[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 216 (Tuesday, November 8, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69267-69268]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28865]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER12-225-000]

Stream Energy New Jersey, 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
Stream Energy New Jersey, 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 21, 2011.
    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: October 31, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-28865 Filed 11-7-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 58 (Friday, March 25, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16715-16718]
[FR Doc No: 2011-7049]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2010-1117]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Raritan River, Arthur Kill and
Their Tributaries, Staten Island, NY and Elizabeth, NJ

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to change the drawbridge operation
regulations governing the operation of the Arthur Kill (AK) Railroad
Bridge at mile 11.6, across Arthur Kill between Staten Island, New York
and Elizabeth, New Jersey. This proposed rule would provide relief to
the bridge owner from crewing their bridge by allowing the bridge to be
operated from a remote location while continuing to meet the present
and future needs of navigation.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before May 24, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-

2010-1117 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal Rulemaking 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 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 Mr. Gary Kassof, Bridge Program Manager, First
Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, 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-2010-1117), 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 (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 http://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received by the
Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax,
hand deliver, 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,
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop down menu select
``Proposed Rules'' and insert ``USCG-2010-1117'' in the ``Keyword''
box. Click ``Search'' 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 them
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,
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2010-1117'' and click
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' 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 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.

Basis and Purpose

    The Arthur Kill (AK) Railroad Bridge at mile 11.6, across Arthur
Kill, has a vertical clearance of 31 feet at mean high water, and 35
feet at mean low water in the closed position. The existing drawbridge
operating regulations are listed at 33 CFR 117.72.
    Beginning in 2009, Consolidated Rail Corporation (Conrail)
conducted a year of successful remote operation tests of the AK
Railroad Bridge without any objections from marine users. A draw
operator was on scene at all times to ensure compliance with drawbridge
operating regulations cited above. In September 2010, Conrail formally
requested that the drawbridge operating regulation be revised to permit
remote operation of the Arthur Kill AK Railroad Bridge.
    Conrail, on October 20, 2010 and at the request of the Coast Guard,
presented its proposal to remotely operate the bridge to the New York
Harbor Operation Committee. Discussions between Conrail, the Coast
Guard, and the New York Harbor Operations Committee ensued with no
objections to the remote operation raised by the committee members.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Arthur Kill Railroad Bridge would operate the same way as
stated in the existing regulation, except that it will be operated
remotely from the Lehigh Valley drawbridge at mile 4.3 across Newark
Bay or at the bridge locally.
    The revised regulation would require a sufficient number of closed
circuit TV cameras, approved by the Coast Guard, to be maintained at
the bridge to enable the remotely located bridge tender to have a full
view of the waterway and all vessel traffic.
    In addition, VHF-FM radiotelephone channels 13 and 16 would be
monitored to facilitate vessel to bridge communication from both the
remote and the local control location.
    Directional microphones and signal horns would also be installed at
the bridge to receive and deliver signals to vessels.
    In the event that the remote operation equipment fails to operate
in any way, a bridge tender will be dispatched to the bridge to arrive
no more than 45 minutes following the equipment failure.

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. This conclusion is based
upon the fact that the bridge will continue to operate according to the
existing regulations except that it could be controlled from either a
remote location or locally.

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 action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the
following reasons. The bridge will continue to operate according to
existing regulations except that it will be controlled from either a
remote location or locally.
    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 Mr. Joe Arca, First Coast Guard
District, Bridge Program Manager, at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or 212-668-
7165. 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 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will 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 cause 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 023-01, and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD which guides 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 because it simply promulgates the operating regulations or
procedures for drawbridges. 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 117

    Bridges

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

    1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

    2. Revise Sec.  117.702 to read as follows:

Sec.  117.702  Arthur Kill

    (a) The draw of the Arthur Kill (AK) Railroad Bridge shall be
maintained in the full open position for navigation at all times,
except during periods when it is closed for the passage of rail
traffic.
    (b) The bridge owner/operator shall maintain a dedicated telephone
hot line for vessel operators to call the bridge in advance to
coordinate anticipated bridge closures. The telephone hot line number
shall be posted on signs at the bridge clearly visible from both the up
and downstream sides of the bridge.
    (c) Tide constrained deep draft vessels shall notify the bridge
operator, daily, of their expected times of vessel transits through the
bridge, by calling the designated telephone hot line.
    (d) The bridge shall not be closed for the passage of rail traffic
during any predicted high tide period if a tide constrained deep draft
vessel has provided the bridge operator with an advance notice of their
intent to transit through the bridge. For the purposes of this
regulation, the predicted high tide period shall be considered to be
from two hours before each predicted high tide to a half-hour after
each predicted high tide taken at the Battery, New York.
    (e) The bridge operator shall issue a manual broadcast notice to
mariners of the intent to close the bridge for a period of up to thirty
minutes for the passage of rail traffic, on VHF-FM channels 13 and 16
(minimum range of 15 miles) 90 minutes before and again at 75 minutes
before each bridge closure.
    (f) Beginning at 60 minutes prior to each bridge closure, automated
or manual broadcast notice to mariners must be repeated at 15 minute
intervals and again at 10 and 5 minutes prior to each bridge closure
and once again as the bridge begins to close, at which point the
appropriate sound signal will be given.
    (g) Two 15 minute bridge closures may be provided each day for the
passage of multiple rail traffic movements across the bridge. Each 15
minute bridge closure shall be separated by at least a 30 minute period
when the bridge is returned to and remains in the full open position.
Notification of the two 15 minute closures shall follow the same
procedures outlined in paragraphs (e) and (f) above.
    (h) A vessel operator may request up to a 30 minute delay for any
bridge closure in order to allow vessel traffic to meet tide or current
requirements; however, the request to delay the bridge closure must be
made within 30 minutes following the initial broadcast for the bridge
closure. Requests received after the initial 30 minute broadcast will
not be granted.
    (i) In the event of a bridge operational failure, the bridge
operator shall immediately notify the Coast Guard Captain of the Port
New York. The bridge owner/operator must provide and dispatch a bridge
repair crew to be on scene at the bridge no later than 45 minutes after
the bridge fails to operate. A repair crew must remain on scene during
the operational failure until the bridge has been fully restored to
normal operations or until the bridge is raised and locked in the fully
open position.
    (j) When the bridge is not tended locally it must be operated from
a remote location. A sufficient number of closed circuit TV cameras,
approved by the Coast Guard, shall be operated and maintained at the
bridge site to enable the remotely located bridge tender to have full
view of both river traffic and the bridge.
    (k) VHF-FM channels 13 and 16 shall be maintained and monitored to
facilitate communication in both the remote and local control
locations. The bridge shall also be equipped with directional
microphones and horns to receive and deliver signals to vessels.
    (l) Whenever the remote control system equipment is disabled or
fails to operate for any reason, the bridge operator shall immediately
notify the Captain of the Port New York. The bridge shall be physically
tended and operated by local control as soon as possible, but no more
than 45 minutes after malfunction or disability of the remote system.
Mechanical bypass and override capability of the remote operation
system shall be provided and maintained at all times.

    Dated: March 10, 2011.
Daniel A. Neptun,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2011-7049 Filed 3-24-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 79 (Wednesday, April 26, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19187-19188]
[FR Doc No: 2017-08366]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0216; Airspace Docket No. 17-ANM-7]

Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace for the Following Idaho
Towns; Lewiston, ID; Pocatello, ID; and Twin Falls, ID

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule, technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the legal description of the Class E
airspace designated as an extension at Lewiston-Nez Perce County
Airport, Lewiston, ID; Pocatello Regional Airport, Pocatello, ID; and
Joslin Field-Magic Valley Regional Airport, Twin Falls, ID, eliminating
the Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) part-time status. Additionally, this
action updates the geographic coordinates of these airports, the
Pocatello VHF Omnidirectional Radar Range Tactical Air Navigation Aid
(VORTAC) the Twin Falls VORTAC, and American Falls Airport listed in
the associated Class D and Class E airspace descriptions for Pocatello
Regional Airport, and Joslin Field-Magic Valley Regional Airport to
match the FAA's aeronautical database. This action does not affect the
charted boundaries or operating requirements of the airspace.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, June 22, 2017. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of
this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Clark, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends Class E airspace at Lewiston-Nez Perce County Airport,
Lewiston, ID, Pocatello Regional Airport, Pocatello, ID, and Joslin
Field-Magic Valley Regional Airport, Twin Falls, ID.

History

    The FAA Aeronautical Information Services branch found the Class E
airspace designated as an extension to a Class D or Class E surface
area does not require NOTAM part-time status at Lewiston-Nez Perce
County Airport, Lewiston, ID; Pocatello Regional Airport, Pocatello,
ID; and Joslin Field-Magic Valley Regional Airport, Twin Falls, ID, as
published in FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points. Also, after a review, the FAA found the geographic coordinates
for Pocatello Regional Airport, Pocatello VORTAC, American Falls
Airport, and Twin Falls VORTAC, listed in the associated Class D and
Class E airspace for these airports as well as navigation aids do not
match the FAA's current aeronautical database. This action makes these
updates.
    Class D and Class E airspace designations are published in
paragraph 5000, 6002, 6004, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order
7400.11A dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15, 2016, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class D and Class
E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11A, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016, and effective September 15,
2016. FAA Order 7400.11A is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11A lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by eliminating the following NOTAM information from the
regulatory text of Class E airspace designated as an extension to Class
D, at Lewiston-Nez Perce County Airport, Lewiston, ID; Pocatello
Regional Airport, Pocatello, ID; and Joslin Field-Magic Valley Regional
Airport, Twin Falls, ID: ``This Class E airspace is effective during
the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to
Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously
published in the Airport/Facility Directory.'' Also, this action
updates the geographic coordinates for Pocatello Regional Airport,
Pocatello VORTAC, American Falls Airport, and Twin Falls VORTAC listed
in the associated Class D and Class E airspace for these airports and
navigation aids to match the FAA's aeronautical database. This is an
administrative change and does not affect the boundaries, altitudes, or
operating requirements of the airspace, therefore, notice and public
procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) is unnecessary.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11A,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2016,
effective September 15, 2016, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

ANM ID D Pocatello, ID [Modified]

Pocatello Regional Airport, ID
    (Lat. 42[deg]54'35'' N., long. 112[deg]35'45'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
6,900 feet MSL within a 4.5-mile radius of the Pocatello Regional
Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific
dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in
the Chart Supplement.

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Designated as Surface Areas.

* * * * *

ANM ID E2 Pocatello, ID [Modified]

Pocatello Regional Airport, ID
    (Lat. 42[deg]54'35'' N., long. 112[deg]35'45'' W.)

    Within a 4.5-mile radius of the Pocatello Regional Airport. This
Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and
times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective
date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Chart
Supplement.

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension to
a Class D or Class E Surface Area.

* * * * *

ANM ID E4 Lewiston, ID [Modified]

Lewiston-Nez Perce County Airport, ID
    (Lat. 46[deg]22'28'' N., long. 117[deg]00'55'' W.)
Nez Perce VOR/DME
    (Lat. 46[deg]22'54'' N., long. 116[deg]52'10'' W.)
Lewiston-Nez Perce ILS Localizer
    (Lat. 46[deg]22'27'' N., long. 117[deg]01'54'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 2.7 miles
each side of the Lewiston-Nez Perce ILS localizer course extending
from the 4.1-mile radius of the airport to 14 miles east of the
airport, and within 3.5 miles each side of the Nez Perce VOR/DME
266[deg] radial extending from the 4.1-mile radius of the airport to
13.1 miles west of the airport.

ANM ID E4 Pocatello, ID [Modified]

Pocatello Regional Airport, ID
    (Lat. 42[deg]54'35'' N., long. 112[deg]35'45'' W.)
Pocatello VORTAC
    (Lat. 42[deg]52'13'' N., long. 112[deg]39'08'' W.)
American Falls Airport
    (Lat. 42[deg]47'50'' N., long. 112[deg]49'31'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 2.7 miles
each side of the Pocatello VORTAC 252[deg] radial extending from the
4.5-mile radius of Pocatello Regional Airport to 7.4 miles west of
the VORTAC, and within 4.3 miles each side of the Pocatello VORTAC
225[deg] radial extending from the 4.5-mile radius of the airport to
9.2 miles southwest of the VORTAC; excluding that airspace within a
0.9-mile radius of American Falls Airport.

ANM ID E4 Twin Falls, ID [Modified]

Joslin Field-Magic Valley Regional Airport, ID
    (Lat. 42[deg]28'55'' N., long. 114[deg]29'16'' W.)
Twin Falls VORTAC
    (Lat. 42[deg]28'47'' N., long. 114[deg]29'22'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface 4.2 miles south
and 4.4 miles north of the Twin Falls VORTAC 086[deg] and 281[deg]
radials extending from the 4.3-mile radius of Joslin Field-Magic
Valley Regional Airport to 9.2 miles east and 9.2 miles west of the
VORTAC.

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ANM ID E5 Pocatello, ID [Modified]

Pocatello Regional Airport, ID
    (Lat. 42[deg]54'35'' N., long. 112[deg]35'45'' W.)
Pocatello VORTAC
    (Lat. 42[deg]52'13'' N., long. 112[deg]39'08'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within 4 miles southeast and 9.6 miles northwest of the Pocatello
VORTAC 048[deg] radial extending from the VORTAC to 24.4 miles
northeast of the VORTAC, and within 8.3 miles north and 4 miles
south of the 252[deg] radial extending from 16.1 miles west to 1.4
miles east of the VORTAC.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on April 19, 2017.
Sam S.L. Shrimpton,
Acting Group Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2017-08366 Filed 4-25-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: March 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 54)]
[Notices]
[Page 14190]
[DOCID:fr21mr06-50]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. PH06-21-000]

Consolidated Energy Holdings LLC; Notice of Petition for
Exemption From the Requirements of the Public Utility Holding Company
Act of 2005

March 13, 2006.
    Take notice that on March 2, 2006, Consolidated Energy Holdings LLC
filed a Petition for Exemption of the Requirements of The Public
Utility Holding Company Act of 2005, pursuant to 18 CFR 366.3(a),
366.4(b)(1) of the Commission's regulations.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

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

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

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 23, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-4030 Filed 3-20-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 135 (Monday, July 15, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33697-33699]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14988]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2017-0571; FRL-9996-57-Region 10]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Idaho;
Regional Haze Progress Report

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a
revision to

the Idaho Regional Haze State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by
the State on June 28, 2016. Idaho submitted its Regional Haze Progress
Report (``progress report'' or ``report'') and a negative declaration
stating that further revision of the existing regional haze SIP is not
needed at this time. Idaho submitted both the progress report and the
negative declaration in the form of implementation plan revisions as
required by Federal regulations. The progress report addresses the
Federal Regional Haze Rule requirements under the Clean Air Act to
submit a report describing progress in achieving reasonable progress
goals established for regional haze and a determination of the adequacy
of the State's existing plan addressing regional haze.

DATES: This action is effective on August 14, 2019.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2017-0571. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Chi<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 155, Seattle,
Washington 98101.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.

I. Background Information

    On April 5, 2019, the EPA proposed to approve Idaho's Regional Haze
Progress Report (84 FR 13582). An explanation of the Clean Air Act
requirements, a detailed analysis of the submittal, and the EPA's
reasons for proposing approval were provided in the notice of proposed
rulemaking, and will not be restated here. The public comment period
for the proposal ended May 6, 2019. We received no comments on our
proposed rulemaking. We note that, in the preamble of our proposed
rulemaking, we made two typographical errors. In our summary of Idaho's
submittal, we labeled ``Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness'' as ``Hells
Canyon Wilderness'' by mistake in two places (84 FR 13582, at page
13582, column 3; and page 13583, column 1). These errors in our
description of Idaho's submittal are minor and do not impact the
approvability of Idaho's Regional Haze Progress Report. We also
provided Idaho's full submittal in the docket for the action.
Therefore, we are finalizing our action as proposed.

II. Final Action

    The EPA is approving the Idaho Regional Haze Progress Report,
submitted on June 28, 2016, as meeting the applicable requirements of
the Clean Air Act and the Federal Regional Haze Rule, as set forth in
40 CFR 51.308(g). The EPA has determined that the existing regional
haze SIP is adequate to meet the State's visibility goals and requires
no substantive revision at this time, as set forth in 40 CFR 51.308(h).
We have also determined that Idaho fulfilled the requirements in 40 CFR
51.308(i) regarding State coordination with Federal Land Managers.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Clean Air Act
and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' 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);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is 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.);
     Does 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);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is 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 Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide the 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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated
that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the
rule does not have tribal implications and it will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    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. The 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 Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 13, 2019. 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. 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Visibility, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: June 27, 2019.
Chris Hladick,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 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 N--Idaho

0
2. In Sec.  52.670, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an
entry at the end of the table for ``Regional Haze 5-Year Progress
Report'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.670   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                    EPA-Approved Idaho Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Applicable geographic       State
     Name of SIP provision       or nonattainment area  submittal date   EPA approval date        Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Regional Haze 5-Year Progress    State-wide...........       6/28/2016  7/15/2019, [Insert
 Report.                                                                 Federal Register
                                                                         citation].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2019-14988 Filed 7-12-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 91 (Monday, May 11, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27739-27740]
[FR Doc No: 2020-10011]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-10009-35-Region 1]

Notice of Availability of Draft NPDES Aquaculture General Permit
(AQUAGP) for Concentrated Aquatic Animal Production (CAAP) Facilities
and Other Related Facilities in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and
Vermont

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Availability of Draft NPDES General Permit MAG130000,
NHG130000, and VTG130000.

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

SUMMARY: The Director of the Water Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency--Region 1 (EPA), is providing a Notice of
Availability for the Draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Aquaculture General Permit (AQUAGP) for discharges from
Concentrated Aquatic Animal Production (CAAP) facilities and other
related facilities to certain waters of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, State of New Hampshire, and State of Vermont (federal
facilities only). This Draft NPDES AQUAGP (``Draft General Permit'')
establishes effluent limitations and requirements, effluent and ambient
monitoring requirements, reporting requirements, and standard
conditions for 14 eligible industrial facilities currently covered by
individual NPDES permits, 7 in Massachusetts, 5 in New Hampshire, and 2
in Vermont. The Draft General Permit is available on EPA Region 1's
website at https://www.epa.gov/npdes-permits/region-1-draft-aquaculture-general-permit. The Fact Sheet for the Draft General Permit
sets forth principal facts and the significant factual, legal,
methodological, and policy questions considered in the development of
the Draft General Permit and is also available at this website.

DATES: Public comments must be received by June 10, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the Draft General Permit may be mailed
to U.S. EPA Region 1, Water Division, Attn: Nathan Chien, 5 Post Office
Square, Suite 100, Mail Code 06-1, Boston, Massachusetts 02109-3912, or

sent via email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>No facsimiles (faxes) will be
accepted.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Additional information concerning the
Draft General Permit may be obtained between the hours of 9 a.m. and 5
p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding holidays from Nathan Chien, U.S.
EPA Region 1, Water Division, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Mail
Code 06-1, Boston, MA 02109-3912; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The Draft General Permit is based on an
administrative record available for review at U.S. EPA Region 1, Water
Division, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, Massachusetts 02109-
3912. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying requests.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Public Comment Information: Interested persons may submit written
comments on the Draft General Permit to EPA Region 1 at the address
listed above. In reaching a final decision on this Draft General
Permit, the Regional Administrator will respond to all significant
comments and make responses available to the public at EPA's Boston
office. All comments must be postmarked or delivered by the close of
the public comment period.
    General Information: The Draft General Permit includes effluent
limitations and requirements for CAAP facilities and related
dischargers based on technology and/or water quality considerations of
the unique discharges from these facilities. The effluent limits
established in the Draft General Permit ensure that the surface water
quality standards of the receiving water(s) will be attained and/or
maintained.
    Obtaining Authorization: To obtain coverage under the Draft General
Permit, facilities meeting the eligibility requirements outlined in
Part 4 of this General Permit may submit a notice of intent (NOI) in
accordance with 40 CFR 122.28(b)(2)(i) & (ii). The contents of the NOI
shall include at a minimum, the legal name and address of the owner or
operator, the facility name and address, type of facility or
discharges, the receiving stream(s) and be signed by the operator in
accordance with the signatory requirements of 40 CFR 122.22.
Alternately, based on 40 CFR 122.28(b)(2)(vi), the Director may notify
a discharger that it is covered by a general permit, even if the
discharger has not submitted an NOI to be covered. EPA has determined
that the 14 facilities identified in Part 1 of the Fact Sheet all meet
the eligibility requirements for coverage under the Draft General
Permit and may be authorized to discharge under the General Permit by
this type of notification.
    Other Legal Requirements: In accordance with the Endangered Species
Act (ESA), EPA has updated the provisions and necessary actions and
documentation related to potential impacts to endangered species from
sites seeking coverage under the Draft General Permit. Concurrently
with the public notice of the Draft General Permit, EPA has submitted a
letter to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National
Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) summarizing the results of
EPA's assessment of the potential effects to endangered and threatened
species and their critical habitats as a result of EPA's issuance of
the Draft General Permit. In this document, EPA has preliminarily
concluded that the proposed issuance of the Draft General Permit is not
likely to adversely affect the shortnose sturgeon, Atlantic sturgeon,
or designated critical habitat for Atlantic sturgeon, as well as
coastal protected whales and sea turtles and the North Atlantic right
whale critical habitat. EPA has requested that NOAA Fisheries review
this submittal and inform EPA whether it concurs with this preliminary
finding.
    In the Fact Sheet accompanying the Draft AQUAGP, EPA has
preliminarily concluded that the Draft AQUAGP will have ``no effect''
on endangered species under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS). The reason for this determination is because
each NOI submission must assess site specific endangered species
impacts using USFWS' Information, Planning, and Conservation (IPaC)
website, available at https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. By using this
website, the applicant can either make a determination of impacts or if
there are questions, seek input from the USFWS directly. Since each NOI
is individually screened prior to submission, EPA has tentatively
determined that the Draft AQUAGP will have ``no effect.'' EPA requests
that USFWS review this submittal and inform EPA whether it concurs with
this preliminary finding.
    Under the 1996 Amendments (Pub. L. 104-267) to the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
(1998)), EPA is required to consult with NOAA Fisheries if EPA's
actions or proposed actions that it funds, permits or undertakes ``may
adversely impact any essential fish habitat'' (EFH). 16 U.S.C. 1855(b).
In the Fact Sheet accompanying the Draft AQUAGP, EPA notes that the
general permit action minimizes adverse effects to aquatic organisms,
including those with designated EFH in the receiving waters, including
Atlantic salmon and the life stages of a number of coastal EFH
designated species. EPA has made the determination that additional
mitigation is not warranted under Section 305(b)(2) of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act and has provided this determination to NOAA Fisheries for
their review.
    National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA): Facilities which
adversely affect properties listed or eligible for listing in the
National Registry of Historic Places under the NHPA are not authorized
to discharge under the Draft General Permit. Based on the nature and
location of the discharges, EPA has determined that the 14 facilities
eligible for authorization under the Draft General Permit do not have
the potential to affect a property that is either listed or eligible
for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.

    Authority: This action is being taken under the Clean Water Act,
33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.

    Dated: May 4, 2020.
Dennis Deziel,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2020-10011 Filed 5-8-20; 8:45 a.m.]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P