[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 203 (Wednesday, October 21, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63667-63671]
[FR Doc No: 2015-26726]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

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

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 203 / Wednesday, October 21, 2015 /
Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 11

[Docket No. RM15-18-000, Order No. 815]

Commencement of Assessment of Annual Charges

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is
revising its regulations to modify when the Commission will commence
assessing annual charges to hydropower licensees and exemptees, other
than state or municipal entities, with respect to licenses and
exemptions authorizing unconstructed projects and new capacity.
Specifically, the Commission will commence assessing annual charges on
the date by which the licensee or exemptee is required to commence
construction of an unconstructed project or new capacity, rather than
on the date that project construction actually begins. The final rule
provides administrative efficiency and promotes certainty among
licensees, exemptees, and Commission staff as to when annual charges
will commence.

DATES: Effective: December 21, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tara DiJohn (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Norman Richardson (Technical Information), Office of the Executive
Director, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Order No. 815

Final Rule

                            Table of Contents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Paragraph  No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Background........................................                  1
II. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR).............                  5
III. Discussion......................................                 11
IV. Regulatory Requirements..........................                 21
    A. Information Collection Statement..............                 21
    B. Environmental Analysis........................                 22
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act....................                 23
    D. Document Availability.........................                 28
    E. Effective Date and Congressional Notification.                 31
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Order No. 815

Final Rule

(Issued October 15, 2015)

I. Background

1. On May 14, 2015, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) proposing to
revise its regulations governing the commencement of assessment of
annual charges for non-municipal hydropower licensees and exemptees.\1\
As explained in the NOPR, section 10(e)(1) of the Federal Power Act
(FPA),\2\ and section 3401 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of
1986,\3\ require the Commission to, among other things, collect annual
charges from licensees in order to reimburse the United States for the
costs of administering Part I of the FPA. The Commission assesses these
annual charges against licensees and exemptees of projects with more
than 1.5 megawatts (MW) of installed capacity under section 11.1 of its
regulations.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Commencement of Assessment of Annual Charges, 151 FERC ]
61,115 (2015). The NOPR was published in the Federal Register on May
22, 2015. 80 FR 29,562.
    \2\ 16 U.S.C. 803(e)(1) (2012).
    \3\ 42 U.S.C. 7178 (2012).
    \4\ 18 CFR 11.1 (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Currently, for exemptions and original licenses for unconstructed
projects, the Commission begins assessing administrative annual charges
on the date project construction starts.\5\ For new capacity authorized
by a relicense \6\ or an amendment of a license or exemption, the
Commission begins assessing annual charges on the date that the
construction to enable such capacity starts.\7\ This final rule affects
only projects with respect to which annual charges are assessed when
project construction starts. It does not address state or municipal
projects, projects with an installed capacity of 1.5 MW or less, or
constructed projects without newly authorized capacity.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id. (c)(5).
    \6\ We use the term ``relicense'' to refer to any new or
subsequent license.
    \7\ 18 CFR 11.1(c)(5) (2015). We refer to the addition of
capacity and a reduction of capacity (on occasion, capacity is
reduced as a result of construction, in which case annual charges
are lowered) as ``new capacity.''
    \8\ Licensees and exemptees that are state or municipal entities
are assessed annual charges when project operation commences. 18 CFR
11.1(d)(6) (2015). As noted above, the Commission does not assess
annual charges with respect to projects with installed capacity of
less than or equal to 1.5 MW. 18 CFR 11.1(b) (2015). Constructed,
operating projects where no new capacity is being authorized are
assessed annual charges beginning on the effective date of the
license or exemption. See 18 CFR 11.1(c)(5) (2015).

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

3. Original licenses for unconstructed projects require a licensee to
start construction no later than two years from the effective date of
the license, as required by section 13 of the FPA.\9\ Generally,
exemptions and operating projects where additional capacity is
authorized similarly require that project construction \10\ or
construction of additional capacity \11\ commence within two years of
the order authorizing such construction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 16 U.S.C. 806 (2012).
    \10\ See 18 CFR 4.94(c) and 4.106(c) (2015) (including in
exemptions standard Article 3 to allow the Commission to revoke an
exemption if actual construction of the proposed generating
facilities has not begun within two years).
    \11\ See e.g., Northern States Power Co., 138 FERC ] 62,022, at
ordering para. (E) (2012) (directing licensee to start construction
of additional authorized capacity within two years).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. In many instances, construction of authorized facilities does not
begin by the set deadline. For original licenses, section 13 of the FPA
provides that the Commission may grant an extension of the deadline for
good cause shown, but only once and for no more than two additional
years. These limitations of FPA section 13 do not apply to relicenses,
exemptions, and amendments. From 2010 through 2014, the Commission
granted extensions of the start-of-construction deadline (1) for
original licenses and relicenses 17 times, or an average of 3.4 times
per year; (2) for exemptions 2 times, or on average 0.4 times per year;
and (3) for license amendments authorizing new capacity 6 times, or an
average of 1.2 extensions per year.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ No extensions of the start-of-construction deadline were
issued for exemption amendments during this period, however,
exemptees rarely file amendment applications requesting
authorization to increase exemption capacity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR)

5. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to revise section 11.1(c)(5) of
its regulations regarding when it will commence assessing annual
charges with respect to hydropower licenses, exemptions, and amendments
authorizing unconstructed projects and new capacity. Specifically, the
Commission proposed to commence assessing annual charges two years from
the effective date of an order issuing a license, exemption, or an
amendment authorizing additional capacity, rather than on the date
project construction starts.
6. In support of the proposed rule, the Commission anticipated that the
change would provide administrative efficiency and foster certainty
among licensees, exemptees, and Commission staff as to when annual
charges will commence. The NOPR explained that licensees and exemptees
will no longer need to notify the Commission when project construction
starts for the purpose of assessing annual charges and, in turn, the
Commission will not have to contact the licensee or exemptee for that
purpose.
7. While licensees and exemptees who begin construction expeditiously
will benefit, the NOPR also acknowledged that the proposed change would
adversely affect those licensees and exemptees that do not start
construction within two years. The NOPR proposed that annual charges
would be assessed two years from the effective date of an order issuing
a license, exemption, or an amendment authorizing additional capacity,
regardless of when actual construction commences. As noted above, on
average, 5 (3.4 licenses + 0.4 exemptions + 1.2 license amendments)
affected projects each year receive extensions of the start-of-
construction deadline.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ In rare circumstances, the Commission may stay the
effective date of a license, in which case the assessment of annual
charges would also be stayed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

8. The NOPR also acknowledged that licensees and exemptees of projects
whose license or exemption is terminated for failure to timely commence
construction also may be adversely affected. If a licensee fails to
start construction within two years of its license's effective date or
as extended by the Commission, the Commission must terminate the
license pursuant to section 13 of the FPA.\14\ Similarly, as noted
above, standard exemption Article 3 states that the Commission may
revoke an exemption if the exemptee fails to start construction within
the time prescribed by the Commission. From 2010 through 2014, the
Commission terminated one license, or an average of 0.2 licenses per
year, and no exemptions. Therefore, in the NOPR, we estimated that
annually 0.2 licenses would be assessed annual charges beginning two
years after a license's effective date until the license is terminated
for failure to construct.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 16 U.S.C. 806 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

9. In sum, the proposed rule estimated that, on average, 5.2 (5
extensions + 0.2 terminations) licensees and/or exemptees per year
would begin paying annual charges earlier than would be the case under
the current regulations.
10. In response to the NOPR, the Commission received comments from two
entities. On July 20, 2015, FFP New Hydro, LLC filed comments on behalf
of its subsidiary project companies and together with its manager Rye
Development, LLC (collectively, FFP New Hydro). On July 21, 2015, the
National Hydropower Association (NHA) filed comments. The NOPR's
proposal, the comments received, and the Commission's determination are
discussed below.

III. Discussion

11. FFP New Hydro contends that the change contemplated by the NOPR
would increase the cost of hydropower development and discourage
investment in critical infrastructure, stating that developers often
take two years following issuance of a license, exemption, or amendment
to secure financing and often apply for extensions of time to commence
construction.\15\ In this vein, FFP New Hydro claims that the proposed
change would discourage new hydropower development and is therefore
contrary to the inherent goals of the Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency
Act of 2013.\16\ FFP New Hydro further asserts that developers, if
faced with the prospect of being assessed annual charges before
construction, will be forced to surrender their licenses more
frequently.\17\ For these reasons, FFP New Hydro advocates that the
Commission continue to commence assessment of annual charges when
project construction begins.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ FFP New Hydro at 2.
    \16\ Pub. L. 113-23, 27 Stat. 493. Id. at 4-5.
    \17\ FFP New Hydro at 5.
    \18\ Id. at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

12. NHA asserts that the proposed change would not further the
administrative efficiency goals set forth in the NOPR, but would
instead increase the administrative burden on Commission staff,
licensees, and exemptees.\19\ As an example of a new administrative
burden that might result, NHA posits that the Commission would need to
implement a procedure for issuing refunds for any payment of annual
charges by a licensee or exemptee who ultimately fails to commence
construction.\20\ NHA further claims that the assessment of annual
charges before project construction would negatively impact the
hydropower industry and quell future investment in hydropower

development, especially pumped storage projects.\21\ Finally, NHA
argues that the change would run counter to recent initiatives intended
to stimulate and streamline hydropower development.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ NHA at 2-4.
    \20\ Id. at 4.
    \21\ Id. at 4-7.
    \22\ Id. at 7-8 (referencing the Water Resources Reform and
Development Act of 2014, Pub. L. 113-121, 128 Stat. 1193, the
Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act of 2013, Pub. L. 113-23, 27
Stat. 493, and The President's Climate Action Plan, Executive Office
of the President (June 25, 2013), available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/image/president27sclimateactionplan.pdf.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

13. NHA recommends that the Commission continue to commence assessment
of annual charges on the date project construction begins.
Alternatively, NHA proposes that the Commission assess annual charges
when project operation commences.
14. Both FFP New Hydro and NHA contend that the phase of project
development that exists between issuance of a license, exemption, or
amendment and the start of construction is a critical period. While the
Commission recognizes the time constraints and financial obstacles
faced by licensees and exemptees, the licensing and pre-construction
phases also translate to a time-consuming and labor-intensive period
for Commission staff.\23\ During this time, the Commission's costs
related to a particular project begin to accrue, but are passed along
in the form of annual charges to the pool of non-municipal licensees
and exemptees for operating projects that are already subject to
assessment of annual charges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The Commission's considerable involvement during the
licensing and pre-construction phases of development is underscored
by FFP New Hydro's statement that ``they have filed hundreds of
thousands of pages of documentation with the Commission, are in
regular and constant communication with the Commission staff, and
will continue to be so throughout the licensing, post-licensing, and
construction stages.'' FFP New Hydro at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

15. In effect, the Commission's costs during the labor-intensive
periods that surround issuance of a license, exemption, or amendment
authorizing new capacity are shouldered by the existing pool of
licensees and exemptees.\24\ The change envisioned by the NOPR, as
modified in this final rule, strives to strike a reasonable balance
that creates certainty for licensees and exemptees as to when
assessment of annual charges will commence, promotes administrative
efficiency for Commission staff by establishing a more clear point at
which to begin assessing annual charges, and lessens the burden on the
existing pool of licensees and exemptees currently bearing the burden
of paying annual charges for the administration of all pre-construction
projects. Moreover, this change will generate cost-saving benefits over
the current regulations for licensees and exemptees who act
expeditiously by commencing construction prior to the date triggering
assessment of annual charges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ FFP New Hydro states that the assessment of annual charges
historically has commenced at the start of construction. To the
contrary, prior to 1995, annual charges were assessed from the date
of issuance of the license, exemption, or amendment authorizing new
capacity. 18 CFR 11.1 (1994). See Charges and Fees for Hydroelectric
Projects, Order No. 576, 60 FR 15,040 (March 22, 1995), FERC Stats.
& Regs. ] 31,016 (cross-referenced at 70 FERC ] 61,293) (1995)
(amending section 11.1 of the regulations to defer annual charges
until construction started).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

16. In its comments, NHA speculated that the proposed change would
actually add new administrative burdens by requiring the Commission to
create and implement a procedure to issue refunds for any payment of
annual charges by a licensee or exemptee who ultimately fails to
commence construction. This speculation is misguided. Because the
assessment of annual charges will be contingent on the expiration of a
set period of time rather than on whether the start of construction
ultimately occurs, there is no need for the Commission to develop a
program to handle refunds.
17. While no refunds will be offered, if a licensee or exemptee
successfully demonstrates an inability to pay at the time assessment of
annual charges commences, the availability of payment plans \25\ may
provide a measure of relief to certain licensees or exemptees assessed
annual charges before construction, but who anticipate being able to
settle their account once project financing is secured or generation
begins.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ A payment plan request would be directed to, and ultimately
coordinated by, the Commission's Office of the Executive Director,
Revenue and Receivables Branch. The Commission's Chief Financial
Officer would determine whether or not to grant a payment plan
request.
    \26\ We note that the inability of a licensee or exemptee to pay
annual charges may call into question that licensee or exemptee's
ability to bring a hydropower project to fruition. For example,
while the amount varies based on the type of project and its annual
generation, the administrative annual charges amount for a 5-MW
conventional project (with an annual energy output of zero), or a 5-
MW exemption, might be expected to be in the area of $8,000, an
amount any financially-viable licensee should be able to pay.
Although pumped storage projects and large, conventional projects
are often responsible for paying much more substantial annual charge
amounts, it is also the case that, if these projects are to be
successfully developed, these licensees will need to have access to
greater amounts of capital than do licensees of small projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

18. Both FFP New Hydro and NHA raised concerns that the effect of this
final rule might discourage hydropower development. NHA indicated that
pumped storage projects would be particularly affected by the changes
contemplated in the NOPR. In light of these concerns, the Commission
has decided to set the commencement of assessment of annual charges to
track the start-of-construction deadline for any license or exemption
authorizing an unconstructed project that receives an extension of the
start-of-construction deadline.\27\ In other words, any license or
exemption for an unconstructed project that receives an extension of
the start-of-construction deadline will be assessed annual charges
beginning at the expiration of the start-of-construction deadline, as
extended by the Commission (i.e., no longer than four years after the
issuance date of the license or exemption authorizing an unconstructed
project). A four-year period is consistent with the deadlines
established by section 13 and, accordingly, will give developers a
reasonable charge-free period in which to secure financing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Even with an extension of the start-of-construction
deadline, in no case would assessment of annual charges commence
later than four years after the issuance of a license or exemption
authorizing an unconstructed project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

19. Similarly, for any license, exemption, or amendment authorizing
additional capacity that receives an extension of the start-of-
construction deadline, the Commission will begin assessing annual
charges upon the expiration of the deadline to start construction as
extended by the Commission. In light of the reasons discussed above,
and those identified in the NOPR, the Commission has modified the
NOPR's proposal to revise section 11.1(c)(5) of its regulations and
will begin assessing annual charges on the date by which a licensee or
exemptee is required to commence construction of an unconstructed
project or new capacity, rather than on the date project construction
actually begins. We believe that these modifications to the Final Rule
substantially address the concerns raised in response to the NOPR,
while also continuing to encourage hydropower development.
20. NHA has requested that the Commission not apply the revised
regulations to all current licensees, exemptees, and applicants.\28\ We
grant the request in part. For any license, exemption, or amendment
issued by the Commission prior to the effective date of this final
rule, we agree that the assessment of annual charges should remain the
start of construction. The revised regulations, however, will apply

to any license, exemption, or amendment that is issued after the
revised regulation's effective date. Thus, any application for a
license, exemption, or amendment that is pending before the Commission
when this final rule becomes effective will not be shielded from its
effects. Based on the phase and complexity of the application process,
an application could be before the Commission for several years before
a determination is issued. Thus, using two separate standards,
contingent on the date an application was filed, could potentially
persist for several years, could lead to confusion, and would place an
undue administrative burden on staff. Therefore, the revision to
section 11.1(c)(5) of the Commission's regulations will apply to any
applicable license, exemption, or amendment issued on or after the
effective date of this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ NHA at 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Regulatory Requirements

A. Information Collection Statement

21. The Paperwork Reduction Act \29\ requires each federal agency to
seek and obtain Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval before
undertaking a collection of information directed to ten or more persons
or contained in a rule of general applicability. OMB regulations
require approval of certain information collection requirements
contained in final rules published in the Federal Register.\30\ The
final rule discussed above does not impose or alter existing reporting
or recordkeeping requirements on applicable entities as defined by the
Paperwork Reduction Act.\31\ Therefore, the Commission will submit this
final rule to OMB for informational purposes only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521 (2012).
    \30\ See 5 CFR 1320.12 (2015).
    \31\ 44 U.S.C. 3502(2)-(3) (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Environmental Analysis

22. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental Assessment
or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may have a
significant adverse effect on the human environment.\32\ Commission
actions concerning annual charges are categorically exempt from this
requirement.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, Order No. 486, 52 FR 47,897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC
Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 1986-1990 ] 30,783 (1987).
    \33\ See 18 CFR 380.4(a)(11) (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

23. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \34\ generally
requires a description and analysis of proposed and final rules that
will have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The RFA mandates consideration of regulatory alternatives
that accomplish the stated objectives of a proposed rule while
minimizing any significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.\35\ In the NOPR, we certified that the proposed
regulation would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612 (2012).
    \35\ 5 U.S.C. 603(c) (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

24. As explained in the NOPR, the Small Business Administration's (SBA)
Office of Size Standards develops the numerical definition of a small
business.\36\ The SBA revised its size standard for electric utilities
(effective January 22, 2014) from a standard based on megawatt-hours to
a standard based on the number of employees, including affiliates.\37\
Under SBA's current size standards, a hydroelectric generator is small
if, including its affiliates, it employs 500 or fewer people.\38\ The
Commission, however, currently does not require information regarding
the number of individuals employed by hydroelectric generators to
administer Part I of the FPA, and therefore, is unable to estimate the
number of small entities using the new SBA definitions. Regardless, the
Commission anticipates that this final rule will affect few small
hydroelectric generators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ 13 CFR 121.101 (2015).
    \37\ SBA Final Rule on ``Small Business Size Standards:
Utilities,'' 78 FR 77,343 (Dec. 23, 2013).
    \38\ 13 CFR 121.201, Sector 22, Utilities (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

25. As noted earlier, this rulemaking will only affect non-state or
municipal licensed projects with an installed capacity exceeding 1.5 MW
that are unconstructed or have newly authorized capacity. From 2010
through 2014, the Commission issued on average 3.6 original licenses
and 0.4 exemptions per year authorizing unconstructed projects to
affected licensees and exemptees, and 1.6 relicenses and 5 license
amendments per year authorizing new capacity. In the NOPR, we estimated
that, in sum, on average a total of 10.6 licensees and exemptees may be
affected by the proposed rule annually.
26. Of the 10.6 total entities, only those that do not start
construction prior to the set deadline to commence construction (as may
be extended) will be negatively affected by the acceleration of annual
charges. Previously, the NOPR estimated that 5.2 licensees and/or
exemptees per year may be negatively affected by the changes
contemplated in the NOPR for failing to start construction within two
years. However, based on the modifications reflected in the final
rule,\39\ we estimate that zero licensees and/or exemptees will be
negatively affected by failing to start construction by the set
deadline, as may be extended by the Commission.\40\ Moreover, small
entities that would otherwise start construction before the date by
which they are required to commence construction of an unconstructed
project or new capacity will benefit from the final rule as it delays
the commencement of assessment of annual charges until the established
deadline to start construction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See supra paragraphs 18-19.
    \40\ Conceivably, a licensee or exemptee that has received an
extension of the start-of-construction deadline might be responsible
for paying annual charges that began to accrue four years after the
issuance date of the license or exemption, but prior to termination
of the license, or revocation of the exemption, for failure to
commence construction. However, this would be rare.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

27. Accordingly, pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, the Commission
certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.

D. Document Availability

28. 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 print the contents of this document via the
Internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and
in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal business hours
(8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street, NE., Room
2A, Washington, DC 20426.
29. From the Commission's Home Page on the Internet, this information
is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available
on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and
downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket
number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket
number field.
30. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's Web
site during normal business hours from the Commission's Online Support
at<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email the Public Reference Room at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

E. Effective Date and Congressional Notification

31. This regulation is effective December 21, 2015. The Commission has
determined, with concurrence of the Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, that this rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined in section 251 of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996.\41\ This rule is being
submitted to the Senate, House, and Government Accountability Office.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ 5 U.S.C. 804(2) (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 11

    Electric power, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    By the Commission.

    Issued: October 15, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
    In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends part 11,
chapter I, title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

PART 11--ANNUAL CHARGES UNDER PART I OF THE FEDERAL POWER ACT

0
1. The authority citation for part 11 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 792-828c; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352.

0
2. Revise Sec.  11.1(c)(5) to read as follows:

Sec.  11.1  Costs of administration.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (5) For unconstructed projects, the assessments begin on the date
by which the licensee or exemptee is required to commence project
construction, or as that deadline may be extended, but in no case
longer than four years after the issuance date of the license or
exemption. For constructed projects, the assessments begin on the
effective date of the license or exemption, except for any new capacity
authorized therein. The assessments for new authorized capacity at
licensed or exempted projects begin on the date by which the licensee
or exemptee is required to commence construction of the new capacity.
In the event that assessments begin during a fiscal year, the charges
will be prorated.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-26726 Filed 10-20-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Notice granting the application, subject to conditions. Effective March 27, 2003 through March 27, 2005. Petitions due April 7, 2003.


MEMORANDUM TO: 3848.241 file FROM: Craig Simons, DPRA DATE: October 29, 1999 SUBJ: Record of communication with Laurie Shields, American Nickeloid. (815 223 0373)

I called to ask about the minimum charge assumptions they experienced in handling F006. According to the 1995 BRS they generate about 21 tons per year. They recycle at least part to Encycle. She noted they have reduced the amount generated substantially.

Bottom line is they have the recycler pick up the material, and it costs $145 per tote (a cubic yard container). Encycle apparently has a milk run to pick up.

She noted that they have some other material which is classified as D007 but face quite different charges for it. Basically to recycle it they pay what she termed as a full truck load price of $1000 (hence our assumptions regarding a$ 1350 minimum charge may not be far off).


[Federal Register: June 22, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 118)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 29447-29450]
[DOCID:fr22jn09-16]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2009-0194]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; IJSBA World Finals, Lower Colorado River, Lake
Havasu, AZ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes a temporary safety zone on the
navigable waters of Lake Havasu on the lower Colorado River in Arizona
in support of the International Jet Sports Boating Association (IJSBA)
World Finals. This temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for
the safety of the participants, crew, spectators, participating
vessels, and other vessels and users of the waterway. Persons and
vessels would be prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or
anchoring within this temporary safety zone unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port San Diego or his designated representative.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before July 22, 2009. Requests for public meetings must be
received by the Coast Guard on or before July 13, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2009-0194 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail Petty Officer Kristen Beer, USCG, Waterways
Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, Coast Guard; telephone
619-278-7262, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2009-0194), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online (via http://www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or hand
delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a
comment online via www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received
by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you
fax, hand delivery, or mail your comment, it will be considered as
having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the
Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and
a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a telephone number in the body
of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
select the Advanced Docket Search option on the right side of the
screen, insert ``USCG-2009-0194'' in the Docket ID box, press Enter,
and then click on the balloon shape in the Actions column. If you
submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change the rule
based on your comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
select the Advanced Docket Search option on the right side of the
screen, insert USCG-2009-0194 in the Docket ID box, press Enter, and
then click on the item in the Docket ID column. You may also visit the
Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an agreement with the
Department of Transportation to use the Docket Management Facility.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of 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 a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008 issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one by July 13, 2009 using one of the four methods
specified under ADDRESSES. Please explain why you believe a public
meeting would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this
rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later
notice in the Federal Register.
    For information on facilities or services for individuals with
disabilities or to request special assistance at the public meeting,
contact Petty Officer Kristen Beer at the telephone number or e-mail
address indicated under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this notice.

Background and Purpose

    The International Jet Sports Boating Association (IJSBA) is
sponsoring the IJSBA World Finals. The event will consist of 300 to 750
personal watercraft racing in a circular course. The race will be
broken down into heats of one to 20. The sponsor will provide four
course marshalls and rescue vessels, as well as four perimeter safety
boats for the duration of this event. This safety zone is necessary to
provide for the safety of the participants, crew, spectators,
participating vessels, and other vessels and users of the waterway.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes establishing a safety zone on Lake Havasu,
Arizona that would be effective from October 6, 2009 through October
19, 2009. The safety zone would be bounded by lines connecting the
following points: Beginning at 34[deg]28.49' N, 114[deg]21.33' W;
thence to 34[deg]28.55' N, 114[deg]21.56' W; thence to 34[deg]28.43' N,
114[deg]21.81' W; thence to 34[deg]28.32' N, 114[deg]21.71' W; thence
along the shoreline returning to 34[deg]28.49' N, 114[deg]21.33' W (NAD
83).
    This safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the
participants, crew, spectators, participating vessels, and other
vessels and users of the waterway. Persons and vessels would be
prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within
this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port San Diego
or his designated representative.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order. We expect the economic
impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory
Evaluation is unnecessary. This determination is based on the size and
location of the safety zone. Commercial vessels would not be hindered
by the safety zone. Recreational vessels would not be allowed to
transit through the designated safety zone during the specified times
unless authorized to do so by the Captain of the Port or his designated
representative.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of
which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels
intending to transit or anchor in a portion of the lower Colorado River
at Lake Havasu from October 6, 2009 through October 19, 2009.
    This safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. Vessel
traffic can pass safely around the safety zone. Before the activation
of the zone, the Coast Guard would publish a local notice to mariners
(LNM).
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better
evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the
rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please contact Petty Officer Kristen Beer,
USCG, Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego at 619-
278-7262. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities
that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would call for no new collection of information
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule
under that Order and

have determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

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

Indian Tribal Governments

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

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 0023.1 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. A preliminary
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination is
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. This proposed
rule involves the establishment of a safety zone, which falls under
paragraph 34(g) in Figure 2-1 of the Instruction. We seek any comments
or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306,
3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5;
Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

    2. Add a new temporary Sec.  165.T11-182 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-182  Safety Zone; IJSBA World Finals, Lower Colorado
River, Lake Havasu, AZ.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of
Lake Havasu, from surface to bottom, encompassed by lines connecting
the following points: Beginning at 34[deg]28.49' N, 114[deg]21.33' W;
thence to 34[deg]28.55' N, 114[deg]21.56' W; thence to 34[deg]28.43' N,
114[deg]21.81' W; thence to 34[deg]28.32' N, 114[deg]21.71' W; thence
along the shoreline returning to 34[deg]28.49' N, 114[deg]21.33' W.
These coordinates are based upon NAD 83.
    (b) Effective Period. This section is effective and will be
enforced from October 6, 2009 through October 19, 2009. If the
International Jet Sports Boating Association World Finals concludes
prior to the scheduled termination of the effective period, the Captain
of the Port will cease enforcement of this safety zone and will
announce that fact via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
    (c) Definitions. The following definition applies to this section:
Designated representative, means any Commissioned, Warrant, or Petty
Officers of the Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary, and local, state,
and federal law enforcement officers who have been authorized to act on
the behalf of the Captain of the Port.
    (d) Regulations. (1) Under the general regulations in Sec.  165.23,
entry into, transit through or anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port San Diego or
his designated representative.
    (2) Mariners desiring to enter or operate in the safety zone may
request authorization to do so from the Patrol Commander (PATCOM). The
PATCOM may be contacted on VHF-FM Channel 16.
    (3) All persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of
the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or his designated representative.
    (4) Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel by
siren, radio, flashing light, or other means, the operator of a vessel
must proceed as directed.

    (5) The Coast Guard may be assisted by other federal, state, or
local agencies.

    Dated: June 4, 2009.
T.H. Farris,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. E9-14591 Filed 6-19-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 33 (Thursday, February 17, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8994-8997]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03256]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket Number USCG-2022-0073]
RIN 1625-AA00

Special Local Regulations; Annual Events in Captain of the Port
Delaware Bay Zone

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish special local
regulations for four annual marine events in the Captain of the Port
(COTP), Delaware Bay Zone. This action is necessary to protect
participants, spectators, and vessels from the hazards associated with
the varying types of marine events. This proposed rulemaking would
prohibit persons and vessels from being in the regulated areas during
the enforcement period unless authorized by the COTP or a designated
representative. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before March 21, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2022-0073 using the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email MST1 Jennifer Padilla, Waterways
Management Division, Sector Delaware Bay, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone
(215) 271-4889, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

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

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    Marine events are held on a recurring basis on the navigable waters
within the Captain of the Port, Delaware Bay Zone. Historically, the
Coast Guard established annual temporary final regulations for each of
these recurring events.
    This proposed rule would consistently inform the public in a timely
manner through permanent publication in Title 33 of the Code of Federal
Regulations. This proposed rule would add recurring marine events
requiring a special local regulation to 33 CFR 100.501 Table 1 to
Paragraph (i)(1) Sector Deleware Bay COTP Zone.
    By establishing permanent regulations containing these marine
events, the Coast Guard would eliminate the need to establish temporary
rules for events that occur on an annual basis and thereby limit the
costs associated with cumulative regulations. Adding descriptions of
these marine events and their timeframes to the CFR would provide
greater notice to the public about the reoccurring events and better
meet the Coast Guard's intended purpose of ensuring safety during these
events. The Coast Guard proposes this rulemaking under authority in 46
U.S.C. 70034. This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and
vessels from being

in the regulated areas during an enforcement period unless authorized
by the COTP or a designated representative. We invite your comments on
this proposed rulemaking.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard is proposing to add four reoccurring special local
regulations for annual marine events in the Captain of the Port
Delaware Bay to 33 CFR 100.501 in Table 1 to Paragraph (i)(1). The
Coast Guard will publish annual notice of the exact dates and times of
the effective periods of the regulations. For each event, the notices
will also provide the geographical description of each regulated area
and other pertinent details concerning the nature of the events. This
proposed rule is necessary to protect participants, spectators, and
vessels from the hazards associated with the varying types of marine
events. During the enforcement periods of these special local
regulations, non-participant persons or vessels would be prohibited
from entering into, remaining within, transiting through, or anchoring
in the regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port
Delaware Bay or a designated representative of the Captain of the Port.
The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this
document.
    Below is a description of the four reoccurring marine events we
propose to add to Table 1 to Paragraph (i)(1) in 100.501.

1. Stockton Boat Race

    This marine event would occur one weekend in March or April
annually. The event would be in Atlantic City, NJ, where the following
area makes up the regulated area: All navigable waters of the New
Jersey Intracoastal Waterway in Atlantic City, NJ, within the polygon
bounded by the following: Originating on the southwest portion at
approximate position latitude 39[deg]20'57'' N, longitude
074[deg]27'59'' W; thence northeasterly along the shoreline to latitude
39[deg]21'35'' N, longitude 074[deg]27'06'' W; thence east across the
mouth of Beach Thorofare to the shoreline at latitude 39[deg]21'41'' N,
longitude 074[deg]26'55'' W; thence east along the shoreline to
latitude 39[deg]21'42'' N, longitude 074[deg]26'51'' W; thence
southeast across the New Jersey Intracoastal Waterway to the shoreline
at latitude 39[deg]21'43'' N, longitude 074[deg]26'41'' W; thence
southwest along the shoreline to approximate position latitude
39[deg]20'55'' N, longitude 074[deg]27'57'' W; thence north to the
point of origin. The sponsor is Stockton University.

2. Escape the Cape Swim

    This marine event would take place on one Saturday or Sunday in
June. The regulated area would be in Lower Township, NJ in the
following area: All navigable waters of the Delaware Bay in Lower
Township, NJ, bounded by a line drawn from: Latitude 39[deg]0'57'' N,
longitude 074[deg]56'56'' W in Villas, NJ, thence west to latitude
39[deg]00'59'' N, longitude 074[deg]57'15'' W, thence south to latitude
38[deg]58'08'' N, longitude 074[deg]58'11'' W, thence east to latitude
38[deg]58'04'' N, longitude 074[deg]57'52'' W in North Cape May, NJ,
thence north along the shoreline to the point of origin. The sponsor is
DelMoSports.

3. Around the Island Paddle

    This marine event would occur on one Saturday or Sunday in June,
July or August. The proposed regulated area location is in Cape May
County, NJ. The following area would be a moving regulated area: All
waters within 50 yards in front of the lead safety vessel preceding the
first event participants, to 50 yards behind the safety vessel trailing
the last event participants, and 100 yards on either side of
participant and safety vessels during the event. The regulated area
will move with the safety vessels and participants as they transit the
waters east through Cape May Harbor, south through Cape May Inlet, west
through the Atlantic Ocean, north through the Delaware Bay, then east
through Cape May Canal, and terminate at the Lost Fishermen's Memorial
in Cape May Harbor. The regulated area will move at the pace of event
patrol vessels and participants. The sponsor is the Desatnick
Foundation.

4. Manasquan Inlet Intracoastal Tug

    This marine event would occur on one Saturday or Sunday in
September or October. The location would be Manasquan Inlet, NJ. The
following area would make up the regulated area: All waters of
Manasquan Inlet extending 400 feet from either side of the rope located
between approximate locations latitude 40[deg]06'09'' N, longitude
74[deg]02'08'' W and latitude 40[deg]06'14'' N, longitude
74[deg]02'08'' W. The sponsor is the Borough of Manasquan.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM
has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, scope,
duration, and historical data concerning the scope and potential impact
of these marine events. The special local regulation areas within this
proposed rule have been enforced on an annual basis through individual
temporary final regulations through temporary regulations. The
regulated areas would be enforced in limited areas on six days out of
the year, usually for only a few hours on those days. Specifically, the
Manasquan Inlet Intracoastal Tug often schedules breaks during the
event to temporarily let vessels pass through the inlet waterway
entrance. Vessels will be able to contact the COTP for permission to
transit the regulated areas or instructions for safely transiting
around the area during enforcement periods.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
regulated areas may be small entities, for the reasons stated in
section IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant
economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule
would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment
(see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to
what degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the proposed rule
would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please call or email the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not
retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this
proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves special
local regulations at various locations and at various times to maintain
the safety of event participants, spectators, and transitting vessel
traffic. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph L61 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction
Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. We seek any comments or information that
may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from
this proposed rule.

G. Protest Activities

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

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through
the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2022-0073 in the
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment
option. If you cannot submit your material by using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for alternate
instructions.
    Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting &
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following
instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. We review all comments received, but we will only
post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may
choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that
we receive.
    Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we
post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal
information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions
to the docket in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70041; 33 CFR 1.05-1.

0
2. In Sec.  100.501, amend Table 1 to Paragraph (i)(1) by adding the
following events after the last entry to read as follows:

Sec.  100.501   Special Local Regulations; Marine Events Within the
Fifth Coast Guard District.

* * * * *

                                           Table 1 to Paragraph (i)(1)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               Enforcement
             Event                            Regulated area                  period(s) \1\         Sponsor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Stockton Boat Race............  All navigable waters of the New Jersey      One weekend in     Stockton
                                 Intracoastal Waterway in Atlantic City,     March or April.    University.
                                 NJ, within the polygon bounded by the
                                 following: Originating on the southwest
                                 portion at approximate position latitude
                                 39[deg]20'57'' N, longitude
                                 074[deg]27'59'' W; thence northeasterly
                                 along the shoreline to latitude
                                 39[deg]21'35'' N, longitude
                                 074[deg]27'06'' W; thence east across the
                                 mouth of Beach Thorofare to the shoreline
                                 at latitude 39[deg]21'41'' N, longitude
                                 074[deg]26'55'' W; thence east along the
                                 shoreline to latitude 39[deg]21'42'' N,
                                 longitude 074[deg]26'51'' W; thence
                                 southeast across the New Jersey
                                 Intracoastal Waterway to the shoreline at
                                 latitude 39[deg]21'43'' N, longitude
                                 074[deg]26'41'' W; thence southwest along
                                 the shoreline to approximate position
                                 latitude 39[deg]20'55'' N, longitude
                                 074[deg]27'57'' W; thence north to the
                                 point of origin.
Escape the Cape Swim..........  All navigable waters of the Delaware Bay    One Saturday or    DelMoSports.
                                 in Lower Township, NJ, bounded by a line    Sunday in June.
                                 drawn from: Latitude 39[deg]0'57'' N,
                                 longitude 074[deg]56'56'' W in Villas,
                                 NJ, thence west to latitude
                                 39[deg]00'59'' N, longitude
                                 074[deg]57'15'' W, thence south to
                                 latitude 38[deg]58'08'' N, longitude
                                 074[deg]58'11'' W, thence east to
                                 latitude 38[deg]58'04'' N, longitude
                                 074[deg]57'52'' W in North Cape May, NJ,
                                 thence north along the shoreline to the
                                 point of origin.
Around the Island Paddle......  All waters within 50 yards in front of the  One Saturday or    Desatnick
                                 lead safety vessel preceding the first      Sunday in June,    Foundation.
                                 event participants, to 50 yards behind      July or August.
                                 the safety vessel trailing the last event
                                 participants, and 100 yards on either
                                 side of participant and safety vessels
                                 during the event. The regulated area will
                                 move with the safety vessels and
                                 participants as they transit the waters
                                 east through Cape May Harbor, south
                                 through Cape May Inlet, west through the
                                 Atlantic Ocean, north through the
                                 Delaware Bay, then east through Cape May
                                 Canal, and terminate at the Lost
                                 Fishermen's Memorial in Cape May Harbor.
                                 The regulated area will move at the pace
                                 of event patrol vessels and participants.
Manasquan Inlet Intracoastal    All waters of Manasquan Inlet extending     One Saturday or    Borough of
 Tug.                            400 feet from either side of the rope       Sunday in          Manasquan.
                                 located between approximate locations       September or
                                 latitude 40[deg]06'09'' N, longitude        October.
                                 74[deg]02'08'' W and latitude
                                 40[deg]06'14'' N, longitude
                                 74[deg]02'08'' W.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As noted, the enforcement dates and times for each of the listed events in this table are subject to change.
  In the event of a change, or for enforcement periods listed that do not allow a specific date or dates to be
  determined, the Captain of the Port will provide notice to the public by publishing a Notice of Enforcement in
  the Federal Register, as well as, issuing a Broadcast Notice to Mariner.

* * * * *

    Dated: February 10, 2022.
Leon McClain, Jr.,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Alternate Captain of the Port, Delaware Bay.
[FR Doc. 2022-03256 Filed 2-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


Percent contribution by cropland/ production area/ lagoon seepage.

For example, 82% / 12% / 6% would mean 82% of the load came from cropland, 12% from production area, and 6% from lagoon seepage.

Sector Baseline Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 70% / 5% / 26% 49% / 8% / 43% 47% / 8% / 45% 54% / 9% / 37% 49% / 4% / 47% N/ A 47% / 8% / 45% 47% / 8% / 45%

Dairy 50% / 4% / 46% 30% / 6% / 64% 29% / 6% / 65% 33% / 7% / 61% 30% / 3% / 67% N/ A 29% / 5% / 66% 30% / 2% / 68%

Swine 47% / 8% / 45% 47% / 8% / 45% 47% / 8% / 45% 53% / 9% / 38% N/ A 63% / 0% / 37% 48% / 6% / 46% 51% / 0% / 49%

Poultry 99% / 1% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Poultry ( wet) 44% / 33% / 23% 43% / 33% / 24% 43% / 33% / 24% 45% / 35% / 19% N/ A 64% / 0% / 36% 43% / 33% / 24% 43% / 33% / 24%

Total 70% / 7% / 23% 63% / 8% / 29% 63% / 8% / 29% 68% / 8% / 24% 75% / 1% / 24% 63% / 0% / 37% 63% / 7% / 30% 65% / 5% / 30%

Sector Baseline Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 99% / 1% / 0% 98% / 2% / 0% 98% / 2% / 0% 98% / 2% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% N/ A 98% / 2% / 0% 98% / 2% / 0%

Dairy 97% / 3% / 0% 96% / 4% / 0% 95% / 5% / 0% 95% / 5% / 0% 98% / 2% / 0% N/ A 98% / 2% / 0% 98% / 2% / 0%

Swine 93% / 7% / 0% 93% / 7% / 0% 92% / 8% / 0% 92% / 8% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 97% / 3% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Poultry 99% / 1% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Poultry ( wet) 76% / 24% / 0% 75% / 25% / 0% 72% / 28% / 0% 72% / 28% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 72% / 28% / 0% 72% / 28% / 0%

Total 97% / 3% / 0% 97% / 3% / 0% 96% / 4% / 0% 96% / 4% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 97% / 3% / 0% 97% / 3% / 0%

Sector Baseline Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Dairy 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Swine 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Poultry 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Poultry ( wet) 90% / 10% / 0% 90% / 10% / 0% 90% / 10% / 0% 90% / 10% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 90% / 10% / 0% 90% / 10% / 0%

Total 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0%

Sector Baseline Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 11% / 89% / 0% 9% / 91% / 0% 9% / 91% / 0% 9% / 91% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% N/ A 9% / 91% / 0% 9% / 91% / 0%

Dairy 4% / 96% / 0% 2% / 98% / 0% 2% / 98% / 0% 2% / 98% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% N/ A 0% / 100% / 0% 3% / 97% / 0%

Swine 1% / 99% / 0% 1% / 99% / 0% 1% / 99% / 0% 1% / 99% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 1% / 99% / 0% 54% / 46% / 0%

Poultry 9% / 91% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%   N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Poultry ( wet) 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0%

Total 8% / 92% / 0% 6% / 94% / 0% 6% / 94% / 0% 6% / 94% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 8% / 92% / 0% 8% / 92% / 0%

Table A 3. Nitrogen loads from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year.

Table A 4. Phosphorous loads from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year.

Table A 5. Sediment loads from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year.

Table A 6. Fecal coliform loads from Large CAFOs in 1019 colony forming units.

Highlighted cells show an increase in loads from baseline. DCTM_ ARP. xls Percent contribution by cropland/ production area/ lagoon seepage.

For example, 82% / 12% / 6% would mean 82% of the load came from cropland, 12% from production area, and 6% from lagoon seepage.

Sector Baseline Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 13% / 87% / 0% 10% / 90% / 0% 10% / 90% / 0% 10% / 90% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% N/ A 10% / 90% / 0% 10% / 90% / 0%

Dairy 6% / 94% / 0% 3% / 97% / 0% 3% / 97% / 0% 3% / 97% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% N/ A 1% / 99% / 0% 9% / 91% / 0%

Swine 1% / 99% / 0% 1% / 99% / 0% 1% / 99% / 0% 1% / 99% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 1% / 99% / 0% 58% / 42% / 0%

Poultry 10% / 90% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Poultry ( wet) 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0%

Total 3% / 97% / 0% 2% / 98% / 0% 2% / 98% / 0% 2% / 98% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 12% / 88% / 0% 20% / 80% / 0%

Sector Baseline Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% N/ A 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0%

Dairy 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Swine 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Poultry 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Poultry ( wet) 88% / 12% / 0% 88% / 12% / 0% 88% / 12% / 0% 88% / 12% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 88% / 12% / 0% 88% / 12% / 0%

Total 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0%

Sector Baseline Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% N/ A 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0%

Dairy 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% N/ A 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0%

Swine 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% N/ A   0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0%

Poultry 0% / 100% / 0%         N/ A

Poultry ( wet) 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% N/ A   0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0%

Total 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0%   0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0%

Sector Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 86% / 0% / 14% 94% / 6% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Dairy 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 79% / 0% / 21% 92% / 8% / 0% N/ A 96% / 4% / 0% 92% / 8% / 0%

Swine 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 7% / 0% / 93% N/ A 139% /  39% / 0% 27% / 73% / 0% 10% / 90% / 0%

Poultry 93% / 7% / 0% 94% / 6% / 0% 94% / 6% / 0% 94% / 6% / 0% N/ A 94% / 6% / 0% 94% / 6% / 0%

Poultry ( wet) 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 26% / 0% / 74% N/ A 5% / 95% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Total 98% / 2% / 0% 98% / 2% / 0% 77% / 2% / 21% 94% / 6% / 0% 434% /  334% / 0% 95% / 5% / 0% 89% / 11% / 0%

Table A 7. Fecal streptococcus loads from Large CAFOs in 1019 colony forming units.

Table A 8. Metals loads from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year.

Table A X. BOD loads from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year.

Table A 9. Nitrogen load reductions from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year. Numbers in ( ) indicate negative values.

Highlighted cells show an increase in loads from baseline. DCTM_ ARP. xls Percent contribution by cropland/ production area/ lagoon seepage.

For example, 82% / 12% / 6% would mean 82% of the load came from cropland, 12% from production area, and 6% from lagoon seepage.

Sector Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 97% / 3% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Dairy 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 94% / 6% / 0% N/ A 93% / 7% / 0% 93% / 7% / 0%

Swine 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 79% / 21% / 0% 77% / 23% / 0% 69% / 31% / 0%

Poultry 92% / 8% / 0% 96% / 4% / 0% 96% / 4% / 0% 96% / 4% / 0% N/ A 96% / 4% / 0% 96% / 4% / 0%

Poultry ( wet) 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 34% / 66% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Total 98% / 2% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 99% / 1% / 0% 96% / 4% / 0% 63% / 37% / 0% 96% / 4% / 0% 95% / 5% / 0%

Sector Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 98% / 2% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Dairy 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 93% / 7% / 0% N/ A 92% / 8% / 0% 93% / 7% / 0%

Swine   100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Poultry 0% / 100% / 0% 82% / 18% / 0% 82% / 18% / 0% 82% / 18% / 0% N/ A 82% / 18% / 0% 82% / 18% / 0%

Poultry ( wet)   100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 9% / 91% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Total 98% / 2% / 0% 98% / 2% / 0% 98% / 2% / 0% 96% / 4% / 0% 125% /  25% / 0% 97% / 3% / 0% 98% / 2% / 0%

Sector Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 18% / 82% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 95% / 5% / 0%

Dairy 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 6% / 94% / 0% N/ A 5% / 95% / 0% 4% / 96% / 0%

Swine 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 0% / 100% / 0% 1% / 99% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0%

Poultry 3% / 97% / 0% 3% / 97% / 0% 3% / 97% / 0% 9% / 91% / 0% N/ A 3% / 97% / 0% 3% / 97% / 0%

Poultry ( wet) 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 0% / 100% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Total 65% / 35% / 0% 65% / 35% / 0% 65% / 35% / 0% 16% / 84% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 8% / 92% / 0% 7% / 93% / 0%

Sector Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 20% / 80% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 96% / 4% / 0%

Dairy 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 10% / 90% / 0% N/ A 6% / 94% / 0% 5% / 95% / 0%

Swine 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 1% / 99% / 0% 1% / 99% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0%

Poultry 4% / 96% / 0% 4% / 96% / 0% 4% / 96% / 0% 10% / 90% / 0% N/ A 4% / 96% / 0% 4% / 96% / 0%

Poultry ( wet) 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 0% / 100% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Total 10% / 90% / 0% 10% / 90% / 0% 10% / 90% / 0% 12% / 88% / 0% 1% / 99% / 0% 2% / 98% / 0% 1% / 99% / 0%

Table A 13. Fecal streptococcus load reductions from Large CAFOs in 1019 colony forming units.

Table A 10. Phosphorous load reductions from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year.

Table A 11. Sediment load reductions from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year. Numbers in ( ) indicate negative values.

Table A 12. Fecal coliform load reductions from Large CAFOs in 1019 colony forming units.

Highlighted cells show an increase in loads from baseline. DCTM_ ARP. xls Percent contribution by cropland/ production area/ lagoon seepage.

For example, 82% / 12% / 6% would mean 82% of the load came from cropland, 12% from production area, and 6% from lagoon seepage.

Sector Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Dairy 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 100% / 0% / 0% 93% / 7% / 0%

Swine 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% # VALUE! 121% /  21% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 67% / 33% / 0%

Poultry 92% / 8% / 0% 95% / 5% / 0% 95% / 5% / 0% 95% / 5% / 0% N/ A 95% / 5% / 0% 95% / 5% / 0%

Poultry ( wet) 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% N/ A 33% / 67% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0% 100% / 0% / 0%

Total 96% / 4% / 0% 98% / 2% / 0% 98% / 2% / 0% 97% / 3% / 0%   98% / 2% / 0% 92% / 8% / 0%

Sector Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 5a Option 5 Option 6 Option 7 Cattle       0% / 100% / 0% N/ A   0% / 100% / 0%

Dairy       0% / 100% / 0% N/ A 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0%

Swine       N/ A 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0%

Poultry 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% N/ A 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0%

Poultry ( wet)       N/ A 0% / 100% / 0%

Total 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0% 0% / 100% / 0%

Table A 14. Metals load reductions from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year. Numbers in ( ) indicate negative values.

Table A Y. BOD load reductions from Large CAFOs in millions of pounds per year.

Highlighted cells show an increase in loads from baseline. DCTM_ ARP. xls