[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 221 (Thursday, November 15, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68203-68204]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27790]

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

 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2012-0006-N-15]

Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and its
implementing regulations, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)
hereby announces that it is seeking renewal of the following currently
approved information collection activities. Before submitting these
information collection requirements for clearance by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), FRA is soliciting public comment on
specific aspects of the activities identified below.

DATES: Comments must be received no later than January 14, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments on any or all of the following
proposed activities by mail to either: Mr. Robert Brogan, Office of
Safety, Planning and Evaluation Division, RRS-21, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Mail Stop 25, Washington, DC
20590, or Ms. Kimberly Toone, Office of Information Technology, RAD-20,
Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Mail Stop
35, Washington, DC 20590. Commenters requesting FRA to acknowledge
receipt of their respective comments must include a self-addressed
stamped postcard stating, ``Comments on OMB Control Number 2130-0525''
and/or ``Comments on OMB Control Number 2130-0529.'' Alternatively,
comments may be transmitted via facsimile to<PHONE_NUMBER> or (202)
493-6170, or via email to Mr. Brogan at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or to
Ms. Toone at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please refer to the assigned OMB
control number in any correspondence submitted. FRA will summarize
comments received in response to this notice in a subsequent notice and
include them in its information collection submission to OMB for
approval.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Brogan, Office of Planning
and Evaluation Division, RRS-21, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200
New Jersey Ave. SE., Mail Stop 25, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone:
(202) 493-6292) or Ms. Ms. Kimberly Toone, Office of Information
Technology, RAD-20, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Ave. SE., Mail Stop 35, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: (202) 493-
6132). (These telephone numbers are not toll-free.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
Public Law 104-13, Sec.  2, 109 Stat. 163 (1995) (codified as revised
at 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), and its implementing regulations, 5 CFR Part
1320, require Federal agencies to provide 60-day notice to the public
for comment on information collection activities before seeking
approval for reinstatement or renewal by OMB. 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A);
5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1),

1320.10(e)(1), 1320.12(a). Specifically, FRA invites interested
respondents to comment on the following summary of proposed information
collection activities regarding (i) whether the information collection
activities are necessary for FRA to properly execute its functions,
including whether the activities will have practical utility; (ii) the
accuracy of FRA's estimates of the burden of the information collection
activities, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used to determine the estimates; (iii) ways for FRA to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information being collected; and
(iv) ways for FRA to minimize the burden of information collection
activities on the public by automated, electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology (e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses). See
44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)(i)-(iv); 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1)(i)-(iv). FRA
believes that soliciting public comment will promote its efforts to
reduce the administrative and paperwork burdens associated with the
collection of information mandated by Federal regulations. In summary,
FRA reasons that comments received will advance three objectives: (i)
Reduce reporting burdens; (ii) ensure that it organizes information
collection requirements in a ``user friendly'' format to improve the
use of such information; and (iii) accurately assess the resources
expended to retrieve and produce information requested. See 44 U.S.C.
3501.
    Below are brief summaries of the two currently approved information
collection activities that FRA will submit for clearance by OMB as
required under the PRA:
    Title: Certification of Glazing Materials.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0525.
    Abstract: The collection of information is set forth under 49 CFR
Part 223, which requires the certification and permanent marking of
glazing materials by the manufacturer. The manufacturer is also
responsible for making available test verification data to railroads
and FRA upon request.
    Form Number(s): N/A.
    Affected Public: Businesses.
    Respondent Universe: 5 Manufacturers.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Total annual       Average time per    Total annual
           CFR section             Respondent universe       responses             response        burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
223.17--Identification of          4 Manufacturers....  200 stencilings or   15 minutes.........              50
 Equipped Locomotives, Passenger                         metal plates.
 Cars, and Caboose.
223.17--Appendix A--Requests for   5 Manufacturers....  10 request.........  15 minutes.........               3
 Glazing Certification.
    --Marking Individual Units of  5 Manufacturers....  25,000 pieces......  480 pieces per hour              52
     Glazing Material.
    --Testing New Material and     5 Manufacturers....  1 test.............  14 hours...........              14
     Providing Verification Data.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Frequency of Submission: On occasion.
    Total Responses: 25,211.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 119 hours.
    Status: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Disqualification Proceedings.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0529.
    Abstract: Under 49 U.S.C. 20111(c), FRA is authorized to issue
orders disqualifying railroad employees, including supervisors,
managers, and other agents, from performing safety-sensitive service in
the rail industry for violations of safety rules, regulations,
standards, orders, or laws evidencing unfitness. FRA's regulations, 49
CFR Part 209, Subpart D, implement the statutory provision by requiring
(i) a railroad employing or formerly employing a disqualified
individual to disclose the terms and conditions of a disqualification
order to the individual's new or prospective employing railroad; (ii) a
railroad considering employing an individual in a safety-sensitive
position to ask the individual's previous employing railroad whether
the individual is currently serving under a disqualification order; and
(iii) a disqualified individual to inform his new or prospective
employer of the disqualification order and provide a copy of the same.
Additionally, the regulations prohibit a railroad from employing a
person serving under a disqualification order to work in a safety-
sensitive position. This information serves to inform a railroad
whether an employee or prospective employee is currently disqualified
from performing safety-sensitive service based on the issuance of a
disqualification order by FRA. Furthermore, it prevents an individual
currently serving under a disqualification order from retaining and
obtaining employment in a safety-sensitive position in the rail
industry.
    Form Number(s): N/A.
    Affected Public: Railroad Employees.
    Respondent Universe: 40,000 Locomotive Engineers.
    Total Responses: 3.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 5 hours.
    Status: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3507(a) and 5 CFR 1320.5(b),
1320.8(b)(3)(vi), FRA informs all interested parties that it may not
conduct or sponsor, and a respondent is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.

    Authority:  44 U.S.C. 3501-3520.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 8, 2012.
Rebecca Pennington,
Chief Financial Officer, Federal Railroad Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012-27790 Filed 11-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 19 (Wednesday, January 29, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4685-4688]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01678]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2124-006; ER10-2125-007; ER10-2127-005; ER10-
2128-006; ER10-2129-005; ER10-2130-006; ER10-2131-006; ER10-2132-006;
ER10-2133-006; ER10-2134-004; ER10-2135-005; ER10-2136-005; ER10-2137-
006; ER10-2138-006; ER10-2139-006; ER10-2140-006; ER10-2141-006; ER10-
2764-006; ER11-3872-007; ER11-4044-007; ER11-4046-006; ER12-161-005;
ER12-164-005; ER12-645-007; ER14-25-002.
    Applicants: Spring Canyon Energy LLC, Judith Gap Energy LLC,
Invenergy TN LLC, Wolverine Creek Energy LLC, Grays Harbor Energy LLC,
Forward Energy LLC, Grand Ridge Energy LLC, Grand Ridge Energy V LLC,
Grand Ridge Energy II LLC, Grand Ridge Energy III LLC, Grand Ridge
Energy IV LLC, Willow Creek Energy LLC, Hardee Power Partners Limited,
Spindle Hill Energy LLC, Invenergy Cannon Falls LLC, Beech Ridge Energy
LLC, Vantage Wind Energy LLC, Stony Creek Energy LLC, Gratiot County
Wind II LLC, Gratiot County Wind LLC, Bishop Hill Energy LLC, Bishop
Hill Energy III LLC, California Ridge Wind Energy LLC, Prairie Breeze
Wind Energy LLC.
    Description: Notification of Change in Facts of Spring Canyon
Energy LLC, et. al.

    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5107.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2374-004; ER10-1533-005.
    Applicants: Puget Sound Energy, Inc., Macquarie Energy LLC.
    Description: Second Amendment to June 28, 2013 Triennial Updated
Market Power Analysis in the Northwest Region of Puget Sound Energy,
Inc., et. al.
    Filed Date: 1/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140116-5127.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/6/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2718-016; ER10-2719-016.
    Applicants: EAST COAST POWER LINDEN HOLDINGS, LLC, Cogen
Technologies Linden Venture, L.P.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Cogen
Technologies Linden Venture, L.P., et. al.
    Filed Date: 1/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140116-5152.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/6/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2447-002.
    Applicants: Pacific Northwest Generating Cooperative.
    Description: Updated Market Power Analysis of Pacific Northwest
Generating Cooperative, Inc. under ER11-2447.
    Filed Date: 1/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140116-5153.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 3/17/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER11-3859-007; ER13-2477-002; ER10-1946-005; ER11-
3863-006; ER13-2476-002; ER11-3861-006; ER11-3864-007; ER13-2475-002;
ER11-3866-007; ER12-192-005; ER11-3867-007; ER11-3857-007; ER11-4266-
006.
    Applicants: Brayton Point Energy, LLC, Broad River Energy LLC,
Dighton Power, LLC, ELWOOD ENERGY LLC, Empire Generating Co, LLC,
EquiPower Resources Management, LLC, Kincaid Generation, L.L.C., Lake
Road Generating Company, L.P., Liberty Electric Power, LLC, MASSPOWER,
Milford Power Company, LLC, Richland-Stryker Generation LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of the ECP MBR Sellers.
    Filed Date: 1/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140116-5142.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/6/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1654-002.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM response to FERC Staff Request for Add'l Inform
Dec 18 2013-ER13-1654-001 to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 1/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140116-5126.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/6/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-1877-001.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., New England Power Pool
Participants Committee.
    Description: Compliance ER13-1877--Energy Mkt Flex Chges to be
effective 12/3/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5020.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1003-001.
    Applicants: Berry Petroleum Company.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Berry
Petroleum Company.
    Filed Date: 1/15/14.
    Accession Number: 20140115-5196.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/5/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1008-000.
    Applicants: AEP Texas Central Company.
    Description: TCC-OCI Alamo 4 Interconnection Agreement to be
effective 12/26/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140116-5090.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/6/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1009-000.
    Applicants: AEP Texas North Company.
    Description: TNC-Barilla Solar Interconnection Agreement to be
effective 12/26/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140116-5093.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/6/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1010-000.
    Applicants: NorthWestern Corporation.
    Description: SA 708--Calumet Montana Refining Construction
Agreement to be effective 1/17/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140116-5105.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/6/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1011-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Progress, Inc.
    Description: OATT Camden NITSA SA 309 to be effective 1/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140116-5111.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/6/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1012-000.
    Applicants: Portland General Electric Company.
    Description: Service Agreements Under the PGE OATT to be effective
1/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140116-5114.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/6/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1013-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, L.L.C.
    Description: EGSL-LaGen Big Cajun II LGIA to be effective 12/16/
2013.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5000.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1014-000.
    Applicants: Bridgeport Energy LLC.
    Description: Filing in Compliance with Order No. 784 to be
effective 11/27/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5022.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1015-000.
    Applicants: Your Energy Holdings, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Cancellation of Market Based Rate Tariff and
Request for Waiver of Form 566 filing of Your Energy Holdings, LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140116-5151.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/6/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1016-000.
    Applicants: Stony Creek Energy LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5032.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1017-000.
    Applicants: Bishop Hill Energy III LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5034.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1018-000.
    Applicants: Bishop Hill Energy LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5035.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1019-000.
    Applicants: Gratiot County Wind LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5036.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1020-000.
    Applicants: Gratiot County Wind II LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5037.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1021-000.
    Applicants: Invenergy Cannon Falls LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.

    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5038.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1022-000.
    Applicants: California Ridge Wind Energy LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5040.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1023-000.
    Applicants: Forward Energy LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5045.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1024-000.
    Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy V LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5046.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1025-000.
    Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy III LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5047.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1026-000.
    Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy II LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5048.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1027-000.
    Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy IV LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5049.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1028-000.
    Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5050.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1029-000.
    Applicants: Sheldon Energy LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5051.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.
    Docket Numbers: ER14-1030-000.
    Applicants: Beech Ridge Energy LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5052.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1031-000.
    Applicants: Invenergy TN LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5053.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1032-000.
    Applicants: Prairie Breeze Wind Energy LLC.
    Description: Revised Market-Based Rate Tariff Filing to be
effective 1/18/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5054.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1033-000.
    Applicants: Emera Energy Services, Inc.
    Description: Filing in Compliance with Order No. 784 to be
effective 11/27/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5073.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1034-000.
    Applicants: Emera Energy Services Subsidiary No. 3 L.
    Description: Filing in Compliance with Order No. 784 to be
effective 11/27/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5098.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1035-000.
    Applicants: Emera Energy Services Subsidiary No. 4 L.
    Description: Filing in Compliance with Order No. 784 to be
effective 11/27/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5104.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1036-000.
    Applicants: Emera Energy Services Subsidiary No. 5 L.
    Description: Filing in Compliance with Order No. 784 to be
effective 11/27/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5112.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1037-000.
    Applicants: Emera Energy Services Subsidiary No. 6 L.
    Description: Filing in Compliance with Order No. 784 to be
effective 11/27/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5113.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1038-000.
    Applicants: Emera Energy Services Subsidiary No. 7 L.
    Description: Filing in Compliance with Order No. 784 to be
effective 11/27/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5114.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1039-000.
    Applicants: Emera Energy Services Subsidiary No. 8 L.
    Description: Filing in Compliance with Order No. 784 to be
effective 11/27/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5115.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1041-000.
    Applicants: Emera Energy Services Subsidiary No. 9 L.
    Description: Filing in Compliance with Order No. 784 to be
effective 11/27/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5128.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1042-000.
    Applicants: Emera Energy Services Subsidiary No. 10.
    Description: Filing in Compliance with Order No. 784 to be
effective 11/27/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5150.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1043-000.
    Applicants: Emera Energy U.S. Subsidiary No. 1, Inc.
    Description: Filing in Compliance with Order No. 784 to be
effective 11/27/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/17/14.
    Accession Number: 20140117-5153.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/7/14.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing

requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: January 17, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-01678 Filed 1-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 157 (Wednesday, August 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38901-38902]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17263]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP17-74-000]

National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation; Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review of the Line YM28 & Line FM120 Modernization
Project

    On March 10, 2017, National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation (National
Fuel) filed an application in Docket No. CP17-74-000 requesting an
authorization and a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
pursuant to Sections 7(b) and 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act to abandon,
construct, and operate certain natural gas pipeline facilities. The
proposed project is known as the Line YM28 & Line FM120 Modernization
Project (Project).
    On March 24, 2017, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission or FERC) issued its Notice of Application for the Project.
Among other things, that notice alerted agencies issuing federal
authorizations of the requirement to complete all necessary reviews and
to reach a final decision on a request for a federal authorization
within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Project. This instant notice
identifies the FERC staff's planned schedule for the completion of the
EA for the Project.

Schedule for Environmental Review

Issuance of EA September 29, 2017
90-day Federal Authorization Decision Deadline December 28, 2017

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

Project Description

    National Fuel proposes to construct, operate, and abandon various
facilities in Cameron, Elk, and McKean Counties, Pennsylvania.
According to National Fuel, the Project would enhance the reliability
and safety of the National Fuel system, allow for continued
transportation services performed by the abandoned facilities, and
offer better connectivity for storage and transportation services to
National Fuel's backbone transmission pipeline (Line K).
    The Project would consist of the following:
     Approximately 14.4 miles of new 12-inch-diameter pipeline
installed within existing rights-of-way in McKean County (designated
Line KL);

     approximately 5.8 miles of new 6-inch-diameter pipeline
installed via insertion into the existing 12-inch-diameter FM120
pipeline in McKean and Elk Counties;
     abandonment in place of approximately 7.7 miles of the
existing Line YM28 in McKean County;
     approximately 12.5 miles of Line FM120 removed from
service in McKean, Elk, and Cameron Counties;
     removal and relocation of a meter set to the proposed Line
KL; and
     new ancillary facilities including an interconnect in
McKean County and miscellaneous valve and piping modifications.

Background

    On May 16, 2017, the Commission issued a Notice of Intent to
Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Line YM28 & Line
FM120 Modernization Project and Request for Comments on Environmental
Issues (NOI). The NOI was sent to affected landowners; federal, state,
and local government agencies; elected officials; environmental and
public interest groups; Native American tribes; other interested
parties; and local libraries and newspapers. In response to the NOI,
the Commission received comments from the Alleghany Defense Project and
William Belitskus. The primary issues raised by the commenters are
improper segmentation of the Project from the Northern Access 2016
Project, cumulative impacts, and impacts from increased shale gas
development.

Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to
keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets,
the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription. This can
reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by
automatically providing you with notification of these filings,
document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Additional information about the Project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs at (866) 208-FERC or on the
FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov). Using the ``eLibrary'' link, select
``General Search'' from the eLibrary menu, enter the selected date
range and ``Docket Number'' excluding the last three digits (i.e.,
CP17-74), and follow the instructions. For assistance with access to
eLibrary, the helpline can be reached at<PHONE_NUMBER>, TTY (202) 502-
8659, or at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The eLibrary link on the FERC
Web site also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued
by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rule makings.

    Dated: August 9, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-17263 Filed 8-15-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Ekvall T, Weidema BP, 2004, System boundaries and input data in
consequential life cycle inventory analysis. International Journal of
Life Cycle Assessment,  9, 161-171

This document has been copyrighted and is not available in the
electronic docket.  Parties that wish to view a hard copy of this
document can do so at the at the EPA Docket Center:  Air and Radiation
Docket and Information Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW, Washington DC.  The Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays.  The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 161 (Wednesday, August 19, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51025-51026]
[FR Doc No: 2020-18138]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC20-85-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Texas, Inc.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act of Entergy Texas, Inc.
    Filed Date: 7/30/20.
    Accession Number: 20200730-5263.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/28/20.

    Docket Numbers: EC20-88-000.
    Applicants: Tonopah Solar Energy, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act, et al. of Tonopah Solar Energy, LLC.
    Filed Date: 8/12/20.
    Accession Number: 20200812-5188.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/2/20.

    Docket Numbers: EC20-89-000.
    Applicants: Baldwin Wind, LLC, Baldwin Wind Energy, LLC, Day County
Wind, LLC, Day County Wind I, LLC, Gray County Wind Energy, LLC, Gray
County Wind, LLC, High Majestic Wind Energy Center, LLC, High Majestic
Wind I, LLC, Minco Wind, LLC, Minco Wind I, LLC, FPL Energy Cowboy
Wind, LLC, Weatherford Wind, LLC.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act, et al. of Baldwin Wind, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 8/12/20.
    Accession Number: 20200812-5189.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/2/20.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER19-467-005.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance to set effective date
under ER19-467-000, et al, related to ESR model to be effective 8/26/
2020.
    Filed Date: 8/12/20.
    Accession Number: 20200812-5152.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/2/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-2745-002.
    Applicants: New Creek Wind LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: New Creek Wind, LLC Compliance
Filing Under Docket No. ER19-2745 to be effective 11/4/2019.
    Filed Date: 8/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200813-5071.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/3/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1696-001.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance to set effective date
for ESR provisions to be effective 8/26/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/12/20.
    Accession Number: 20200812-5150.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/2/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1847-001.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance Filing per the
Commission's 7/19/2020 order re: Docket No. ER20-1847 to be effective
4/23/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200813-5078.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/3/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1851-001.
    Applicants: Whitetail Solar 3, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Deficiency Filing for Whitetail
Solar 3 Reactive Rate Schedule to be effective 7/18/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/12/20.
    Accession Number: 20200812-5153.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/2/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-1863-000.
    Applicants: Ingenco Wholesale Power, L.L.C.
    Description: Report Filing: Deficiency Filing #2 for Ingenco
Reactive Rate Schedule to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 8/10/20.
    Accession Number: 20200810-5168.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/31/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2113-001.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: Compliance filing to set effective
date for ESR provisions to be effective 8/26/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/12/20.
    Accession Number: 20200812-5155.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/2/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2164-001.
    Applicants: H.A. Wagner LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Market-Based Rate
Tariff Revision Filing to be effective 6/26/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200813-5082.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/3/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2165-001.
    Applicants: LMBE Project Company LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Market-Based Rate
Tariff Revision Filing to be effective 6/26/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200813-5081.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/3/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2656-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.,
Republic Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2020-08-13_Republic
Transmission Regulatory Asset Filing to be effective 10/13/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200813-5023.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/3/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2657-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to WMPA, Service
Agreement No. 5314; Queue No. AE1-081 to be effective 2/17/2019.
    Filed Date: 8/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200813-5037.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/3/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2658-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: BPA Kennewick Mobile REDI
Communications Agr to be effective 8/30/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200813-5068.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/3/20.

    Docket Numbers: ER20-2659-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: PNM-EL Cabo Attachment A-1
to be effective 7/14/2020.
    Filed Date: 8/13/20.
    Accession Number: 20200813-5085.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/3/20.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 13, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-18138 Filed 8-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 249 (Tuesday, December 29, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 81304-81305]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32697]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 10253-032]

Pelzer Hydro Company, LLC; Consolidated Hydro Southeast, LLC;
Notice of Application Tendered for Filing With the Commission and
Soliciting Additional Study Requests and Establishing Procedural
Schedule for Relicensing and a Deadline for Submission of Final
Amendments

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Minor New License.

    b. Project No.: P-10253-032.
    c. Date filed: November 30, 2015.
    d. Applicant: Pelzer Hydro Company, LLC and Consolidated Hydro
Southeast, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: Lower Pelzer Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On the Saluda River, in Anderson and Greenville
Counties, South Carolina. The project does not occupy lands of the
United States.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791 (a)--825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Beth E. Harris, P.E., Regional Operations
Manager, Enel Green Power North America, Inc., 11 Anderson St.,
Piedmont, SC 29674;<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Sean Murphy,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the
environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such
requests described in item l below. Cooperating agencies should note
the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation
of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See, 94 FERC ]
61,076 (2001).
    k. Pursuant to section 4.32(b)(7) of 18 CFR of the Commission's
regulations, if any resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person believes
that an additional scientific study should be conducted in order to
form an adequate factual basis for a complete analysis of the
application on its merit, the resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person
must file a request for a study with the Commission not later than 60
days from the date of filing of the application, and serve a copy of
the request on the applicant.
    l. Deadline for filing additional study requests and requests for
cooperating agency status: January 29, 2016
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
additional study requests and requests for cooperating agency status
using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202)
502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy
to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street
NE., Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-10253-032.
    m. The application is not ready for environmental analysis at this
time.
    n. The Lower Pelzer Hydroelectric Project consists of: (a) a
granite masonry dam with 310-foot-long overflow spillway section
surmounted with four-foot-high flashboards, a 40-foot-long non-overflow
section incorporating two gates and openings, a 110-foot-long
powerhouse, and a 236-foot-long non-overflow section; (b) a reservoir
with a surface area of 80 acres and a storage capacity of 400 acre-feet
at an elevation of 693 feet m.s.l.; (c) a 600 foot-long tailrace; (d)
four 750-kVA synchronous generators and a 300-kVA synchronous generator
for a total generating capacity of 3,300 kW; (e) 3.3-kVA generator
leads; (f) a 3-mile-long 3.3-kVA overhead transmission line; and (g)
appurtenant facilities.
    o. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact
FERC Online Support. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in item h above.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    p. Procedural schedule and final amendments: The application will
be processed according to the following preliminary Hydro Licensing
Schedule. Revisions to the schedule will be made as appropriate.

Issue Notice of Acceptance............  August 2016.
Issue Scoping Document 1 for comments.  October 2016.
Comments on Scoping Document 1due.....  December 2016.
Issue Scoping Document 2..............  February 2017.
Issue notice of ready for               March 2017.
 environmental analysis.
Commission issues EA..................  October 2017.
Comments on EA due....................  November 2017.
Commission issues final EA............  January 2018.

    Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice
of ready for environmental analysis.

    Dated: December 22, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-32697 Filed 12-28-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 230 (Thursday, November 29, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71163-71166]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28815]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 571

[Docket No. NHTSA 2008-0124]
RIN 2127-AK13

Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Windshield Zone Intrusion

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

ACTION: Withdrawal of rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: This document withdraws a rulemaking proposal to rescind
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 219, ``Windshield
zone intrusion.'' The agency has determined that there are two ongoing
regulatory developments that could influence vehicle designs by putting
a premium on the use of lighter or less rigid materials. These two
developments are U.S. fuel economy requirements and a global technical
regulation aimed at reducing injuries to pedestrians struck by
vehicles. As a result, the agency believes that vehicle designs with
regard to the hood and windshield are in a state of change and that the
implications of these developments should be better understood before
deciding whether to rescind FMVSS No. 219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, you may contact
Mr. David Sutula, Office of Crashworthiness Standards, NHTSA, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) (Fax:
202-366-2739).
    For legal issues, you may contact Ms. Analiese Marchesseault,
Office of the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) (Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. NPRM To Rescind FMVSS No. 219
III. Agency Response to Comments on the NPRM
    A. The Changing Vehicle Fleet
    B. Real World Data
    C. Dummy and Air Bag Performance in Windshield Zone Intrusion
    D. Industry Burden
    E. Possible Effect of FMVSS No. 219 Rescission on State
Regulation
IV. Agency Decision To Withdraw the Rulemaking

I. Background

    FMVSS No. 219, ``Windshield zone intrusion,'' provides that a
vehicle's hood must not enter a defined zone in front of the vehicle's
windshield during a full frontal crash test at 48 kilometers per hour
(km/h) (30 miles per hour (mph)). The purpose of the standard is to
reduce injuries and fatalities that result from occupant contact with
vehicle components, such as the hood, that are displaced into the
occupant compartment through the windshield opening or into the zone
immediately forward of the windshield aperture during a frontal crash.
    FMVSS No. 219 specifies a protected zone at the daylight opening
(DLO) portion of the vehicle windshield. The protected zone is an area
encompassing the width of the windshield and that protrudes about 76 mm
(3 inches) from the outer surface of the windshield. In a 48 km/h (30
mph) frontal rigid barrier crash test, no part of the vehicle from
outside the occupant compartment, except windshield molding and other
components designed to normally be in contact with the windshield, are
permitted to penetrate the protected zone to a depth of more than 6 mm
(0.25 inches) and no such part of a vehicle is permitted to penetrate
the inner surface of that portion of the windshield, within the DLO,
below the protected zone.
    FMVSS No. 219, which took effect on September 1, 1976, applies to
passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses with
a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 kilograms (kg) (10,000 pounds)
or less, except for forward control vehicles, walk-in van-type
vehicles, or open-body-type vehicles with fold-down or removable
windshields. NHTSA has maintained this standard without substantive
revision since 1976.

II. NPRM To Rescind FMVSS No. 219

    As part of a periodic review of existing vehicle safety regulations
to determine whether a continuing safety need exists for the standard
under review, NHTSA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
that proposed to rescind FMVSS No. 219 on July 7, 2008.\1\ NHTSA
undertakes periodic reviews of its regulations under, inter alia, the
Department's 1979 Regulatory Policies and Procedures, under Executive
Order 12866 ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' and under section 610
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 501 et seq.). In addition,
NHTSA conducts reviews pursuant to its internal operating procedures.
During this review process, FMVSS No. 219 was identified as a standard
that could possibly be removed as unnecessary. The NPRM tentatively
concluded that the safety need that FMVSS No. 219 addresses was being
met by FMVSS No. 208, ``Occupant crash protection,'' and FMVSS No. 113,
``Hood latch system.'' The NPRM cited the improvements made to FMVSS
No. 208 over the years as well as the secondary latch position required
by FMVSS No. 113. Based on the performance requirements in FMVSS No.
208 and FMVSS No. 113, the agency tentatively concluded that FMVSS No.
219 was no longer necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 73 FR 38372.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our belief stemmed from the fact that FMVSS No. 219 had succeeded
in virtually eliminating the intrusion of vehicle components from
outside the occupant compartment into the windshield. The agency's
analysis of FMVSS compliance and New Car Assessment Program (NCAP)
tests indicated there had been no known incidents in which a crash
tested vehicle failed to meet the performance requirements in FMVSS No.
219. Furthermore, in a preliminary analysis of crashes in the National
Automotive Sampling System (NASS) Crashworthiness Data System (CDS), no
hood intrusions into the areas prescribed by FMVSS No. 219 were found
among full frontal crashes.

III. Agency Response to Comments on the NPRM

    The following organizations submitted comments on the NPRM: Public
Citizen and the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) (the two commenters
submitted joint comments), Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety
(Advocates), the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), and the
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (Alliance).\2\ The issues raised
include: changes in the vehicle fleet, real world data, dummy and air
bag performance in

windshield zone intrusion, industry burden and possible effects of
FMVSS No. 219 rescission on State regulation. The consumer advocacy
organizations and the insurance consortium did not support the NPRM,
while the vehicle manufacturer organization generally supported the
rescission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The members included: BMW Group, Chrysler LLC, Ford Motor
Company, General Motors, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz USA, Mitsubishi,
Porsche, Toyota, and Volkswagen.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. The Changing Vehicle Fleet

    Public Citizen/CAS stated, ``In coming years, there will be an
influx of new small cars from Europe and Asia, which will not
necessarily be designed with consideration of FMVSS [No.] 219 if it is
rescinded.'' Advocates stated that ``both long and short-term changes
in the vehicle fleet make this an inappropriate action to take at this
time.'' Advocates stated:

the vehicle manufacturing industry is in a rapidly evolving, dynamic
state and is developing radically new designs and types of motor
vehicles. Small, uniquely designed vehicles are being produced in
Europe and imported into the U.S. Three-wheel vehicles are also
nearing entry into the U.S. market. In the near future, production
of vehicles in China will supply many more models for import into
the U.S. market, and inexpensive passenger vehicles using new
designs are planned in India and other countries that may eventually
be sold in the U.S. In addition, alternative fuel vehicles will
incorporate unknown designs and features that, without the
performance requirement and safety protection for occupants provided
by FMVSS No. 219, may present safety threats that neither FMVSS No.
208 nor FMVSS No. 113 are equipped to prevent.

    IIHS commented that ``NHTSA is underestimating the continuing
benefits of FMVSS [No.] 219, especially considering a growing global
market, while simultaneously overestimating the benefits of its
rescission.''
    Agency Response: The agency agrees that the vehicle fleet is in a
period of change because of many factors. We agree that the U.S. fleet
may begin to see new entrants from foreign and domestic manufacturers
that have less experience with the FMVSS framework, in comparison to
manufacturers that have long been part of the U.S. market. In addition,
we also believe a period of change may be initiated by two specific
influences on vehicle design, the effects of which have not yet been
fully determined. Those influences are more stringent U.S. Corporate
Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards and a global technical regulation
requiring changes in vehicle design aimed at minimizing injuries to
pedestrians that are struck by automobiles.
    We believe manufacturers may begin using lighter materials to meet
CAFE standards, including materials in and around the hoods of
vehicles. Hood design could be affected by the use of lighter
materials. We, therefore, agree with commenters that suggested that
FMVSS No. 219 should remain in place to assure protection against hood
intrusion while the vehicle fleet evolves in response to CAFE
standards.
    Additionally, in November 2008, the World Forum for Harmonization
of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29) adopted Global Technical Regulation
(GTR) No. 9 (ECE/TRANS/180/Add. 9). GTR No. 9 is aimed at establishing
vehicle design criteria that will result in vehicles with hoods and
related hardware that will reduce the severity of injuries to
pedestrians struck by automobiles. Among the vehicle changes that
manufacturers are likely to consider as a result of implementation of
this GTR are softer, more deformable hood structures and alternative
hood designs that aid in protecting a pedestrian that is struck by a
vehicle. NHTSA is considering the benefit of adopting this GTR to
harmonize U.S. regulations with the international community. Canada is
currently considering adopting GTR No. 9, while Japan and the European
Commission already have adopted requirements in their domestic
regulations similar to those of the GTR.
    Several vehicles have already shown up in the U.S. market that both
comply with FMVSS No. 219 and have incorporated the kinds of changes in
vehicle design anticipated by the GTR. The agency is concerned that a
pedestrian safety standard might increase the possibility that some
manufacturers would use hood hinges that are significantly less stiff,
to produce low injury values for pedestrian testing. It makes sense
that FMVSS No. 219 would be needed, at least during the initial
implementation of a pedestrian standard, to ensure that rearward
deformation of the vehicle's hood is not excessive in an FMVSS No. 219
type crash.
    The agency agrees that there are unknowns associated with the
effect of new pedestrian safety designs on the vehicle fleet as they
pertain to FMVSS No. 219. Therefore, these unknowns warrant retaining
FMVSS No. 219, at least until the impact of these circumstances can be
more fully understood.

B. Real World Data

    The IIHS and Public Citizen/CAS commented that NHTSA did not
provide sufficient real world data to support the rescission of FMVSS
No. 219. Public Citizen/CAS suggested that NHTSA should analyze the
effectiveness of FMVSS No. 219 and the potential consequences of
rescinding it before deciding whether to rescind the standard.
    The IIHS stated that a review of NASS cases revealed that vehicle
hood penetration into the occupant compartment still occurs in a small
number of offset crashes, pole impacts, and severe underride collisions
with large trucks or tractor trailers. The IIHS said that it identified
NASS cases from 2002-2006 that involved crashes different from the 48
km/h (30 mph) flat barrier test required by FMVSS No. 219. The IIHS
suggested that FMVSS No. 219 be modified to address the types of
crashes seen in these NASS cases. Public Citizen/CAS also stated that
an offset frontal crash test should be incorporated into FMVSS No. 219.
    CAS compiled a list of 40 recalls from model year 1980 through 2007
that related to defective hood latch equipment. The organization said,
``[T]he presence of FMVSS No. 113 does not protect occupants in the
face of these defects; therefore, the protection provided by FMVSS No.
219 ensures that occupants are not injured by an intruding roof [sic]
in the event of a latch failure.'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ NHTSA assumes that Public Citizen and the Center for Auto
Safety were referring to an intruding hood rather than an intruding
roof. [Footnote added.]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Agency Response: NHTSA has analyzed crash data to determine the
potential safety consequences of a decision to rescind FMVSS No. 219.
As discussed below, the analysis has shown that the safety need for the
standard for current vehicles is apparently being met by other
standards. Nonetheless, for reasons related to future vehicle designs,
we have decided not to rescind FMVSS No. 219.
    NHTSA analyzed NASS cases of model year 2004-2008 vehicles with
dual frontal air bags that were coded as having hood intrusion. A total
of 78 cases were identified. Of these 78 NASS cases, only one case
involved an injury to a non-ejected occupant due to hood intrusion, and
the resulting injury was coded as a minor injury to the occupant's
right hand and arm. Based on nationally weighting this one case, NHTSA
estimates there are annually 127 minor injuries to non-ejected
occupants associated with hood intrusion.
    The agency also analyzed more than 900 NASS cases that met the
following criteria: a 2000 model year vehicle, or newer, with a delta V
of 35 km/h (22 mph),\4\ or greater, with a primary frontal

impact and available air bags. The agency found only 12 cases in which
the hood intruded through the windshield. These cases involved frontal
offset, pole impact, and underride crashes. None of these crash modes
are required to be tested in FMVSS No. 219. The single NASS case with a
minor injury to the occupant's arm and hand, described in the previous
paragraph, was identified in this analysis as well. There were no other
occupant injuries resulting from hood intrusion found.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ This delta V threshold was set in order to limit the number
of cases to a manageable level and to capture crashes around the
crash severity of the standard and just below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the agency also reviewed 230 Crash Injury Research
Engineering Network (CIREN) cases and found 9 cases that were coded
with hood intrusion, 4 of which had injuries associated with hood
intrusion. All of these cases involved exceedingly severe crashes under
conditions that far exceed the FMVSS No. 219 testing requirements, and
resulted in a significant loss of occupant space. These crashes were so
severe that they exceeded the parameters of any crash test in common
use, including offset or pole testing suggested by IIHS and Public
Citizen/CAS.
    Details of the NASS and CIREN crashes discussed above are contained
in a technical report titled, ``Evaluation of NASS Cases for Windshield
Zone Intrusion,'' which may be found in Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0124 (the
docket for the July 7, 2008 NPRM).

C. Dummy and Air Bag Performance in Windshield Zone Intrusion

    The IIHS commented that FMVSS No. 208 does not protect against
windshield zone intrusion in the same way that FMVSS No. 219 does
because, under FMVSS No. 208, an intrusion would have to occur and
strike a test dummy in the vehicle to be considered dangerous. Any
component intruding through a windshield should be considered a hazard,
IIHS stated, because when intrusion occurs, even slight changes to the
crash scenario could result in occupant injury.
    Advocates commented that it is unclear how the dummy performance
requirements of FMVSS No. 208, which it suggested are intended to
protect occupants from injuries caused by contact with internal vehicle
surfaces, will serve to reflect impact injuries due to windshield
intrusion by external vehicle parts. It stated that the agency cannot
assure the public that only blunt impact injuries would occur if FMVSS
No. 219 were rescinded. Advocates also stated that FMVSS No. 208 will
not necessarily prevent lacerative injuries because it is unknown how
quickly air bags will deflate once punctured by a sharp object
protruding through the windshield or because an air bag, once having
performed its function, could start to deflate before an object
intrudes through a windshield. It stated that in real world crashes, an
object can strike an occupant without encountering an inflated air bag.
    Agency Response: We believe that the concerns raised by Advocates
and IIHS about how well FMVSS No. 208 would protect vehicle occupants
against injury from objects intruding through a windshield during a
crash would merit further discussion in the event further steps were
taken to rescind the standard. The agency is today deciding not to
proceed with rescinding FMVSS No. 219 based primarily on changes that
are likely to occur in the vehicle fleet. Should the agency consider
rescinding FMVSS No. 219 at a future time, we will address all
appropriate issues then.

D. Industry Burden

    The Alliance supported the agency's tentative assessment in the
NPRM that FMVSS Nos. 208 and 113 adequately protect against windshield
intrusion, that FMVSS No. 219 is redundant, and that the standard
imposes an unnecessary burden on manufacturers. The Alliance commented
that it ``supports the agency's periodic review of its regulations and
standards * * * to assure that out of date or ineffective regulations
or standards are not creating needless compliance burdens.''
    Advocates, IIHS, and Public Citizen/CAS stated that FMVSS No. 219
testing imposes little burden or cost on vehicle manufacturers. IIHS
stated that FMVSS No. 219 testing poses little additional compliance
test burden because this aspect of safety is addressed at the same time
as other flat barrier dynamic testing. Furthermore, IIHS commented that
``[M]aintaining the standard creates little additional work for the
agency or manufacturers.'' Advocates stated that ``any cost savings to
industry would be extremely small.'' Public Citizen/CAS commented that
FMVSS No. 219 ``places a minimal burden on the industry.''
    Agency Response: We note that we clearly stated in the NPRM that
any cost savings resulting from the rescission of FMVSS No. 219 would
be so minimal that the savings cannot be calculated. We note that the
requirements of FMVSS No. 219 may be assessed during the FMVSS No. 208
crash test.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The full frontal barrier tests in FMVSS No. 208 are now
performed at 56 km/m (35 mph), which is a more severe test than that
specified in FMVSS No. 219.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In December 2004, NHTSA published a technical report analyzing the
cost and weight added by different FMVSSs.\6\ This report concluded
that there was no attributable weight or cost associated with FMVSS No.
219. This conclusion relied on the results of a NHTSA report \7\ that
sampled twelve make-models pre-standard and post-standard. The report
found no measurable or determinable weight or cost per vehicle
associated with FMVSS No. 219.\8\ Based on the negligible cost to
industry to maintain and test to the performance requirements in FMVSS
No. 219, the agency has concluded that FMVSS No. 219 does not place an
unreasonable burden on industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Tarbet, M.J., Cost and Weight Added by the Federal Motor
Vehicle Safety Standards for Model Years 1968-2001 in Passenger Cars
and Light Trucks. NHTSA Technical Report No. DOT HS 809 834:128
(2004).
    \7\ McVetty, T.N., Cross, A.J., and Parr, L.W., Cost Evaluation
for Two Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards--FMVSS 113 Hood
Latch--Passenger Cars--FMVSS 219 Windshield Zone Intrusion--
Passenger Cars. NHTSA Technical Report No. DOT HS 806 187:19-36
(1982).
    \8\ We note that in that report, the agency stated that ``it is
conceivable that a more thorough teardown study including vehicles a
year or two before 1976 could have revealed costs of changes made in
anticipation of FMVSS No. 219, if there were any.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Possible Effect of FMVSS No. 219 Rescission on State Regulation

    The Alliance said that NHTSA ``should confirm in the notice
publishing the final rule the conclusion that the safety need addressed
by FMVSS No. 219 is addressed sufficiently by the current versions of
FMVSS No. 208 and FMVSS No. 113, leaving no room for State regulation
of this aspect of vehicle performance.'' The NPRM had stated the
agency's tentative determination that if FMVSS No. 219 were rescinded,
States would be free to regulate the aspect of motor vehicle
performance that was regulated by the standard (73 FR at 38374).
    Agency Response: Our action today to withdraw the July 7, 2008 NPRM
will not change the current relationship between FMVSS No. 219 and
State regulation of this aspect of vehicle performance.

IV. Agency Decision To Withdraw the Rulemaking

    The agency has decided to withdraw this rulemaking. There are
relatively new considerations affecting vehicle design, specifically,
enhanced corporate average fuel economy standards, and global technical
regulations for vehicle hoods that will reduce the severity of injuries
sustained by pedestrians that are struck by vehicles. These

considerations are likely to stimulate the use of lighter or less stiff
materials in vehicles. In addition, we may begin to see new entrants
from foreign and domestic manufacturers that have less experience with
the FMVSS framework, in comparison to manufacturers that have long been
part of the U.S. market. Therefore, the agency has concluded that now
is not an appropriate time to rescind FMVSS No. 219. The agency will
continue to monitor changes in the vehicle fleet that may occur as a
result of these new design considerations and will continue its process
of regularly reviewing the existing safety standards, which will
include FMVSS No. 219.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 30162; delegations of authority at 49 CFR
1.95 and 501.8.

Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2012-28815 Filed 11-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


Draft 9/ 15/ 03   RM/ MLS 1 September 15, 2003 EPA STRATEGY FOR CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION WITH INDIAN TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS FOR PROMULGATING FEDERAL WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR THE STATE OF OREGON I. Purpose of the Strategy  This document describes EPA's strategy for consultation and coordination with Indian Tribal Governments on upcoming EPA water quality decisions in Oregon. As outlined in the July 2001 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency  Region 10 Tribal Consultation Framework ( attached), EPA is committed to consult with federally recognized tribal governments in a manner respectful of tribal sovereignty and culture.

II. EPA's Federal Oregon Water Quality Standard Promulgation  According to the schedule developed under the District Court of Oregon's orders, EPA must sign a proposed rule to federally promulgate replacement water quality standards for Oregon by October 1, 2003, and finalize the rule by March 2, 2004. To meet the Court's direction, the following elements are in the rule EPA plans to propose:

A. Propose and promulgate numeric water quality criteria for temperature to protect salmonid rearing and bull trout rearing and spawning, including the specific times and places that this water quality criteria must apply.

B. Propose and promulgate water quality criteria for temperature for the lower Willamette River.

C. Propose and promulgate water quality criterion for intergravel dissolved oxygen ( IDGO) to protect salmonid spawning.

D. Identify implementation methods for Oregon's antidegradation policy.

E. Consult again on Oregon's water quality standards with Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service under the Endangered Species Act.

This promulgation will not address waters in Indian reservation lands. This promulgation will however, address adjacent waters and waters within treaty boundaries outside of reservation lands.

III. Potentially Affected Tribal Governments Burns Paiute Tribe of the Burns Paiute Indian Colony of Oregon Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde, Oregon Siletz Tribe, Oregon Confederated Tribes of Umatilla, Oregon Draft 9/ 15/ 03   RM/ MLS 2 Coquille Indian Tribe, Oregon Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Indians, Oregon Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua & Siulsaw, Oregon Klamath Tribes, Oregon Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington Nez Perce Tribe, Idaho Shoshone Bannock Tribes of the Fort Hall Reservation of Idaho IV. General Approaches for Consultation and Coordination A. On August 28, 2003, EPA Region 10 Regional Administrator, John Iani, sent a letter to all potentially interested tribes expressing EPA's interest in coordinating with the tribes on the proposed water quality standard promulgation in Oregon. The letter also informed the tribes that EPA will be following up to gauge tribal interest in a conference call to provide more information on EPA's action.

B. Week of September 15: Schedule conference call with all interested tribes to describe EPA's action and discuss any potential questions or concerns; send a notification to tribes announcing the conference call.

C. October 22: Public hearing in Portland, OR in October. October 23: Public hearing in Eugene, OR October 24: Public hearing in Bend, OR Tribes will be sent information as early as possible regarding the details of these meetings.

D. Solicit formal comments from tribal governments during the proposed rule's public comment period which begins approximately October 4, 2003.

E. Where opportunities available, attend tribal meeting to discuss the Oregon rule: 1. Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians meeting, September 23, 2003 in Pendleton, OR 2. Oregon Tribal Chair/ EPA quarterly meetings F. Schedule Government to Government Briefings where requested and where appropriate 1. Umatilla Tribe Meeting with R10 in Seattle  September 12 V. Agency Contacts and Information Sources Mary Lou Soscia ( 503) 326 5873 Dan Opalski ( 503) 326 3250