilities; (2) providing Federally undertaken, financed, or
assisted construction and improvements; and (3) conducting Federal
activities and programs affecting land use, including but not limited
to water and related land resources planning, regulating, and licensing
activities. In carrying out these responsibilities, each agency must
evaluate the potential effects of any actions it may take in a
floodplain; ensure that its planning programs and budget requests
reflect consideration of flood hazards and floodplain management; and
prescribe procedures to implement the policies and requirements of the
Executive Order.
    Before promulgating any regulation, an agency must determine
whether the proposed regulations will affect a floodplain(s), and if
so, the agency must consider alternatives to avoid adverse effects and
incompatible development in the floodplain(s). If the head of the
agency finds that the only practicable alternative consistent with the
law and with the policy set forth in Executive Order 11988 is to
promulgate a regulation that affects a floodplain(s), the agency must,
prior to promulgating the regulation, design or modify the regulation
in order to minimize potential harm to or within the floodplain,
consistent with the agency's floodplain management regulations and
prepare and circulate a notice containing an explanation of why the
action is proposed to be located in the floodplain. This rule removes
from regulation a previously-terminated pilot program. It is therefore
procedural and will not have an effect on land use or floodplain
management.

J. Executive Order 11990, ``Protection of Wetlands''

    Executive Order 11990, ``Protection of Wetlands,'' 42 FR 26961, May
24, 1977, sets forth that each agency must provide leadership and take
action to minimize the destruction, loss or degradation of wetlands,
and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values of
wetlands in carrying out the agency's responsibilities for (1)
acquiring, managing, and disposing of Federal lands and facilities; and
(2) providing Federally undertaken, financed, or assisted construction
and improvements; and (3) conducting Federal activities and programs
affecting land use, including but not limited to water and related land
resources planning, regulating, and licensing activities. Each agency,
to the extent permitted by law, must avoid undertaking or providing
assistance for new construction located in wetlands unless the head of
the agency finds (1) that there is no practicable alternative to such
construction, and (2) that the proposed action includes all practicable
measures to minimize harm to wetlands which may result from such use.
    In carrying out the activities described in Executive Order 11990,
each agency must consider factors relevant to a proposal's effect on
the survival and quality of the wetlands. Among these factors are:
Public health, safety, and welfare, including water supply, quality,
recharge and discharge; pollution; flood and storm hazards; and
sediment and erosion; maintenance of natural systems, including
conservation and long term productivity of existing flora and fauna,
species and habitat diversity and stability, hydrologic utility, fish,
wildlife, timber, and food and fiber resources; and other uses of
wetlands in the public interest, including recreational, scientific,
and cultural uses. Because this rule removes from regulation a
previously-terminated pilot program, it is procedural and will not have
an effect on land use or wetlands.

K. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)

    Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., an agency must prepare an
environmental assessment or environmental impact statement for any
rulemaking that could significantly affect the quality of the human
environment. FEMA has determined that this rulemaking does not
significantly affect the quality of the human environment and
consequently has not prepared an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement.
    Rulemaking is a major Federal action subject to NEPA. Categorical
exclusion A3 included in the list of exclusion categories at Department
of Homeland Security Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Revision 01,
Implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act, Appendix A,
issued November 6, 2014, covers the promulgation of rules, issuance of
rulings or interpretations, and the development and publication of
policies, orders, directives, notices, procedures, manuals, and
advisory circulars if they meet certain criteria provided in A3(a-f).
This rule meets Categorical Exclusion A3(a), which covers rules of a
strictly administrative or procedural nature.

L. Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking

    Under the Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking Act (CRA), 5
U.S.C. 801-808, before a rule can take effect, the Federal agency
promulgating the rule must submit to Congress and to the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) a copy of the rule; a concise general
statement relating to the rule, including whether it is a major rule;
the proposed effective date of the rule; a copy of any cost-benefit
analysis; descriptions of the agency's actions under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act; and any other
information or statements required by relevant executive orders.
    FEMA has sent this final rule to the Congress and to GAO pursuant
to the

CRA. The rule is not a ``major rule'' within the meaning of the CRA. It
will not have an annual effect on the economy of $100,000,000 or more;
it will not result in a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions; and it will not have significant
adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity,
innovation, or on the ability of United States-based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic and export markets.

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Parts 59 and 61

    Flood insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Federal Emergency
Management Agency amends 44 CFR Chapter I as follows:

PART 59--GENERAL PROVISIONS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 59 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of
1978, 43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127 of Mar. 31,
1979, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376.
* * * * *

Subpart C--Pilot Inspection Program [Removed]

0
2. Remove subpart C, consisting of Sec.  59.30.
* * * * *

PART 61--INSURANCE COVERAGE AND RATES

0
3. The authority citation for Part 61 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of
1978, 43 FR 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127 of Mar. 31,
1979, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376.
* * * * *

Appendix A(4) to Part 61 [Removed]

0
4. Remove Appendix A(4) to Part 61.

Appendix A(5) to Part 61 [Removed]

0
5. Remove Appendix A(5) to Part 61.

Appendix A(6) to Part 61 [Removed]

0
6. Remove Appendix A(6) to Part 61.

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2018-14477 Filed 7-3-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-52-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 84 (Monday, May 2, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 26224]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10140]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER16-1468-000]

Palmco Power RI LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Palmco Power RI LLC`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 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 May 11, 2016.
    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
5 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 electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 21, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-10140 Filed 4-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 3, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 212)]
[Notices]
[Page 66830]
[DOCID:fr03no05-46]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL06-12-000]

American Municipal Power-Ohio, Inc., Complainant, v. PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C., Respondent; Notice of Complaint

October 27, 2005.
    Take notice that on October 26, 2005, American Municipal Power-
Ohio, Inc. (AMP-Ohio) pursuant to sections 206 and 306 of the Federal
Power Act and Rule 206 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedures, tendered for filing a complaint against PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM) on behalf of twelve of AMP-Ohio's member
municipal utilities. AMP-Ohio requests that the Commission enforce the
Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of PJM and the PJM West
Reliability Assurance Agreement and require PJM to recognize and honor
the transfer Unforced Capacity Credits from Dayton Power & Light
Company to AMP-Ohio.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing 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). 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all parties to this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on November 15, 2005.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-6068 Filed 11-2-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 38 (Monday, March 1, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12000-12001]
[FR Doc No: 2021-04197]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2021-0128; FRL-10020-81-OW]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request; Clean
Watersheds Needs Survey (CWNS) (Reinstatement)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to
submit an information collection request (ICR), ``Clean Watersheds
Needs Survey (CWNS) (Reinstatement)'' (EPA ICR No. 0318.14, OMB Control
No. 2040-0050) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review
and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA).
Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects
of the proposed information collection as described below. This is a
reinstatement of the ICR. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor and a
person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless
it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before April 30, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2021-0128 online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method) or by
mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code
28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elisabeth Schlaudt, Office of Water,
State Revolving Fund Branch, (4204M), Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC

20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. EPA is temporarily
suspending its Docket Center and Reading Room for public visitors, with
limited exceptions, to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19. Our
Docket Center staff will continue to provide remote customer service
via email, phone, and webform. For additional information about EPA's
public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.), EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i)
Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including
whether the information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the
accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information, including the validity of the methodology
and assumptions used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA
will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate.
The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and
approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice
to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to
submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: The Clean Watersheds Needs Survey (CWNS) is required by
Clean Water Act (CWA) Sections 205(a) and 516. It is a periodic
inventory of existing and planned publicly owned wastewater conveyance
and treatment facilities, combined sewer overflow correction,
stormwater management and other water pollution control facilities in
the United States, as well as an estimate of how many of these
facilities need to be built. The CWNS is a joint effort between EPA and
the states. The CWNS collects cost and technical data from states that
are associated with publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) and other
water pollution control facilities, existing and planned. The
respondents who provide this information to EPA are state agencies
responsible for environmental pollution control and local facility
contacts who provide documentation to the states. Periodically, the
states request data or documentation from contacts at the facility or
local government level. These respondents are referred to as
facilities.
    No confidential information is used, nor is sensitive information
protected from release under the Public Information Act. EPA achieves
national consistency in the final results through the application of
uniform guidelines and validation techniques.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: States, Territories, and Local
Facilities.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Voluntary.
    Estimated number of respondents: 56 States and Territories, 5,349
Local Facilities (total).
    Frequency of response: Every 4 years.
    Total estimated burden: 9,645 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $505,004 (per year), includes $0 annualized
capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in Estimates: There is an increase of 541 hours and
$134,820 in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR
previously approved by OMB. This increase is based upon an increase in
facility universe, as well as an adjustment in labor rates and
benefits.

    Dated: February 18, 2021.
Andrew D. Sawyers,
Director, Office of Wastewater Management.
[FR Doc. 2021-04197 Filed 2-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 244 (Wednesday, December 21, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78188-78190]
[FR Doc No: 2022-27702]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Approval of LaGuardia Airport (LGA) Noise Compatibility Program

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of approval of the LaGuardia Airport (LGA) noise
compatibility program.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announces its
findings for the noise compatibility program submitted by LGA, see
supplementary information for details. On July 6, 2022 the FAA
determined that the revised noise exposure maps submitted by LGA were
in compliance with applicable requirements and that the noise
compatibility program would be initiating final review for approval or
disapproval. On December 15, 2022, the FAA approved the LGA noise
compatibility program. The noise compatibility program contained 23
recommended measures, including eight noise abatement measures, three
land use measures, and 12 program management measures. Of the measures
proposed, 14 were approved, five were approved as voluntary, three were
disapproved, and one was determined to have no FAA action. Five of the
eight noise abatement procedures proposed at LGA are related to new or
revised flight procedures.

DATES: The effective date of the FAA's approval of the LGA noise
compatibility program is December 15, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Brooks, Regional

Environmental Program Manager, Airports Division, Federal Aviation
Administration, 1 Aviation Plaza, Room 516, Jamaica, NY 11434. Phone
Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice announces FAA's approval of the
noise compatibility program (NCP) for LGA, effective on December 15,
2022. Per United States Code section 47504 (49 U.S.C. 47504) and Title
14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 150, an airport sponsor who
previously submitted a noise exposure map (NEM) may submit to the FAA a
noise compatibility program which sets forth the measures taken or
proposed by the airport sponsor for the reduction of existing non-
compatible land uses and prevention of additional non-compatible land
uses within the area covered by the NEMs. As required by 49 U.S.C.
47504, such programs must be developed in consultation with interested
and affected parties including local communities, government agencies,
airport users, and the FAA. The FAA does not substitute its judgment
for that of the airport sponsor with respect to which measures should
be recommended for action. The FAA approval or disapproval of an
airports recommendations in their noise compatibility program are made
in accordance with the requirements and standards pursuant to 49 U.S.C.
47504 and 14 CFR part 150, which is limited to the following
determinations:
    a. The noise compatibility program was developed in accordance with
the provisions and procedures of 14 CFR 150.23;
    b. Program measures are reasonably consistent with achieving the
goals of reducing existing non-compatible land uses around the airport
and preventing the introduction of additional non-compatible land uses;
    c. Program measures would not create an undue burden on interstate
or foreign commerce, unjustly discriminate against types or classes of
aeronautical uses, violate the terms of airport grant agreements, or
intrude into areas preempted by the Federal Government; and
    d. Program measures relating to the use of flight procedures can be
implemented within the period covered by the program without derogating
safety, adversely affecting the efficient use and management of the
navigable airspace and air traffic control systems, or adversely
affecting other powers and responsibilities of the Administrator
prescribed by law.
    Specific limitations of FAA's approval of NCPs are delineated in 14
CFR 150.5. Approval is not a determination concerning the acceptability
of land uses under Federal, state, or local law. Approval does not by
itself constitute an FAA implementing action. A request for Federal
action or approval to implement specific noise compatibility measures
may be required, and an FAA decision on the request may require an
environmental assessment of the proposed action. Approval does not
constitute a commitment by the FAA to financially assist in the
implementation of the noise compatibility program nor a determination
that all measures covered by the NCP are eligible for grant-in-aid
funding from the FAA. Where federal funding is sought, requests must be
submitted to the FAA New York Airports District Office at 1 Aviation
Plaza, Room 111, Jamaica, New York 11434.
    On June 15, 2022, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
submitted to the FAA a revised ``With Program'' 2021 NEM, descriptions,
and other documentation that were produced during the development of
the ``LaGuardia Airport Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part
150 Noise Compatibility Program,'' dated June 2022. The revised ``With
Program'' 2021 NEM was submitted to show changes made to the LaGuardia
Airport 2021 NEM previously accepted by the FAA on May 15, 2017 (Noise
Exposure Map Notice for LaGuardia Airport, New York City, New York,
volume 82, Federal Register, pages 22714-5, May 15, 2017). The
revisions to the previously approved 2021 NEM depict changes to noise
contours from implementation of noise abatement measures contained
within the concurrent NCP submittal. It was requested that the FAA
review this material as the NEM, as described in 49 U.S.C. 47503 of the
Act, and that the noise mitigation measures, to be implemented jointly
by the airport and surrounding communities, be approved as a NCP under
49 U.S.C. 47504. Notice of this NEM determination and intent to review
the NCP was published in the Federal Register on July 11, 2022 (Notice
of Acceptance of a Noise Exposure Map and Review of a Noise
Compatibility Program, volume 87, Federal Register, pages 41160-2, July
11, 2022). That Federal Register Notice also announced the start of a
60-day period of public review for the NCP documentation. The FAA
received no comments from interested parties during the public review
period.
    The LGA proposed NCP is comprised of actions designed for phased
implementation by airport management and adjacent jurisdictions within
the next one to five years. It was requested that the FAA evaluate and
approve this material as a noise compatibility program as described in
49 U.S.C. 47504. The FAA began its review of the program on July 6,
2022 and was required by a provision of 49 U.S.C. 47504 to approve or
disapprove the program within 180 days, other than the use of new or
modified flight procedures for noise control. Failure to approve or
disapprove such program within the 180-day period shall be deemed an
approval of such program.
    The submitted program contained 23 proposed measures to minimize
impacts of aviation noise on and off the airport. The FAA completed its
review and determined that the procedural and substantive requirements
of the 49 U.S.C. 47504 and 14 CFR part 150 were satisfied. A Record of
Approval for the overall program was issued by the FAA effective
December 15, 2022.
    The specific program elements and their individual determinations
are as follows:
    Noise Abatement (NA) Measure 1: Modify NTHNS and GLDMN Runway 13
RNAV SIDs to Direct Aircraft Away from Flushing, New York--Approved as
Voluntary.
    NA Measure 2: Create New Runway 13 Departure Procedure with an
Immediate Left Turn over Compatible Land Uses--Disapproved.
    NA Measure 3: Implement Offset Approach to Runway 22 to Reduce
Noise Exposure Over Clason Point--Approved as Voluntary.
    NA Measure 4: Reduce Runway 4 Departure Noise Over Clason Point--
Approved as Voluntary.
    NA Measure 5: Reduce Runway 13 Departures at Night--Approved as
Voluntary
    NA Measure 6: Implement Noise Abatement Departure Profiles on a
Voluntary Basis for Runways 4 and 13--Disapproved for Purposes of Part
150.
    NA Measure 7: Implement Nighttime Optimized Profile Descent
Procedures--Disapproved for Purposes of Part 150.
    NA Measure 8: Continue Existing Mandatory Departure Noise Limit--No
Action.
    Land Use (LU) Measure 1: Sound-Insulate Eligible Dwelling Units--
Approved.
    LU Measure 2: Sound-Insulate Eligible Non-Residential Noise--
Sensitive Structures- Approved.
    LU Measure 3: Include Aircraft Noise in Real Estate Disclosures--
Approved.
    Program Management (PM) Measure 1: Maintain Noise Office--Approved.
    PM Measure 2: Maintain Noise and Operations Management System--
Approved.

    PM Measure 3: Maintain Public Flight Tracking Portal--Approved.
    PM Measure 4: Maintain Noise Complaint Management System--Approved.
    PM Measure 5: Maintain Noise Office website--Approved.
    PM Measure 6: Continue Community Outreach Activities--Approved.
    PM Measure 7: Establish and Manage a Fly Quiet Program--Approved as
Voluntary.
    PM Measure 8: Make Aircraft Noise Contours Available in a
Geographic Information System (GIS)--Approved.
    PM Measure 9: Update the Noise Exposure Map--Approved.
    PM Measure 10: Update the Noise Compatibility Program--Approved.
    PM Measure 11: Post Monthly Color-Coded DNL Values on Port
Authority website--Approved.
    PM Measure 12: The Port Authority to Coordinate with the FAA on
Development and Implementation of NextGen Procedures--Approved.
    These determinations are set forth in detail in the Record of
Approval signed by the FAA Airports Eastern Division Director on
December 15, 2022. The Record of Approval, as well as other evaluation
materials and the documents comprising the submittal, are available for
review at the FAA office listed above. The Record of Approval also will
be available on the internet on the FAA's website at http://www.faa.gov/airports/environmental/airport_noise/part_150/states/ and
the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey's website at http://panynjpart150.com/LGA_documents.asp.

    Issued in Jamaica, NY, on December 16, 2022.
David A. Fish,
Director, Airports Division, Eastern Region.
[FR Doc. 2022-27702 Filed 12-20-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 150 (Tuesday, August 5, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45441-45442]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18452]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9914-47-OEI]

Agency Information Collection Activities OMB Responses

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:  Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) responses to Agency Clearance requests, in compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA regulations are listed
in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Courtney Kerwin<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and

please refer to the appropriate EPA Information Collection Request
(ICR) Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

OMB Responses to Agency Clearance Requests OMB Approvals

    EPA ICR Number 2384.03; NSPS for Commercial and Industrial Solid
Waste Incineration (CISWI) units; 40 CFR part 60, subparts A and CCCC;
was approved on 06/03/2014; OMB Number 2060-0662; expires on 06/30/
2017; Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 0983.14; NSPS for Equipment Leaks of VOC in
Petroleum Refineries; 40 CFR part 60, subparts GGG and GGGa; was
approved on 06/03/2014; OMB Number 2060-0067; expires on 06/30/2017;
Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 2485.02; NSPS for Kraft Pulp Mills for which
Construction, Reconstruction or Modification Commenced after May 23,
2103; 40 CFR part 60, subpart BBa; was approved on 06/03/2014; OMB
Number 2060-0690; expires on 06/30/2017; Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 2330.02; Pesticide Registration Fees Program; was
approved on 06/09/2014; OMB Number 2070-0179; expires on 06/30/2017;
Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 1764.06; National Volatile Organic Compound Emission
Standards for Consumer Products; 40 CFR part 59, subpart C; was
approved on 06/11/2014; OMB Number 2060-0348; expires on 06/30/2017;
Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 1500.08; National Estuary Program (Renewal); 40 CFR
part 35; was approved on 06/11/2014; OMB Number 2040-0138; expires on
06/30/2017; Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 1854.09; The Consolidated Air Rule (CAR) for the
Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI) (Renewal); 40
CFR part 65; part 60, subparts A, Ka, Kb, W, Wa, DDD, III, NNN, RRR;
part 61, subparts A, BB, Y, V; part 63, subparts A, F, G, H, I; was
approved on 06/16/2014; OMB Number 2060-0443; expires on 06/30/2017;
Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 1632.04; Standards for Pesticide Containers and
Containment; 40 CFR parts 156 and 165; was approved on 06/16/2014; OMB
Number 2070-0133; expires on 06/30/2017; Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 0138.10; Modification of Secondary Treatment
Requirements for Discharges into Marine Waters (Renewal); 40 CFR part
125; was approved on 06/16/2014; OMB Number 2040-0088; expires on 06/
30/2017; Approved without change.
    EPA ICR Number 0938.18; General Administrative Requirements for
Assistance Programs (Renewal); 40 CFR part 31; was approved on 06/30/
2014; OMB Number 2030-0020; expires on 06/30/2017; Approved with
change.

Short Term Extension of Expiration Date

    EPA ICR Number 0143.13; Recordkeeping Requirements for Producers,
Registrants, and Applicants of Pesticides and Pesticide Devices under
Section 8 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA) (Renewal); a short term extension of the expiration date was
granted by OMB on 06/30/2014; OMB Number 2070-0028; expires on 07/31/
2014.

Comment Filed

    EPA ICR Number 1176.10; NSPS for New Residential Wood Heaters; in
40 CFR part 60, subpart AAA; OMB filed comment on 06/10/2014.

Spencer W. Clark,
Acting Director, Collections Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2014-18452 Filed 8-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P