[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 157 (Wednesday, August 16, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38828-38832]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17226]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2017-0385; FRL-9966-20-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; SC: Multiple Revisions to Air Pollution
Control Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to approve changes to the South Carolina State
Implementation Plan (SIP) to revise miscellaneous rules covering air
pollution control standards. EPA is approving portions of SIP revisions
submitted by the State of South Carolina, through the South Carolina
Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC), on

the following dates: October 1, 2007, July 18, 2011, June 17, 2013,
August 8, 2014, August 12, 2015, July 27, 2016, and November 4, 2016.
These actions are being taken pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA or
Act).

DATES: This direct final rule is effective October 16, 2017 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by September 15,
2017. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform
the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2017-0385 at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Wong, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Mr. Wong can be reached via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On October 1, 2007, July 18, 2011, June 17, 2013, August 8, 2014,
August 12, 2015, July 27, 2016, and November 4, 2016, SC DHEC submitted
SIP revisions to EPA for approval that involve changes to South
Carolina's SIP regulations to make administrative and clarifying
amendments, revise regulations, and correct typographical errors. These
SIP submittals make changes to several air quality rules in South
Carolina Code of Regulations Annotated (S.C. Code Ann. Regs.). The
changes EPA is approving into the SIP in this action modify portions of
Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 1--Emissions From Fuel Burning
Operations and Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 4--Emissions From
Process Industries. EPA is not acting on other revisions that are
included in these submittals. EPA will act on those changes in separate
actions.

II. Analysis of South Carolina's Submittals

A. Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 1--Emissions From Fuel Burning
Operations

    South Carolina is amending multiple sections at Regulation 61-62.5,
Standard No. 1--Emissions from Fuel Burning Operations. The July 18,
2011, submittal revises subparagraph C of Section I --Visible Emissions
by excluding natural gas fired units from maintaining an information
log to determine periods of startup and shutdown. The August 12, 2015,
submittal further revises the subparagraph adding propane fired units
to the log keeping exception and corrects typographical errors in the
Standard.
    CAA section 110(l) provides that EPA shall not approve a revision
to a plan if the revision would interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (as
defined in CAA section 171), or any other applicable requirement of the
CAA. SC DHEC considered CAA section 110(l) in making these changes and
explains in a letter dated December 30, 2016, that the state expects no
increase in actual emissions as a result of exempting units burning
only natural gas and propane fuels from maintaining logs because there
are no opacity concerns with these type of fuels during startup,
shutdown, or normal operations. Because natural gas and propane contain
relatively minor amounts of the constituents (particulate matter and
sulfur) that could result in visible emissions, this change to
subparagraph C will not result in any increase in emissions and will
not affect the State's ability to attain or maintain state or federal
standards or reasonable further progress.
    The August 8, 2014, submittal makes the following changes: (1)
Clarifies sulfur dioxide maximum allowable discharge limits at Section
III--Sulfur Dioxide Emissions and (2) makes administrative and
clarifying edits throughout Standard No. 1. The revision in Section
III--Sulfur Dioxide Emissions streamlines the requirement by setting a
maximum sulfur dioxide (SO2) limit of 2.3 pounds per million
British thermal units (lb/MMBtu) from fuel burning operations. The
current approved Standard sets two SO2 limits, 2.3 lb/MMBtu
or 3.5 lb/MMBtu across various classification categories. Therefore,
this revision would streamline the rule to the lower of the two limits
allowed for such sources. Lastly, this submittal makes administrative
and clarifying edits in Section I --Visible Emissions, Section III--
Sulfur Dioxide Emissions, Section IV--Opacity Monitoring Requirements,
and Section VI--Periodic Testing.
    The November 4, 2016, submittal makes typographical corrections
under Section IV--Opacity Reporting Requirements. EPA has reviewed the
aforementioned changes to South Carolina's Regulation 61-62.5, Standard
No. 1 and is approving the changes into the SIP pursuant to CAA section
110.

B. Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 4--Emissions From Process
Industries

    South Carolina is amending multiple sections at Regulation 61-62.5,
Standard No. 4--Emissions from Process Industries. The October 1, 2007,
submittal removes Section IV--Portland Cement Manufacturing from the
SIP. This rule contains particulate matter (PM) emission limits for
cement kilns with a production rate of up to 120 tons per hour and it
establishes a 20 percent allowable stack opacity limit for certain
components of Portland cement plants. SC DHEC states that there are no
Portland cement plants operating at 120 tons per hour or less in the
State because it is not economically feasible. SC DHEC asserts that
removing this rule would not create a relaxation as there are no
applicable sources subject to this regulation. Additionally, should
such a source start operation, it would be subject to more stringent PM
emissions limits in New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) subpart F
(Standards of Performance for Portland Cement Plants).
    The July 18, 2011, submittal amends Section V--Cotton Gins by
removing established specific emission limits based on production rate
(output) of bales of cotton per hour and replacing that with specific,
measurable performance requirements and operating standards. SC DHEC
considered CAA section 110(l) in making this change. SC DEHC explains
that the rule development is based on best management practices
outlined in the USDA's Cotton Ginners Handbook, staff experience with
effective emission reduction techniques, the review of

other state regulations on cotton gins, and several discussions with
the affected industry. The new rule assures a greater degree of control
of these emissions than that which would result from the existing
process weight rate curve and also allows the state to more effectively
determine compliance. The revised rule requires enforceable control of
emissions from specific point sources in the ginning process rather
than an allowable emission rate, and it establishes requirements to
minimize fugitive emissions from various sources at cotton ginning
facilities. The revised rule also sets applicable requirements for good
housekeeping practices in the gin yard, weekly monitoring of control
efficiency, recordkeeping, and reporting. The revised regulation will
provide for improved emissions control through practicably enforceable
control of emissions, use of state of the art pollution control
devices, and minimization of fugitive emissions. The June 17, 2013,
submittal makes a subsequent typographical correction to Section V.
    The August 8, 2014, submittal makes the following changes: (1)
Removes a PM emissions limit at Section III--Kraft Pulp and Paper
Manufacturing; (2) revises the frequency required for reporting excess
emissions at Section XI--Total Reduced Sulfur Emissions of Kraft Pulp
Mills; (3) removes periodic testing requirement for Total Reduce Sulfur
(TRS) at Section XII--Periodic Testing; and (4) makes administrative
and clarifying edits throughout Standard No. 4. At Section III, the
submittal removes the table column ``Maximum Allowable Emissions of PM
in pounds/equivalent Ton of Air Dried, Unbleached Pulp Produced'' and
retains the ``Maximum Allowable Stack Opacity.'' SC DEHC asserts that
this will not result in a relaxation of emission limits because the
subject sources are covered under more stringent PM limits under the
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP)
(subpart S--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
from the Pulp and Paper Industry). Additionally, the word ``opacity''
replaces ``rate of emissions.''
    At Section XI, the August 8, 2014, submittal revises the required
excess emissions reporting frequency in subparagraph D.3. from
quarterly to semi-annual. SC DHEC considered CAA sections 110(l) and
193 in making the revision and asserts changing reporting from
quarterly to semi-annual will not affect the level of emissions or
compromise the national ambient air quality standards. SC DHEC cites to
several Federal and state regulations that address excess emissions
reporting, including NSPS subpart BB Standards of Performance for Kraft
Pulp Mills; South Carolina Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 4 Section
XI(D)(3) Total Reduced Sulfur (TRS) Emissions of Kraft Pulp Mills;
South Carolina Regulations 61-62.1, Section II(J)(2) Permit
Requirements; and South Carolina Regulation 61-62.70 Title V Operating
Permit Program.
    At Section XII, the August 8, 2014, submittal removes the periodic
testing requirement for TRS at Kraft pulp mills.\1\ SC DHEC states that
most sources are required to test under NSPS or NESHAP rules. The few
sources that are not required to test have enough historical test data
to develop an approvable operating range which can be handled during
the permitting process. Additionally, the S.C. Pollution Control Act
(48-1-50, Powers of the Department) makes provision for the SC DHEC to
ask for a source test and permits are often drafted with language
allowing the SC DEHC to ask for source tests. Therefore, the
requirements will be no less stringent than what is allowed through
current regulatory and permitting authority to review testing
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ SC DHEC's July 18, 2011, submittal makes changes to TRS in
Section XII. The August 8, 2014, submittal, if approved, would
supersede the 2011 revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, the August 8, 2014, submittal makes minor typographical,
renumbering, and clarifying edits to Standard No. 4 in Section II--
Sulfuric Acid Manufacturing, Section V--Cotton Gins, Section XI--Total
Reduced Sulfur Emissions of Kraft Pulp Mills, and Section XII--Periodic
Testing.
    The July 27, 2016, submittal revises Section VIII--Other
Manufacturing by excluding Kraft Pulp and Paper Manufacturing
facilities. This Section sets PM emission for source categories not
specified elsewhere in Standard No. 4. The revision to exclude Kraft
Pulp and Paper Manufacturing facilities aligns with the August 8, 2014,
revision, as previously discussed in this notice. The submittal also
makes minor typographical, renumbering, and clarifying edits to Section
XII --Periodic Testing.
    EPA has reviewed the aforementioned changes to South Carolina's
Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 4 and is approving the revisions into
the SIP pursuant to CAA section 110.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of South
Carolina Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 1--Emissions From Fuel
Burning Operations, effective September 23, 2016, which makes
administrative and clarifying revisions for consistency, removes log
reporting requirements, revises monitoring requirements, and Regulation
61-62.5, Standard No. 4--Emissions From Process Industries, effective
June 24, 2016, which makes administrative and clarifying revisions for
consistency, removes specific emission rates, and reporting
requirements. Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for
inclusion in the SIP, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into
that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113
of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's
approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the
Federal Register in the next update to the SIP compilation.\2\ EPA has
made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available
through https://www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region 4 Office
(please contact the person identified in the For Further Information
Contact section of this preamble for more information).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Final Action

    EPA is approving the aforementioned changes to the South Carolina
SIP, submitted on October 1, 2007, July 18, 2011, June 17, 2013, August
8, 2014, August 12, 2015, July 27, 2016, and November 4, 2016 because
they are consistent with the CAA and federal regulations. EPA is
publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views
this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should adverse
comments be filed. This rule will be effective October 16, 2017 without
further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by September
15, 2017.
    If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All adverse comments received will then be addressed
in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Parties

interested in commenting should do so at this time. If no such comments
are received, the public is advised that this rule will be effective on
October 16, 2017 and no further action will be taken on the proposed
rule.
    Please note that if we receive adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, we may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, these
actions merely approve state law as meeting federal requirements and do
not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
For that reason, these actions:
     Are not significant regulatory actions subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     are certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     do not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     are not economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     are not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     do not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this direct final action for the State of South
Carolina does not have Tribal implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because it does not have
substantial direct effects on an Indian Tribe. The Catawba Indian
Nation Reservation is located within the South Carolina portion of the
bi-state Charlotte Area. Pursuant to the Catawba Indian Claims
Settlement Act, S.C. Code Ann. 27-16-120, ``all state and local
environmental laws and regulations apply to the [Catawba Indian Nation]
and Reservation and are fully enforceable by all relevant state and
local agencies and authorities.'' EPA notes this action will not impose
substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by October 16, 2017. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: August 4, 2017.
A. Anne Heard,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart PP--South Carolina

0
2. Section 52.2120(c) is amended by:
0
a. Revising the entries under Regulation No. 62.5, Standard No. 1, for
``Section I,'' ``Section III,'' and ``Section VI,''
0
b. Revising the entries under Regulation No. 62.5, Standard No. 4, for
``Section II,'' ``Section III,'' ``Section IV,'' ``Section V,''
``Section VIII,'' ``Section XI,'' and ``Section XII'' to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.2120   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                              Air Pollution Control Regulations for South Carolina
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                State       EPA approval      Federal Register
          State citation                Title/subject      effective date       date               notice
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Standard No. 1...................  Emissions from Fuel
                                    Burning Operations.
Section I........................  Visible Emissions.....       9/23/2016       8/16/2017  [Insert Federal
                                                                                Register citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section III......................  Sulfur Dioxide               9/23/2016       8/16/2017  [Insert Federal
                                    Emissions.                                              Register citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section VI.......................  Periodic Testing......       9/23/2016       8/16/2017  [Insert Federal
                                                                                Register citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
Standard No. 4...................  Emissions From Process
                                    Industries.

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section II.......................  Sulfuric Acid                6/24/2016       8/16/2017  [Insert Federal
                                    Manufacturing.                                          Register citation].
Section III......................  Kraft Pulp and Paper         6/24/2016       8/16/2017  [Insert Federal
                                    Manufacturing Plants.                                   Register citation].
Section IV.......................  Portland Cement              6/24/2016       8/16/2017  [Insert Federal
                                    Manufacturing.                                          Register citation].
Section V........................  Cotton Gins...........       6/24/2016       8/16/2017  [Insert Federal
                                                                                Register citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section VIII.....................  Other Manufacturing...       6/24/2016       8/16/2017  [Insert Federal
                                                                                Register citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
Section XI.......................  Total Reduced Sulfur         6/24/2016       8/16/2017  [Insert Federal
                                    Emissions of Kraft                                      Register citation].
                                    Pulp Mills.
Section XII......................  Periodic Testing......       6/24/2016       8/16/2017  [Insert Federal
                                                                                Register citation].

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-17226 Filed 8-15-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 217 (Thursday, November 8, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 66977]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27302]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER13-214-000]

Middletown Cogeneration Company LLC; Supplemental Notice That
Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section
204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Middletown Cogeneration Company LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is November 23, 2012.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: November 2, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-27302 Filed 11-7-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 67 (Thursday, April 7, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20257-20258]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08025]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 62

[Docket ID: FEMA-2016-0009]
RIN 1660-AA88

National Flood Insurance Program: Update To Address Information
for Claims Appeals

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency is revising its
regulations to remove address information for the National Flood
Insurance Program's claims appeals process.

DATES: This final rule is effective April 7, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Claudia Murphy, Policyholder Services
Division Director, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 400 C Street SW., Washington, DC
20472-3020,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Removal of Address

    In accordance with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
regulations at title 44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 62,
subpart B, once a flood insurer participating in the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP) issues a final claim determination, a
policyholder may appeal an action related to the claim taken by the
insurer, a FEMA employee, or insurance agent. To pursue an appeal, a
policyholder must submit a written appeal to FEMA within 60 days from
the date of the decision. See 44 CFR 62.20(e)(1).
    The current regulations at Sec.  62.20(e)(1) indicate that
policyholders should submit their appeal to: DHS/FEMA, Mitigation
Directorate, Federal Insurance Administrator, 1800 S. Bell Street,
Arlington, VA 20598-MS3010. FEMA is removing this address from the
regulations because the Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
(FIMA), which handles claims appeals, is relocating from Arlington,
Virginia to Washington, DC, and the address in the regulations will no
longer be valid. Beginning April 4, 2016, policyholders should submit
written appeals to FEMA at the following address: Federal Insurance and
Mitigation Administration (FIMA), DHS/FEMA, 400 C Street SW., 3rd
Floor, Washington, DC 20472-3020. FEMA is also introducing the option
to submit written appeals via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    FEMA will make this information available on its Web site at
www.fema.gov. FEMA has decided to no longer include the address in the
regulations, and instead to continue providing the address via its Web
site and requiring participating flood insurance carriers to include
the address in all denial letters,\1\ so that it is more readily
available to policyholders and so that FEMA can more easily update the
address.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See FEMA, Memorandum For: WYO Principal Coordinators and the
NFIP Direct Servicing Agent, FIMA Address Change, W-16011 (March 8,
2016), http://www.nfipiservice.com/Stakeholder/pdf/bulletin/w-16011.pdf.

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

II. Regulatory Analysis

a. Administrative Procedure Act

    FEMA did not publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for this
regulation. FEMA finds that this rule is exempt from the Administrative
Procedure Act's (5 U.S.C. 553(b)) notice and comment rulemaking
requirements because it is purely procedural in nature. This rule is
making a technical change to ensure the accuracy of FEMA's regulations
as FIMA relocates from Arlington, Virginia to Washington, DC. FEMA
believes this technical amendment is not controversial and will not
result in any adverse comments. These changes do not confer any
substantive rights, benefits, or obligations; therefore, this rule will
have no substantive effect on the public.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), FEMA has determined it has good cause to
make this technical amendment effective immediately, so that appellants
are aware of the new address as soon as possible and their appeals will
be received at the correct address.

b. Executive Order 12866, as Amended, Regulatory Planning and Review;
Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58
FR 51735, Oct. 4, 1993), accordingly FEMA has not submitted it to the
Office of Management and Budget for review. As this rule involves a
non-substantive change, FEMA expects that it will not impose any costs
on the public.

c. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) requires that
special consideration be given to the effects of proposed regulations
on small entities. This rule does not require a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking and, therefore, is exempt from the requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

d. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Ch. 3501-3520), FEMA reviewed this final rule and has determined that
there are no new collections of information contained therein.

e. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have Tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, ``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments''
(65 FR 67249, Nov. 9, 2000), because it does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian
Tribes.

f. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, Aug. 10, 1999), 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.
FEMA has analyzed this rule under that Order and determined that it
does not have implications for federalism.

g. Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking

    FEMA has sent this final rule to the Congress and to the Government
Accountability Office under the Congressional Review of Agency
Rulemaking Act (Act), Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 873 (March 29,
1996) (5 U.S.C. 804). The rule is not a ``major rule'' within the
meaning of that Act and will not result in an annual effect on the
economy of $100,000,000 or more. Moreover, it will not result in a
major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries,
Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions.
FEMA does not expect that it will have ``significant adverse effects''
on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on
the ability of United States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-
based enterprises.

List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 62

    Claims, Flood insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Emergency
Management Agency is amending 44 CFR part 62 as follows:

PART 62--SALE OF INSURANCE AND ADJUSTMENT OF CLAIMS

0
1. The authority citation for part 62 continues to read as follows:

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

0
2. In Sec.  62.20, revise paragraph (e)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  62.20  Claims appeals.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) Submit a written appeal to FEMA within 60 days from the date of
the decision.
* * * * *

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2016-08025 Filed 4-6-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-A6-P


[Federal Register: December 28, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 247)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 68529-68530]
[DOCID:fr28de09-21]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Parts 510 and 529

[Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0665]

New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor; Isoflurane

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal
drug regulations to reflect a change of sponsor for an abbreviated new
animal drug application (ANADA) for isoflurane, USP, from Nicholas
Piramal India Ltd. UK, to Piramal Healthcare Ltd.

DATES: This rule is effective December 28, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David R. Newkirk, Center for
Veterinary Medicine (HFV-100), Food and Drug Administration, 7500
Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Nicholas Piramal India Ltd. UK has informed
FDA that it has transferred ownership of, and all rights and interest
in, ANADA 200-237 for Isoflurane, USP, to Piramal Healthcare Ltd.,
Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai - 400 013,
India. Accordingly, the regulations are amended in 21 CFR

529.1186 to reflect this change of sponsorship.
    Following this change of sponsorship, Nicholas Piramal India Ltd.
UK is no longer the sponsor of an approved application. In addition,
Piramal Healthcare Ltd. is not currently listed in the animal drug
regulations as a sponsor of an approved application. Accordingly, 21
CFR 510.600(c) is being amended to remove the entries for Nicholas
Piramal India Ltd. UK to add entries for Piramal Healthcare Ltd.
    This rule does not meet the definition of ``rule'' in 5 U.S.C.
804(3)(A) because it is a rule of ``particular applicability.''
Therefore, it is not subject to the congressional review requirements
in 5 U.S.C. 801-808.

List of Subjects

21 CFR Part 510

    Administrative practice and procedure, Animal drugs, Labeling,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

21 CFR Part 529

    Animal drugs.

0
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and
redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 CFR parts 510 and
529 are amended as follows:

PART 510--NEW ANIMAL DRUGS

0
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 510 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352, 353, 360b, 371, 379e.

0
2. In Sec.  510.600, in the table in paragraph (c)(1) alphabetically
add an entry for ``Piramal Healthcare Ltd.'' and remove the entry for
``Nicholas Piramal India Ltd. UK''; and in the table in paragraph
(c)(2) remove the entry for ``066112'' and numerically add an entry for
``065085'' to read as follows:

Sec.  510.600  Names, addresses, and drug labeler codes of sponsors of
approved applications.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Firm name and address                  Drug labeler code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Piramal Healthcare Ltd., Piramal Tower,       065085
 Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai -
 400 013, India
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Drug labeler code                  Firm name and address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
065085                       Piramal Healthcare Ltd., Piramal Tower,
                              Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai
                               400 013, India
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 529--CERTAIN OTHER DOSAGE FORM NEW ANIMAL DRUGS

0
3. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 529 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b.

Sec.  529.1186  [Amended]

0
4. In Sec.  529.1186, in paragraph (b), remove ``066112'' and in its
place add ``065085''.

    Dated: December 17, 2009.
Steven D. Vaughn,
Director, Office of New Animal Drug Evaluation, Center for Veterinary
Medicine.
[FR Doc. E9-30590 Filed 12-24-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 176 (Tuesday, September 13, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56148-56150]
[FR Doc No: 2022-19561]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2021-0094]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to the
Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Exemption for
the Make Inoperative Prohibition To Accommodate People With
Disabilities; OMB Control No. 2127-0635

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

ACTION: Notice and request for comments on a reinstatement of a
previously approved information collection.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
this notice (``30-day notice'') announces that the Information
Collection Request (ICR) summarized below will be submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. The ICR
describes the nature of the information collection and its expected
burden and is a request for a reinstatement of a previously approved
information collection regarding an exemption for the make inoperative
prohibition to accommodate people with disabilities. The Federal
Register notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on the
following information collection was published on January 12, 2022.
NHTSA received one comment on the 60-day notice. The comment generally
supported the information collection and further addressed broad issues
not discussed in this ICR. Therefore, NHTSA has concluded that it is
not necessary to make any changes to the information collection based
on the comment received for the 60-day notice.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before October 13, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed
information collection, including suggestions for reducing burden,
should be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget at
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. To find this particular information
collection, select ``Currently under Review--Open for Public Comment''
or use the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information or access
to background documents, contact Gunyoung Lee, Office of Rulemaking
(NRM230),<PHONE_NUMBER>, Room W43-463, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, Please
identify the relevant collection of information by referring to its OMB
Control Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), a
Federal agency must receive approval from the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) before it collects certain information from the public and
a person is not required to respond to a collection of information by a
Federal agency unless the collection displays a valid OMB control
number. In compliance with these requirements, this notice announces
that the following information collection request will be submitted to
the OMB.
    A Federal Register notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting
public comments on the following information collection was published
on January 12, 2022 (87 FR 1829). NHTSA received one comment on the 60-
day notice from the National Mobility Equipment Dealers Association
(NMEDA). NMEDA generally supported the information collection and
further addressed broad issues, such as managing the collected
information to enhance the benefits for the public; suggesting a
particular form for the information collection; and questioning the
label requirement which is not subject to the information collection.
NHTSA may consider those broad issues in determining the agency's next
steps regarding drivers and passengers with disabilities. However, the
agency concluded that it is not necessary to make any changes to the
information collection based on those broad issues not addressed in
this ICR.
    In a March 15, 2022 final rule (87 FR 14406), NHTSA provided a make
inoperative exemption to rental companies to make inoperative a knee
bolster air bag in order to permit the installation of hand controls to
accommodate persons with physical disabilities. Regarding rental
vehicles, NHTSA solicited comment on a proposed modification to this
collection of information as part of a Supplemental Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (SNPRM) published on December 28, 2020 (85 FR 84281). NHTSA
received comments opposing a proposed requirement that a copy of a
disclosure that the vehicle may no longer comply with all applicable
FMVSSs be required to be provided in a modified rental vehicle be
separately provided to a renter at the time of transaction and be
retained by the rental company for a period of five years. As part of
the SNPRM, NHTSA assumed that this would result in an estimated
information collection burden of 1,333 hours (10 respondents x 400
responses per respondent x 0.333 hours to annotate the invoice).
    NHTSA received eight comments on this proposed requirement. Five
commenters supported the requirement. One commenter argued that this
requirement was unnecessary because renters would already likely know
that the vehicle would not comply with the FMVSSs. Two commenters,
Enterprise Holdings Inc., and the American Car Rental Association
opined that this requirement would result in significant expense. After
considering these comments, NHTSA determined that this separate
notification was unnecessary and duplicative of the disclosure that
would be required to be placed in the vehicle itself. This change
eliminated the entire proposed hour burden associated with the make
inoperative exemptions, as they apply to rental companies.
    Title: Exemption for the Make Inoperative Prohibition to
Accommodate People With Disabilities.
    OMB Control Number: 2127-0635.
    Form Number: This collection of information uses no standard form.
    Type of Request: Reinstatement of a previously approved collection
of information.
    Type of Review Requested: Regular.
    Length of Approval Requested: Three (3) years from date of
approval.
    Summary of the Collection of Information:
    The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (49 U.S.C.
chapter 301) authorizes NHTSA to issue Federal motor vehicle safety
standards (FMVSS) applicable to new motor vehicle and new items of
motor vehicle equipment. In addition to regulating the manufacture and
sale of new motor vehicles and items of motor vehicle equipment, the
act also prohibits certain regulated entities from knowingly making
inoperative a part of a device or element of design installed on or in
a motor vehicle or motor vehicle in

compliance with an applicable FMVSS (49 U.S.C. 30122). The statute
authorizes the Secretary of Transportation (NHTSA) to prescribe
regulations to exempt a regulated entity from the make inoperative
provision if such an exemption is consistent with motor vehicle safety
(49 U.S.C. 30122(c)(1)).
    On February 27, 2001, NHTSA published a final rule (66 FR 12638) to
facilitate the modification of motor vehicles so that persons with
disabilities can drive or ride in them as passengers. In that final
rule, the agency issued a limited exemption from a statutory provision
that prohibits specified types of commercial entities from either
removing safety equipment or features installed on motor vehicles
pursuant to the Federal motor vehicle safety standards or altering the
equipment or features to adversely affect their performance. The
exemption is limited in that it allows repair businesses to modify only
certain types of FMVSS-required safety equipment and features, under
specified circumstances. The regulation is found at 49 CFR part 595
subpart C, ``Vehicle Modifications to Accommodate People with
Disabilities.'' The regulation includes three collections of
information: (1) a requirement for modifiers to submit identification
information to NHTSA; (2) a requirement for modifiers to provide a
document to the owner of the modified vehicle stating the exemptions
used for that vehicle and any reduction in load carrying capacity of
the vehicle of more than 100 kg (220 lbs); and (3) a requirement for
rental companies and modifiers to retain a copy of the information
provide to the owner or renter of the modified vehicle for five years.
    Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use of the
Information:
    Commercial entities that modify vehicles after the first retail
sale and wish to use the exemptions offered under this rule are
required to provide NHTSA with their identification information. The
registration involves a one-time submission using NHTSA's online
Manufacturer Portal \1\ containing only the name, address, and
telephone number of the modifier and a prescribed statement that they
will modify vehicles for persons with disabilities and intend to avail
themselves of the exemptions. Any changes in the identification
information must be conveyed to the agency within 30 days. The required
information may be submitted using NHTSA's online Manufacturer
Portal.\2\ This information will be used by the agency to track
entities involved in vehicle modification for persons with disabilities
and is available to the public on NHTSA's website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ NHTSA's Manufacturer's Portal is found at https://vpic.nhtsa.dot.gov/mfrportal/.
    \2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Modifiers must also provide each customer whose vehicle
modification involves the use of the make inoperative exemptions with a
list of the exemptions used in the process of modifying that
vehicle.\3\ The simplest form of this document is an annotated invoice.
No specific or special forms are required. A copy of this document must
also be retained by the modifier for five years. This document will be
used by the consumer to understand the modifications made to his/her
vehicle and their effect on vehicle safety. Similarly, rental companies
are required to retain documents related to the modification for a
period of five years. It may be requested by NHTSA in the event of an
inquiry about the safety of the modified vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 49 CFR 595.7(b) and (e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Affected Public: Motor vehicle repair business and rental
companies.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 765.
    For this estimate, NHTSA assumed that there are 900 businesses
making vehicle modifications for people with disabilities, and 85
percent of these (i.e., 765 businesses) will elect to use the
exemptions available under the rule.
    Frequency: On occasion (e.g., a customer demands a vehicle
modification to accommodate people with disabilities, or a company
decides to become an adaptive vehicle modification business or changes
its identification information).
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,432.
    This ICR is for three information collections. We estimate the
total burden hours for this ICR to be 1,432. The burden hours for the
three information collections were calculated as follows:

Information Collection 1: Requirement To Submit Identification
Information to NHTSA To Use the Exemptions

    NHTSA estimates that compiling and submitting the identification
information will take approximately 10 minutes. NHTSA estimates that
there are approximately 900 businesses making vehicle modifications for
persons with disabilities in the United States and that 85 percent of
these, or 765 businesses, will elect to use the exemptions available
under the rule. After the initial registration (which occurred in
2001), NHTSA estimates that 90 businesses will either need to change
their information or become new registrants who elect to use the
exemptions each year. Therefore, NHTSA estimates the total burden hours
associated with submitting new or updated identification information is
15 hours (90 business x 10 minutes).
    To calculate the labor cost associated with submitting modifier
identification information, NHTSA looked at wage estimates for the type
of personnel involved with compiling and submitting the information.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) estimates that the average hourly
wage for ``General Office Clerks'' (BLS Occupation code 43-9061) is
$16.98.\4\ The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that private
industry workers' wages represent 70.4% of total labor compensation
costs.\5\ Therefore, NHTSA estimates the hourly labor costs to be
$24.12 for ``General Office Clerks'' (BLS Occupation code 43-9061).
NHTSA estimates the total labor cost associated with the 15 burden
hours (For submitting modifier identification by ``office clerks'') to
be approximately $362. (15 x $24.12 = $361.80.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See May 2020 National Occupational Employment and Wage
Estimates, United States, available at https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm.
    \5\ See Table 1. Employer Costs for Employee Compensation by
ownership (Mar. 2021), available at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t01.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Information Collection 2: Requirement To Provide a Document to the
Owner of the Modified Vehicle

    The second information collection in part 595 is the requirement to
provide a disclosure to the vehicle owner. This disclosure is made with
each vehicle modified using exemptions under part 595. In the final
rule, we anticipated that the least costly way for a repair business to
comply with this portion of the new rule would be to annotate the
vehicle modification invoice as to the exemption, if any, involved with
each item on the invoice. The cost of preparing the invoice is not a
portion of our burden calculation, as that preparation would be done in
the normal course of business. Additionally, NHTSA's burden estimate
does not include an estimate for the time to gather the information
required for the disclosure as it is assumed that this information
would be gathered in the normal course of vehicle modification.
Instead, NHTSA estimates that the only extra burden would be incurred
for calculation of the reduction in loading-carrying capacity and
annotating the information on the invoice. NHTSA estimates the time
needed to annotate

the invoice is 20 minutes. NHTSA estimates that there are approximately
4,250 vehicles modified under exemptions provided by 49 CFR 595.7 each
year. Therefore, NHTSA estimates the total burden associated with
providing disclosures to vehicle owners is 1,417 hours (20 minutes x
4,250 vehicles = 1,416.67 hours).
    To calculate the labor cost associated with the 1,417 burden hours
for the disclosure document requirement, NHTSA looked at the average
hourly wage for ``Mechanical Engineering Technicians'' (BLS Occupation
code 17-3027). With the BLS's average hourly wage of $28.00 (which
represents 70.4% of total compensation according to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics), NHTSA estimates the hourly labor costs to be $39.78 for
``Mechanical Engineering Technicians (BLS Occupation code 17-3027).
Therefore, NHTSA estimates the total labor cost associated with the
1,417 burden hours (for providing disclosure documents to vehicle
owners by ``engineering technicians'') to be $56,368 (1,417 x $39.78 =
$56,368.28).

Information Collection 3: Retaining a Copy of the Document Provided to
Vehicle Owners

    NHTSA estimates that there are no additional burden hours
associated with the requirement to retain a copy of the disclosures
provided to vehicle owners. Similarly, NHTSA estimates that there is no
burden beyond the ordinary course of business associated with the
requirement that rental companies retain records related to the
modification for a period of five years. Accordingly, there are also no
labor costs associated with this requirement.
    Table 1 provides a summary of the estimated burden hours and labor
costs associated with this collection of information request.

                                                                Table 1--Burden Estimates
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Estimated
                                                                    Annual        burden per        Average     Labor cost per     Total     Total labor
                                                                submissions or    submission     hourly labor     submission       burden       costs
                                                                   responses       (minutes)         cost                          hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modifier identification.......................................              90              10          $24.12           $4.02           15         $362
Disclosure document (to vehicle owners).......................           4,250              20           39.78           13.26        1,417       56,368
Retention of a copy of document provided to vehicle owner.....           4,250               0             N/A            0.00            0         0.00
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Annual total burden hours & labor costs...................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............        1,432       56,730
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Cost: NHTSA estimates that there are
no additional costs associated with this information collection
request. There will be no additional material cost associated with
complying with this requirement because no additional materials need to
be used except those used to prepare the invoice in the normal course
of business. We are assuming that it is normal and customary in the
course of vehicle modification business to prepare an invoice, to
provide a copy of the invoice to the vehicle owner, and to keep a copy
of the invoice for five years after the vehicle is delivered to the
owner in finished form.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspects of
this information collection, including (a) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance
the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected;
and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms
of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter
35, as amended; 49 CFR 1.95, 501.5 and 501.8; and DOT Order 1351.29.

Milton E. Cooper,
Director, Rulemaking Operations.
[FR Doc. 2022-19561 Filed 9-12-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 24, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30025-30027]
[FR Doc No: E9-14819]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2008-1099; Airspace Docket No. 08-AWP-10]

Proposed Modification of Class E Airspace; Lake Havasu, AZ

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to modify Class E airspace at Lake Havasu
City, AZ. Additional controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate
aircraft using a new Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning System
(GPS) Standard Instrument Approach Procedure (SIAP) at Lake Havasu City
Airport, Lake Havasu, AZ. The FAA is proposing this action to enhance
the safety and management of aircraft operations at Lake Havasu City
Airport, Lake Havasu, AZ.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 10, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, 20590.
Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2008-
1099; Airspace Docket No. 08-AWP-10, at the beginning of your comments.
You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA 2008-1099 and Airspace Docket No. 08-AWP-10) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to FAA
Docket No. FAA-2008-1099 and Airspace Docket No. 08-AWP-10''. The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified closing date
for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date
for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number)
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Northwest Mountain Regional Office of the Federal
Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service
Center, Operations Support Group, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA
98057.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by modifying Class E airspace at Lake
Havasu City Airport, Lake Havasu, AZ. Controlled airspace extending 700
feet above the surface is necessary to accommodate aircraft using the
new RNAV (GPS) SIAPs at Lake Havasu City Airport, Lake Havasu, AZ. This
action would enhance the safety and management of aircraft operations
at Lake Havasu City Airport, Lake Havasu, AZ.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.9S, signed October 3, 2008, and effective October 31,
2008, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in this Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44
FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since
this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures
and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule, when
promulgated, would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAAs authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes
the authority for the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it modifies additional controlled airspace at Lake Havasu City
Airport, Lake Havasu, AZ.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

    1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the FAA Order
7400.9S, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed October 3,
2008, and effective October 31, 2008 is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

AWP AZ E5 Lake Havasu, AZ [ Modified]

Lake Havasu City Airport, AZ
    (Lat. 34[deg]34'16'' N., long. 114[deg]21'30'' W.)

Chemehuevi Valley Airport, CA
    (Lat. 34[deg]31'44'' N., long. 114[deg]25'56'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.7-mile radius of Lake Havasu City Airport and within 1
mile each side of the Lake Havasu City Airport 150[deg] bearing
extending from the 6.7-mile radius to 13 miles southeast of the Lake
Havasu City Airport, excluding that airspace with a 2.2-mile radius
of Chemehuevi Valley Airport. That airspace extending upward from
1,200 feet above the surface bounded by a line beginning at lat.
34[deg]42'47'' N., long. 114[deg]29'37'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]42'47''
N., long. 114[deg]12'06'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]23'00'' N., long.
114[deg]12'06'' W.; to lat. 34[deg]17'19'' N., long. 114[deg]32'12''
W.; thence to the point of beginning.
* * * * *

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on June 12, 2009.
William Buck,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. E9-14819 Filed 6-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


a. No growth projected for industry b. F = E * 34.69 [$ 16.52 * 110% overhead rate]

c. 25% of 62 plants estimated to be subject to this subpart have excess emissions ( established in regulation development).

d. Travel Expenses: ( 1 person* 8 plants/ yr* 2 days/ plant*$ 75 per diem) + ($ 300 round trip/ plant* 8 plants/ yr) = $ 3,600 TABLE 1A: AVERAGE ANNUAL EPA RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS ( NATURAL GAS PROCESSING INDUSTRY  SO2 EMISSION STANDARDS, 40 CFR 60.640  NSPS SUBPART LLL)

Reporting/ Recordkeeping Requirement Hours/ Occurrence ( A) Occurences/ Plant/ Year ( B) Hours/ Plant/ Year ( C= A* B)

( C) Plants/ Year ( D) Hours/

Year ( E= C* D)

( E) EPA Cost ($)

( F) b New plants:

Initial Performance test a 120 1 120 0 0 0 Repeat performance test 136 0.2 27 0 0 0 Report Review:

Notification of Construction a 2 1 2 0 0 0 Notification of Anticipated Startup 2 1 2 0 0 0 Notification of Actual Startup 2 1 2 0 0 0 Notification of Initial Test 2 1 2 0 0 0 Notification of CMS Demonstration 2 1 2 0 0 0 Initial Performance Test Report 8 1.2 9.6 0 0 0 CMS Demonstration Report 16 1 16 1 2 69 Excess Emission Report c 8 2 16 16 256 8,881 TOTAL ANNUAL HOURS 258 8,950 TOTAL ANNUAL COST TO EPA FOR THIS SUBPART = $ 12,550 ($ 8,950 + $ 3,600) d