[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 177 (Tuesday, September 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 56465]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23323]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4019-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2011-0001]

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

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of North Carolina (FEMA-4019-DR), dated August 31, 2011,
and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: September 1, 2011.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of North Carolina is hereby amended to include the Public
Assistance program for the following areas among those areas determined
to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster
by the President in his declaration of August 31, 2011.

    Halifax and Lenoir Counties for Individual Assistance.

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

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2011-23323 Filed 9-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: April 15, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 72)]
[Notices]
[Page 19673-19674]
[DOCID:fr15ap10-92]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; Saab

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

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Saab Cars North America,
Inc.'s (Saab) petition for exemption of the 9-5 vehicle line in
accordance with 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from the Theft Prevention
Standard. This petition is granted because the agency has determined
that the antitheft device to be placed on the line as standard
equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor
vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the
Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541).

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2011 model year.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah Mazyck, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, West
Building, W43-443, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Ms. Mazyck's telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Her fax number is
(202) 493-2990.

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:  In a petition dated March 1, 2010, Saab
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541) for the MY 2011 Saab 9-5 vehicle
line. The petition requested an exemption from parts-marking pursuant
to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard,
based on the installation of an antitheft device as standard equipment
for the entire vehicle line.
    Under Sec.  543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant
exemptions for one vehicle line per model year. In its petition, Saab
provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity, design,
and location of the components of the antitheft device for the Saab 9-5
vehicle line. Saab will install its passive transponder-based,
electronic immobilizer antitheft device as standard equipment on its 9-
5 vehicle line beginning with MY 2011. Major components of the
antitheft device will include a body control module (BCM), passive
entry passive start module (PEPS), intrusion/inclination sensor, an
immobilizer control module and a user identification device (UID).
Activation of the immobilization device occurs when the ignition is
turned to the ``OFF'' position. Saab will also install an audible and
visual alarm system on the 9-5 as standard equipment. Saab's submission
is considered a complete petition as required by 49 CFR 543.7, in that
it meets the general requirements contained in Sec.  543.5 and the
specific content requirements of Sec.  543.6.
    Saab stated that before the vehicle can operate, driver
authentication must be performed by communication between the PEPS and
the BCM jointly with the UID (key fob). Additionally, verification of
the electronic code is required to allow the transmission shift lever
to unlock. When the Engine Start/Stop button on the instrument panel is
pressed, the vehicle transmits a randomly generated 32-bit challenge
and identifier. If the data matches the command and response values,
authorizations are sent within the BCM to allow the vehicle to operate.
Saab stated that, if incorrect responses are received at any point in
the process, or if a response is not received, the system will inhibit
operation of the engine.
    The Saab 9-5 is equipped with a vehicle alarm system (VAS). The VAS
consists of an ultrasonic sensor and vehicle inclination sensor. Any
attempt to enter the vehicle by means other than the key will be
detected by the VAS. Saab stated that when an unauthorized person has
entered the vehicle after the system has been set, the signal lights
will flash, and the horn and an additional siren alarm will provide a
warning. The VAS monitors the doors, engine hood and trunk lid.
Additionally, Saab stated that any attempt to access any of the system
components will activate the VAS.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, Saab
provided a detailed list of the tests conducted and believes that the
device is reliable and durable since the device complied with its
specified requirements for each test. Specifically, Saab stated that
the design and assembly processes of the antitheft subsystems and
components were validated for climatic, mechanical and chemical
environments under the General Motors Corporation validation
procedures.
    In support of its belief that its antitheft device will be as
effective as compliance with the parts marking requirements in reducing
and deterring vehicle theft, Saab referenced the American Automobile
Manufacturers Association response to Docket 97-042; NHTSA Request for
Comments on its preliminary report to Congress on the effects of the
Anti Car theft Act of 1984 provides data supporting that the anti-theft
device will be effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft.
Additionally, Saab stated that the 2011 9-5 antitheft device, which was
introduced on the 2003 Saab 9-3, has been designed to enhance the
functionality and theft protection provided by Saab's first generation
antitheft system. The Saab 9-3 was formerly named the Saab 900. The
antitheft device installed on the Saab 9-3 (Saab 900) was granted an
exemption from the parts-marking requirements. (See 62 FR 55453).
    Saab provided data on the effectiveness of the antitheft device
installed on its 9-3 vehicle line in support of the belief that its
device will be at least as effective as those comparable devices
previously granted exemptions by the agency. The agency's 2007 theft
data showed that the theft rate for the 9-3 vehicle line has remained
consistently low. The average theft rate using three MY's data for the
9-3 is 0.4690. Based on the theft rate experience of the 9-3 vehicle
line and the additional advanced technology utilized in the current 9-5
antitheft system, Saab believes that the Saab 9-5 will be more
effective in deterring

theft than the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR 541.
    Based on the supporting evidence submitted by Saab on the device,
the agency believes that the antitheft device for the 9-5 vehicle line
is likely to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle
theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard (49 CFR 541). The agency concludes that the device
will provide the five types of performance listed in Sec.  543.6(a)(3):
promoting activation; attracting attention to the efforts of
unauthorized persons to enter or operate a vehicle by means other than
a key; preventing defeat or circumvention of the device by unauthorized
persons; preventing operation of the vehicle by unauthorized entrants;
and ensuring the reliability and durability of the device.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants
a petition for exemption from the parts-marking requirements of part
541 either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts marking requirements of part 541. The agency
finds that Saab has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for the Saab vehicle line is likely to be as effective
in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the
parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR
part 541). This conclusion is based on the information Saab provided
about its device.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full Saab's
petition for exemption for the Saab 9-5 vehicle line from the parts-
marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541, beginning with the 2011 model
year vehicles. The agency notes that 49 CFR part 541, Appendix A-1,
identifies those lines that are exempted from the Theft Prevention
Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR part 543.7(f) contains
publication requirements incident to the disposition of all Part 543
petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of future product
nameplates, the beginning model year for which the petition is granted
and a general description of the antitheft device is necessary in order
to notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle lines exempted from
the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.
    If Saab decides not to use the exemption for this line, it must
formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line must
be fully marked according to the requirements under 49 CFR Parts 541.5
and 541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if Saab wishes in the future to modify the device
on which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit a
petition to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d) states that a Part 543
exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted under
this part and equipped with the anti-theft device on which the line's
exemption is based. Further, Part 543.9(c)(2) provides for the
submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use of
an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in
that exemption.''
    The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that Part
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself.
The agency did not intend in drafting Part 543 to require the
submission of a modification petition for every change to the
components or design of an antitheft device. The significance of many
such changes could be de minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the
manufacturer contemplates making any changes, the effects of which
might be characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency
before preparing and submitting a petition to modify.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR
1.50.

    Issued on: April 12, 2010.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2010-8660 Filed 4-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 9, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13602-13605]
[FR Doc No: 2021-04877]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2021-0013]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Notice and Request for
Comment; Automated Driving Systems 2.0: A Vision for Safety

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

ACTION: Notice and request for public comment on an extension of a
currently-approved information collection.

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

SUMMARY: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
invites public comments about our intention to request approval from
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for an extension of a
currently-approved information collection. Before a Federal agency may
collect certain information from the public, it must receive approval
from OMB. Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal agencies must solicit
public comment on proposed collections of information, including
extensions and reinstatements of previously approved collections. This
document describes a collection of information for which NHTSA intends
to seek OMB extension approval, titled ``Automated Driving Systems 2.0:
A Vision for Safety'' and identified by OMB Control Number 2127-0723,
which is currently approved through May 31, 2021. The burden hour
calculations have been adjusted to reflect a reduction in burden as
well as a reduction in the frequency of response resulting in a total
annual burden hour

reduction from 86,100 hours to 12,000 hours.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before May 10, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments using any of the following methods:
     Electronic submissions: Go to http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Management, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, West Building, Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Telephone (202) 366-
9322.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
Docket number identified at the beginning of this document. Note that
all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets via internet.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information or access
to background documents, contact Ms. Debbie Sweet, NHTSA, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590; Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Fax:
(202) 366-2106; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please identify
the relevant collection of information by referring to its OMB Control
Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), before an agency submits a proposed
collection of information to OMB for approval, it must first publish a
document in the Federal Register providing a 60-day comment period and
otherwise consult with members of the public and affected agencies
concerning each proposed collection of information. OMB has promulgated
regulations describing what must be included in such a document. Under
OMB's regulation (at 5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must request public
comment on the following: (a) 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; (b) 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; (c) how to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) how to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including 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. In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA asks for public
comments on the extension of the following collection of information
for which the agency is seeking approval from OMB.
    Title: Automated Driving Systems 2.0: A Vision for Safety.
    Type of Request: Extension of a currently-approved information
collection.
    OMB Control Number: 2127-0723.
    Form Number: None.
    Type of Review Requested: Regular.
    Requested Expiration Date of Approval: Three years from date of
approval.
    Summary of the collection of Information: In September 2017, NHTSA
published a policy document titled, Automated Driving Systems 2.0: A
Vision for Safety (ADS 2.0). Recognizing the potential that Automated
Driving Systems (ADSs) have to enhance safety and mobility, this policy
document set out an approach to enable the safe deployment of Automated
Driving Systems (SAE Automation Levels 3 through 5--Conditional, High,
and Full Automation Systems as defined in SAE J3016).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For more information about SAE J3016, see https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_201806.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with its statutory purpose to reduce traffic crashes and
deaths and injuries resulting from traffic accidents,\2\ NHTSA has
recommended disclosure of information via a Voluntary Safety Self-
Assessment (VSSA) related to ADS technologies by vehicle manufacturers
and other entities as described in ADS 2.0. In the section of ADS 2.0
titled, ``Voluntary Guidance for Automated Driving Systems'' (hereafter
referred to as ``Voluntary Guidance''), NHTSA recommended that
manufacturers and other entities assess their ADS-equipped vehicle
against specific safety elements, summarize that assessment, and then
voluntarily disclose that summary to the public.\3\ The Voluntary
Guidance outlines recommended best practices, many of which should be
commonplace in the industry, for the safe pre-deployment design,
development, and testing of ADSs prior to commercial sale or operation
on public roads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 49 U.S.C. 30101.
    \3\ https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/13069a-ads2.0_090617_v9a_tag.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use of the
Information: To assist States and the public in understanding how
safety is being considered by manufacturers and other entities
developing and testing ADSs, NHTSA has encouraged disclosures that aid
in that mission. The burden estimates contained in this notice are
based on the Agency's understanding of the ADS market and the time
associated with generating a self-assessment and voluntarily making a
summary of that self-assessment public. The estimates in this notice
are adjustments from the previous information collection request (ICR)
demonstrating a decrease in the burden-hour estimate.
    The manner by which NHTSA encourages ADS manufacturers and other
entities to disclose information is through a VSSA. The VSSA summarizes
how the manufacturer or other entity has considered the safety elements
contained in the Voluntary Guidance as shown below:

 System Safety
 Operational Design Domain
 Object and Event Detection and Response
 Fallback (Minimal Risk Condition)
 Validation Methods
 Human Machine Interface
 Vehicle Cybersecurity
 Crashworthiness
 Post-Crash ADS Behavior
 Data Recording
 Consumer Education and Training
 Federal, State and Local Laws

    The Agency believes the work associated with consideration of the
safety element in the Voluntary Guidance to be an extension of good and
safe engineering practices already in place. It therefore believes that
manufacturers and other entities will have access to all the
information

needed to craft a VSSA that discusses how the safety elements were
considered and, if they choose, release a summary of that assessment
publicly. Of the manufacturers and other entities who voluntarily
disclose this information, NHTSA anticipates that most manufacturers
and other entities will post the VSSAs online. As of December 28, 2020,
NHTSA was aware of 26 VSSAs, all available online.
    The safety elements are fully described in the Voluntary Guidance
section (section 1) of ADS 2.0, as is the VSSA. The VSSA (including the
public release of that summary assessment) is intended to communicate
to the public (particularly States and consumers) that entities are (1)
considering the safety aspects of ADSs; (2) communicating and
collaborating with DOT; (3) encouraging the self-establishment of
industry safety norms for ADSs; and (4) building public trust,
acceptance, and confidence through transparent testing and deployment
of ADSs.
    Affected Public: Entities involved in the testing and deployment of
ADSs.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 20.
    Frequency: On Occasion (based on information from the current
information collection, respondents are expected to respond, on
average, once every three years).
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 12,000 hours.
    NHTSA is using the number of entities that have received permits
from the State of California as surrogate for the number of respondents
that may choose to develop and issue a VSSA. As of December 28, 2020,
California has cumulatively issued permits to 58 entities to test
Automated Driving Systems with drivers present, five of those entities
also received permits to test without a driver present, and one entity
(included on both other lists) has a permit to deploy.\4\ At the onset
of the current information collection, California had issued permits to
45 entities as of November 16, 2017, but NHTSA had expected the number
to grow to 60 entities within the three years of the information
collection, assuming an addition of new entrants. For that reason, the
burden hours and cost were calculated based on 60 respondents. NHTSA
expects the number of potential respondents to remain at approximately
60 given the coordinated efforts of some companies on the list, the
departure of some of those entities from the industry (departures were
not prevalent in 2017 as the industry was new), and accounting for new
entrants. As a point of reference, since the previous ICR was approved,
NHTSA is aware of 26 published VSSAs. Given that only 26 VSSAs have
been published in three years compared to the 58 actively-permitted
entities in California, NHTSA believes that 60 respondents is an
appropriate high-end for total respondents. However, based on
observations of the current information, NHTSA estimates that
respondents will only produce and disclose a new VSSA once every three
years. Therefore, NHTSA has revised its burden calculations to reflect
estimates based on 20 respondents each year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/vehicle-industry-services/autonomous-vehicles/autonomous-vehicle-testing-permit-holders/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Components of the Voluntary Guidance in ADS 2.0 and public
disclosure of the VSSA have not changed since release in 2017. NHTSA
expects the industry burden of addressing safety elements in the
Voluntary Guidance to be comprised of efforts entities would already
incur in normal business operation and existing documentation. While
the previous ICR calculated burden hours associated with a potential
increase in analysis and review in order to develop the VSSA, NHTSA has
since determined there to be no increased documentation citing how an
entity addressed the safety elements in the Voluntary Guidance. NHTSA
does not believe that any entity is documenting its safety efforts
solely for the purpose of the VSSA and public disclosure. Therefore,
NHTSA reduced the estimation of burden hours by 835 burden hours per
respondent per year from the previous ICR.
    Development and disclosure of a VSSA is expected to involve burden
for format, content, and summary, varying by safety element. NHTSA
estimates that each entity will spend approximately 600 hours to
develop and disseminate a VSSA. This estimate of burden is comprised of
efforts to transmit information from the existing format (520 hours for
development) into a summary format that would be consumable by the
public, including data translation, analysis, and discussion of
traditionally technical information (80 hours to summarize).
    The total estimated burden hours for a single VSSA is calculated as
600 hours for each of the 20 respondents. The total burden hours per
year is estimated at 12,000 hours, a reduction from the 86,100 hours in
the previous ICR.
    In summary, NHTSA estimates the total burden associated with
disclosure recommendations via a VSSA would be 600 hours per respondent
with 20 respondents submitting information each year. The frequency of
responding is once every three years; therefore, NHTSA estimates there
will be a total of 60 unique responders over the course of the next
three years.
    The burden hours associated with development of a VSSA are detailed
in the tables below.

      Table 1--Burden Hours Estimates for VSSA, per Safety Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Burden hours    Burden hours
  Safety element in voluntary guidance       for VSSA        for VSSA
                                            development       summary
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. System Safety........................              20              10
B. Operational Design Domain............              20               5
C. Object and Event Detection and                     40               5
 Response...............................
D. Fallback.............................              80              10
E. Validation Methods...................              80              10
F. Human Machine Interface..............              20               5
G. Vehicle Cybersecurity................              20               5
H. Crashworthiness......................              20               5
I. Post-Crash ADS Behavior..............              20               5
J. Data Recording.......................              80              10
K. Consumer Education and Training......              40               5

L. Federal, State, and Local Laws.......              80               5
                                         -------------------------------
    Total Burden Hours Per ADS..........             520              80
------------------------------------------------------------------------

               Table 2--Calculation of Annual Burden Hours
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Number of Respondents Annually  20
    Estimated Burden Hours for Voluntary  520 hours
     Assessment Development.
    Estimated Burden Hours for            80 hours
     Summarizing Information.
Total Burden Hours per Respondent.......  600 hours
                                         -------------------------------
    Total Estimated Burden Hours for      12,000 hours
     Industry per Year.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA estimates the hourly cost associated with preparing VSSAs to
be $97.36 \5\ per hour using the Bureau of Labor Statistics' mean
hourly wage estimate for architectural and engineering managers in the
motor vehicle manufacturing industry (Standard Occupational
Classification #11-9041). Therefore, the total estimated annual burden
to each respondent is $58,416 (600 hours x $97.36 = $58,416).
Therefore, the total estimated labor costs to all respondents to this
collection is $1,168,320.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The hourly wage is estimated to be $68.35 per hour. National
Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates NAICS
336100--Motor Vehicle Manufacturing, May 2019, https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_336100.htm, last accessed June 30, 2020. The
Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that wages represent 70.2
percent of total compensation to private workers, on average.
Therefore, NHTSA estimates the total hourly compensation cost to be
$97.36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Cost: NHTSA does not anticipate any
further burden to respondents beyond the labor costs associated with
the burden hours.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Department, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Department's estimate
of the burden of the proposed information collection; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.
    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter
35, as amended; 49 CFR 1.49; and DOT Order 1351.29.

Cem Hatipoglu,
Associate Administrator for Vehicle Safety Research.
[FR Doc. 2021-04877 Filed 3-8-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 163 (Wednesday, August 22, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42509-42512]
[FR Doc No: 2018-18073]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0449]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Sun Protection Factor Labeling and Testing
Requirements for Over-the-Counter Sunscreen Drug Products

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain
information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and
to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This
notice solicits comments on sun protection factor (SPF) labeling and
testing requirements for over-the-counter (OTC) sunscreen products
containing specified ingredients and marketed without approved
applications, and comments on compliance with Drug Facts labeling
requirements for all OTC sunscreen products.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection
of information by October 22, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before October 22, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
midnight Eastern Time at the end of October 22, 2018. Comments received
by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be
considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service
acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

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

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2011-N-0449 for ``Agency Information Collection Activities;
Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Sun Protection Factor Labeling
and Testing Requirements and Drug Facts Labeling for Over-the-Counter
Sunscreen Drug Products.'' Received comments, those filed in a timely
manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except for
those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at
https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between
9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The

second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information
redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted
on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets
Management Staff. If you do not wish your name and contact information
to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the
cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify
this information as ``confidential.'' Any information marked as
``confidential'' will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR
10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about
FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September
18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Domini Bean, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information,
before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with
this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection
of information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

SPF Labeling and Testing Requirements for OTC Sunscreen Products--21
CFR 201.327(a)(1) and (i), 21 CFR 201.66(c) and (d)

OMB Control Number 0910-0717--Extension

I. Background

    In the Federal Register of June 17, 2011 (76 FR 35620), we
published a final rule establishing labeling and effectiveness testing
requirements for certain OTC sunscreen products containing specified
active ingredients without approved applications (2011 sunscreen final
rule; Sec.  201.327 (21 CFR 201.327)). In addition to establishing
testing requirements, the 2011 sunscreen final rule lifted the delay of
implementing the prior 1999 sunscreen final rule (published in the
Federal Register of May 21, 1999 (64 FR 27666) and stayed in the
Federal Register of December 31, 2001 (66 FR 67485) from complying with
the 1999 Drug Facts labeling final rule (published in the Federal
Register of March 17, 1999 (64 FR 13254)), in which we amended our
regulations governing requirements for human drug products to establish
standardized format and content requirements for the labeling of all
marketed OTC drug products in part 201 (21 CFR part 201). Specifically,
the 1999 Drug Facts labeling final rule added new Sec.  201.66 to part
201. Section 201.66 establishes content and format requirements for the
Drug Facts portion of OTC drug product labels. We specifically exempted
OTC sunscreen products from complying with the 1999 Drug Facts labeling
final rule until we lifted the stay of the 1999 sunscreen final rule.
The 2011 sunscreen final rule became effective December 17, 2012, for
sunscreen products with annual sales of $25,000 or more and December
17, 2013, for sunscreen products with annual sales of less than $25,000
when we published an extension date notice in the Federal Register of
May 11, 2012 (77 FR 27591) (2012 extension date notice).

II. SPF Labeling and Testing for OTC Sunscreens Containing Specified
Active Ingredients and Marketed Without Approved Applications

    In the Federal Register of June 17, 2011 (76 FR 35678), we
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information regarding SPF labeling and testing
requirements for OTC sunscreen products containing specified
ingredients and marketed without approved applications (2011 60-day
notice). In that notice, we stated that Sec.  201.327(a)(1) requires
the principal display panel (PDP) labeling of a sunscreen covered by
the 2011 sunscreen final rule to include the SPF value determined by
conducting the SPF test outlined in Sec.  201.327(i). Therefore, that
provision resulted in an information collection with a third-party
disclosure burden for manufacturers of OTC sunscreens covered by the
2011 sunscreen rule. We determined that products need only complete the
testing and labeling required by the 2011 sunscreen rule once and then
continue to use the resultant labeling (third-party disclosure) going
forward without additional burden. This one-time testing would need to
be conducted within the first 3 years after publication of the 2011
sunscreen final rule for all OTC sunscreens covered by that rule.
    We determined that the third-party disclosure burden by
manufacturers of OTC sunscreens covered by the 2011 sunscreen rule was
based on: (1) An estimate of the time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing each collection of information;
(2) the conduct of SPF testing based on the estimated number of
existing formulations; (3) an estimate of the time to relabel currently
marketed OTC sunscreens containing specified ingredients and marketed
without approved applications; and (4) testing and labeling of new
products introduced each year. The estimate for this burden in the 2011
60-day notice was a total of 30,066 hours in years 1 and 2, and a total
of 966 in each subsequent year.
    All currently marketed OTC sunscreen drug products are already
required to comply with the SPF labeling requirements specified by the
2011 sunscreen final rule. However, our original estimate also included
the burden of new products introduced each year. We estimated that as
many as

60 new OTC sunscreen products stock keeping units (SKUs) may be
introduced each year, which must be tested and labeled with the SPF
value determined in the test. We estimated that the 60 new sunscreen
SKUs represent 39 new formulations. The burden for testing and labeling
these formulations was estimated at 30 hours per year.
    We received only two comments on our estimated information
collection burden (FDA-2011-N-0449-0002 and FDA-2011-N-0449-0003).
These comments were already addressed in FDA's notice entitled ``Agency
Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management
and Budget Review; Comment Request; Sun Protection Factor Labeling and
Testing Requirements and Drug Facts Labeling for Over-the Counter
Sunscreen Drug Products'' published in the Federal Register of May 9,
2012 (77 FR 27230).
    In the Federal Register of April 16, 2015 (80 FR 20499), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. No comments were received.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                               Table 1--Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Number of
                                              Number  of      disclosures    Total annual
                 Activity                     respondents         per         disclosures          Average burden  per disclosure           Total hours
                                                              respondent
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conduct SPF testing in accordance with                  20            1.95              39  24..........................................             936
 Sec.   201.327(i) for new sunscreens.
Create PDP labeling in accordance with                  20               3              60  0.5 (30 minutes)............................              30
 Sec.   201.327(a)(1) for new sunscreen
 SKUs.
                                           -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.................................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ............................................             966
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

III. Drug Facts Labeling for OTC Sunscreens

    Because the 2011 sunscreen final rule also lifted the delay of
implementing the Drug Facts regulations (Sec.  201.66) for OTC
sunscreens, the rule also modified the information collection
associated with Sec.  201.66 (currently approved under OMB control
number 0910-0340) and added a third-party disclosure burden resulting
from requiring OTC sunscreen products to comply with Drug Facts
regulations. In the 1999 Drug Facts labeling final rule, we amended our
regulations governing requirements for human drug products to establish
standardized format and content requirements for the labeling of all
marketed OTC drug products, codified in Sec.  201.66. This section
establishes requirements for the Drug Facts portion of labels on OTC
drug products requiring such labeling, to include uniform headings and
subheadings, presented in a standardized order with minimum standards
for type size and other graphical features. Therefore, OTC sunscreen
products already on the market at that time incurred a one-time burden
to comply with the requirements in Sec.  201.66(c) and (d). In the 60-
day notice, the burden was estimated as 43,200 hours for existing
sunscreen SKUs and 720 hours for new sunscreen SKUs.
    The compliance dates for the 2011 sunscreen final rule that lifted
the delay of the Sec.  201.66 labeling implementation data for OTC
sunscreen products were December 17, 2012, for sunscreen products with
annual sales of $25,000 or more and December 17, 2013, for sunscreen
products with annual sales of less than $25,000, respectively, when we
published the 2012 extension date notice. All currently marketed
sunscreen products are, therefore, already required to comply with the
Drug Facts labeling requirements in Sec.  201.66 and will incur no
further burden in the 1999 Drug Facts labeling final rule. However, new
OTC sunscreen drug products will be subject to a one-time burden to
comply with Drug Facts labeling requirements in Sec.  201.66. In the
2011 60-day notice, we estimated that as many as 60 new product SKUs
marketed each year must comply with Drug Facts regulations. We
estimated that these 60 SKUs would be marketed by 30 manufacturers,
which will spend approximately 12 hours on each label based on the most
recent estimate used for other OTC drug products to comply with the
1999 Drug Facts labeling final rule, including public comments received
on this estimate in 2010 that addressed sunscreens. This is equal to
720 hours annually (60 SKUs, 12 hours per SKU). We stated that we do
not expect any OTC sunscreens to apply for exemptions or deferrals of
the Drug Facts regulations in Sec.  201.66(e). However, we considered
this in 2013 and estimated the burden for an exemption or deferral by
considering the number of exemptions or deferrals we have received
since publication of the 1999 Drug Facts labeling final rule (one
response) and estimating that a request for deferral or exemption would
require 24 hours to complete. Multiplying the annual frequency of
response (0.125) by the number of hours per response (24) gives a total
response time for requesting an exemption or deferral equal to 3 hours.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                           Table 2--Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of
                                    Number  of      disclosures    Total annual       Average
            Activity                respondents         per         disclosures     burden per      Total hours
                                                    respondent                      disclosure
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Format labeling in accordance                 20               3              60              12             720
 with Sec.   201.66(c) and (d)
 for new sunscreen SKUs.........
Request for Drug Facts exemption               1           0.125           0.125              24               3
 or deferral Sec.   201.66(e)...
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............             723
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

    We note that these estimates may be adjusted in the future
development of an upcoming rulemaking on over-the-counter sunscreen
products (RIN 0910-AA01). FDA intends to amend this information
collection and/or seek approval of additional information collections,
as appropriate, concurrent with this rulemaking.

    Dated: August 16, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-18073 Filed 8-21-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 68 (Monday, April 9, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 15168]
[FR Doc No: 2018-07158]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2018-0189]

Information Collection Request to Office of Management and
Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-0101

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Sixty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request
(ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting an extension of
its approval for the following collection of information: 1625-0101,
Periodic Gauging and Engineering Analyses for Certain Tank Vessels Over
30 Years Old; without change. Our ICR describes the information we seek
to collect from the public. Before submitting this ICR to OIRA, the
Coast Guard is inviting comments as described below.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before June 8, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2018-0189] to the Coast Guard using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public
participation and request for comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.
    A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the internet
at http://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are available from:
COMMANDANT (CG-612), ATTN: PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT MANAGER, U.S. COAST
GUARD, 2703 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. AVE. SE, STOP 7710, WASHINGTON, DC
20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of
Information Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for questions on these documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to
OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard
collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information
describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on
the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection,
and other important information describing the Collection. There is one
ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether this ICR should be
granted based on the Collection being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the
Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information
subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. In response to
your comments, we may revise this ICR or decide not to seek an
extension of approval for the Collection. We will consider all comments
and material received during the comment period.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments must contain the OMB Control Number of
the ICR and the docket number of this request, [USCG-2018-0189], and
must be received by June 8, 2018.

Submitting Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions. Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public
comments, are in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that website's instructions. Additionally,
if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will
be notified when comments are posted.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).

Information Collection Request

    Title: Periodic Gauging and Engineering Analyses for Certain Tank
Vessels Over 30 Years Old.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0101.
    Summary: The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 required the issuance of
regulations related to the structural integrity of tank vessels,
including periodic gauging of the plating thickness of tank vessels
over 30 years old. This collection of information is used to verify the
structural integrity of older tank vessels.
    Need: Title 46 U.S.C. 3703 authorizes the Coast Guard to prescribe
regulations related to tank vessels, including design, construction,
alteration, repair, and maintenance. Title 46 CFR 31.10-21a prescribes
the regulations related to periodic gauging and engineering analyses of
certain tank vessels over 30 years old.
    Forms: None.
    Respondents: Owners and operators of certain tank vessels.
    Frequency: Every 5 years.
    Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has decreased from 5,278
hours to 2,784 hours a year due to a decrease in the estimated annual
number of respondents.

    Authority:  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended.

    Dated: March 29, 2018.
James D. Roppel,
U.S. Coast Guard, Division Chief, Directives and Publications.
[FR Doc. 2018-07158 Filed 4-6-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: August 14, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 156)]
[Notices]
[Page 41176]
[DOCID:fr14au09-83]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

U.S. Canadian Minerals, Inc.; Order of Suspension of Trading

August 12, 2009.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
U.S. Canadian Minerals, Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board symbol: USCN), a
Nevada corporation. Questions have been raised about the accuracy and
adequacy of publicly disseminated information concerning, among other
things, U.S. Canadian Minerals' liabilities, stock issuances, recent
merger transaction, business prospects, and recently acquired purported
assets.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of U.S. Canadian Minerals, Inc.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the
above-listed company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT,
August 12, 2009, through 11:59 p.m. EDT, on August 25, 2009.

    By the Commission.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-19627 Filed 8-12-09; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: June 8, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 108)]
[Notices]
[Page 27139]
[DOCID:fr08jn09-43]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER09-1195-000]

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

May 29, 2009.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Palmco Power PA, 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 June 19, 2009.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-13226 Filed 6-5-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: July 17, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 136)]
[Notices]
[Page 40556-40557]
[DOCID:fr17jy06-111]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC
20549.

Extension:
    Rule 17a-6, SEC File No. 270-433, OMB Control No. 3235-0489.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget a request for extension of the previously approved
collection of information discussed below.
    Rule 17a-6 (17 CFR 240.17a-6) under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.) permits national securities exchanges,
national securities associations, registered clearing agencies, and the
Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (collectively, ``SROs'') to
destroy or convert to microfilm or other recording media

records maintained under Rule 17a-1, if they have filed a record
destruction plan with the Commission and the Commission has declared
such plan effective.
    There are currently 22 SROs: 10 national securities exchanges, 1
national securities association, 10 registered clearing agencies, and
the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. These respondents file no
more than one record destruction plan per year, which requires
approximately 160 hours for each new plan. However, the Commission is
discounting that figure given its experience to date with the number of
plans that have been filed. Further, any existing SRO record
destructions plan may require revision, over time, in response to, for
example, changes in document retention technology, which the Commission
estimates will take much less than the 160 hours estimated for a new
plan. Thus, the total annual compliance burden is estimated to be 60
hours, based on an estimated two respondents per year. The approximate
cost per hour is $250, resulting in a total cost of compliance for
    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 control number.
    General comments regarding the estimated burden hours should be
directed to the following persons: (i) The Desk Officer for the
Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New
Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or by sending an e-mail
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Shirley
Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or by sending
an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments must be submitted within 30
days of this notice.

    Dated: July 10, 2006.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-11230 Filed 7-14-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 229 (Thursday, December 2, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 68491]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26194]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER22-480-000]

Rock Aetna Power Partners, 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
Rock Aetna Power Partners, 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 December 16, 2021.
    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 may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: November 26, 2021.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-26194 Filed 12-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


1 31 January 2003 Regional Methodology Used in the § 316( b) Phase II Notice of Data Availability Objectives of Regional Approach In its analysis for the § 316( b) Phase II proposal, EPA relied on nine case studies to estimate the potential economic benefits of reduced impingement and entrainment ( I& E) EPA extrapolated facility specific estimates to other facilities located on the same waterbody type and summed the results for all waterbody types to obtain national estimates. A number of commenters expressed concern about this method of extrapolation, noting that even within the same water body type, there are important ecological and socioeconomic differences among different regions of the country. For example, commercial and recreational fisheries of Atlantic Coast estuaries are substantially different from those of Pacific Coast estuaries.

To address this concern, EPA has revised the design of its analysis to examine impingement and entrainment ( I& E) losses, and the economic benefits of reducing these losses,

at the regional scale. The estimated benefits are then aggregated across all regions to yield a national benefit estimate.

EPA is proposing this regional approach for the national rulemaking effort, but is not advocating that this approach be followed for impact and/ or benefits analyses that might be conducted for individual National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) permits.

At the individual permit level it is both necessary and possible to conduct a more detailed,

sitespecific analysis on the environmental ramifications of cooling water intake structures governed by the permit in question than is necessary or feasible for this national level rulemaking analysis.

Definitions of Regions


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 91 (Friday, May 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 27414]
[FR Doc No: 2013-11111]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4110-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2013-0001]

Massachusetts; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (FEMA-4110-DR), dated
April 19, 2013, and related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: April 19, 2013.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated April 19, 2013, the President issued a major disaster declaration
under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford
Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in the Commonwealth
Massachusetts resulting from the severe winter storm, snowstorm, and
flooding during the period of February 8-9, 2013, is of sufficient
severity and magnitude to warrant a major disaster declaration under
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act,
42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare
that such a major disaster exists in the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the Commonwealth.
You are further authorized to provide snow assistance under the
Public Assistance program for a limited period of time during or
proximate to the incident period. Consistent with the requirement
that Federal assistance is supplemental, any Federal funds provided
under the Stafford Act for Public Assistance and Hazard Mitigation
will be limited to 75 percent of the total eligible costs.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, James N. Russo, of FEMA is appointed
to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.
    The following areas of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts have been
designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Barnstable, Berkshire, Bristol, Dukes, Essex, Franklin, Hampden,
Hampshire, Middlesex, Nantucket, Norfolk, Plymouth, Suffolk, and
Worcester Counties for Public Assistance.
    Berkshire, Bristol, Essex, Franklin, Hampden, Hampshire,
Middlesex, Norfolk, Suffolk, and Worcester Counties for snow
assistance under the Public Assistance program for any continuous
48-hour period during or proximate to the incident period.
    All counties within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts are
eligible to apply for assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program.

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

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator,
    Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2013-11111 Filed 5-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: May 16, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 94)]
[Notices]
[Page 28315]
[DOCID:fr16my06-65]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL05-148-000; ER05-1410-000]

PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of Initiation of Proceeding
and Refund Effective Date

May 9, 2006.
    On April 20, 2006, the Commission issued an order that initiated a
proceeding in Docket Nos. EL05-148-000 and ER05-1410-000, pursuant to
section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPS), 16 U.S.C. 824e (2005),
concerning the justness and reasonableness of PJM Interconnection,
L.L.C.'s reliability pricing model proposal (RPM). PJM Interconnection,
L.L.C., 115 FERC ] 61,079 (2006).
    The refund effective date in Docket Nos. EL05-148-000 and ER05-
1410-000, established pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be
the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-7373 Filed 5-15-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P