[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 18 (Tuesday, January 28, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4462-4463]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01493]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

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

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2639-003; ER11-2200-003; ER12-1716-002.
    Applicants: Noble Americas Gas & Power Corp., Noble Americas Energy
Solutions LLC, Your Energy Holdings, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of Noble Americas Gas &
Power Corp., et al.
    Filed Date: 1/15/14.
    Accession Number: 20140115-5195.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/5/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER13-897-002.
    Applicants: Louisville Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Order1000 2nd Regional Compliance Filing to be
effective 6/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140116-5000.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/13/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1003-000.
    Applicants: Berry Petroleum Company.
    Description: Notice of Succession to be effective 12/16/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/15/14.
    Accession Number: 20140115-5144.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/5/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1004-000.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: 2014-01-15--DeficiencyResponse to be effective 4/1/
2014.
    Filed Date: 1/15/14.
    Accession Number: 20140115-5171.

    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/5/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1005-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits Queue Position
S36; Original Service Agreement No. 3734 to be effective 12/19/2013.
    Filed Date: 1/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140116-5061.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/6/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1006-000.
    Applicants: El Paso Electric Company.
    Description: El Paso Electric Company submits Service Agreement No.
286 PNM Settlement PTP Rollover to be effective 1/1/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140116-5078.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/6/14.

    Docket Numbers: ER14-1007-000.
    Applicants: Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Company, Pennsylvania
Electric Company, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Trans-Allegheny Interstate Line Company submits
FirstEnergy submits on behalf of TrAILCO & Penelec Service Agmt No.
3690 to be effective 2/10/2014.
    Filed Date: 1/16/14.
    Accession Number: 20140116-5079.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/6/14.

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

    Dated: January 16, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-01493 Filed 1-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 216 (Friday, November 12, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62721-62723]
[FR Doc No: 2021-24559]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0496; Airspace Docket No. 20-AEA-1]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of VOR Federal Airways V-31, V-36, V-84, V-252, and V-
510 in the Vicinity of Buffalo, NY

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule

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

SUMMARY: This action amends VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal
airways V-31, V-36, V-84, V-252, and V-510. This action is necessary
due to the planned decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Buffalo,
NY, VOR/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME) navigational aid, which
provides navigational guidance for these airways. The Buffalo VOR is
being decommissioned as part of the FAA's VOR Minimum Operational
Network (MON) program.
    The VOR Federal airways V-2, V-14, V-33, and V-164 modifications
proposed in the notice of proposed rulemaking have been accomplished by
separate rules subsequently published.

As a result, the V-2, V-14, V-33 and V-164 modifications are removed
from this rule.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, January 27, 2022. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and
publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA JO Order 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. FAA JO Order 7400.00F is also available for
inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
For information on the availability of FAA JO Order 7400.11F at NARA,
email: [email protected] or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jesse Acevedo, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

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
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 the airway structure as necessary to preserve
the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National Airspace
System.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for Docket
No. FAA-2020-0496, in the Federal Register (85 FR 34144; June 3, 2020),
amending V-2, V-14, V-31, V-33, V-36, V-84, V-164, V-252, and V-510.
The proposed amendment actions were due to the planned decommissioning
of the VOR portion of the Buffalo VOR/DME navigational aid. Interested
parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by
submitting written comments on the proposal. No comments were received.
    Subsequent to the NPRM, the FAA published a rule for Docket No.
FAA-2020-0049 in the Federal Register (85 FR 41184; July 9, 2020),
amending V-33 by removing the airway segment overlying the Bradford,
PA, VOR/DME between the Keating, PA, VORTAC and the Buffalo, NY, VOR/
DME; and amending V-164 by removing the airway segment overlying the
Wellsville, NY, VORTAC between the Buffalo, NY, VOR/DME and the
Stonyfork, PA, VOR/DME. The airway amendments were effective September
10, 2020. As a result, the V-33 and V-164 amendments in this rule are
no longer necessary and removed.
    Additionally, subsequent to the NPRM, the FAA published a rule for
Docket No. FAA-2020-1146 in the Federal Register (86 FR 19129; April
13, 2021), amending V-2 by removing the airway segment overlying the
Rochester, NY, VOR/DME between the Buffalo, NY, VOR/DME and the
Gardner, MA, VOR/DME; and amending V-14 by removing the airway segment
overlying the Geneseo, NY, VOR/DME between the Buffalo, NY, VOR/DME and
the Norwich, CT, VOR/DME. The airways amendments were effective June
17, 2021. As a result, the V-2 and V-14 amendments in this rule are no
longer necessary and removed.
    VOR Federal airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) of FAA JO
Order 7400.11F dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2020,
which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The airways listed
in this document will be published subsequently in FAA JO Order
7400.11.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA JO Order 7400.11F, Airspace Designations
and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September
15, 2021. FAA JO Order 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA JO Order 7400.11F lists Class
A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by amending VOR Federal airways
V-31, V-36, V-84, V-252, and V-510. The planned decommissioning of the
VOR portion of the Buffalo, NY, VOR/DME has made this action necessary.
    The VOR Federal airway amendment actions are described below.
    V-31: V-31 extends between the Patuxent, MD, VORTAC and the
Nottingham, MD, VORTAC; and between the Baltimore, MD, VORTAC and the
intersection of the Rochester, NY, VOR/DME 279[deg] and Buffalo, NY,
VOR/DME 023[deg] radials (AIRCO fix). This action amends the AIRCO fix
in the airway description to describe it as the intersection of the
existing Rochester VOR/DME 279[deg] radial and the Jamestown, NY, VOR/
DME 024[deg] radial. Additionally, the Patuxent, MD, VORTAC airway
point references are corrected from ``Patuxent River'' to ``Patuxent.''
The unaffected portions of the existing airway remain as charted.
    V-36: V-36 extends between the Thunder Bay, ON, Canada, VOR/DME and
the intersection of the Wiarton, ON, Canada, VOR/DME 150[deg] and
Toronto, ON, Canada, VOR/DME 304[deg] radials; and between the Buffalo,
NY, VOR/DME and the intersection of the LaGuardia, NY, VOR/DME 310[deg]
and Stillwater, NJ, VOR/DME 043[deg] radials. The airspace within
Canada is excluded. This action removes the airway segment between the
Buffalo, NY, VOR/DME and the Elmira, NY, VOR/DME. The unaffected
portions of the existing airway remain as charted.
    V-84: V-84 extends between the Northbrook, IL, VOR/DME and the
Pullman, MI, VOR/DME; and between the Buffalo, NY, VOR/DME and the
Syracuse, NY, VORTAC. This action removes the airway segment between
the Buffalo, NY, VOR/DME and the Geneseo, NY, VOR/DME. The unaffected
portions of the existing airway remain as charted.
    V-252: V-252 extends between the intersection of the Buffalo, NY,
VOR/DME 023[deg] and Geneseo, NY, VOR/DME 305[deg] radials (AIRCO fix)
and the Dupont, DE, VORTAC. This action amends the AIRCO fix in the
airway description to describe it as the intersection of the Jamestown,
NY, VOR/DME 024[deg] radial and the existing Geneseo, NY, VOR/DME
305[deg] radial. The unaffected portions of the existing airway remain
as charted.
    V-510: V-510 extends between the Dickinson, ND, VORTAC and the
Dells, WI, VORTAC; and between the Buffalo, NY, VOR/DME and the
Rochester, NY, VOR/DME. This action removes the airway segment between
the Buffalo, NY, VOR/DME and the Rochester, NY, VOR/DME. The unaffected
portions of the existing airway remain as charted.

    All radials contained in the VOR Federal airway descriptions listed
below are stated in True degrees.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

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.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (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 rule, when
promulgated, will 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 of amending VOR Federal
airways V-31, V-36, V-84, V-252, and V-510, due to the planned
decommissioning of the VOR portion of the Buffalo VOR/DME navigational
aid, qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its implementing
regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with FAA Order
1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, paragraph 5-
6.5a, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact
review rulemaking actions that designate or modify classes of airspace
areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71,
Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic
Service Routes; and Reporting Points). As such, this action is not
expected to result in any potentially significant environmental
impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding
Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this action for
factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically excluded
action may have a significant environmental impact requiring further
analysis. Accordingly, the FAA has determined that no extraordinary
circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental
assessment or environmental impact study.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

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 JO Order
7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10,
2021, and effective September 15, 2021, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6010(a) Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-31 [Amended]

    From Patuxent, MD; INT Patuxent 338[deg] and Nottingham, MD,
128[deg] radials; to Nottingham. From Baltimore, MD; INT Baltimore
004[deg] and Harrisburg, PA, 147[deg] radials; Harrisburg;
Selinsgrove, PA; Williamsport, PA; Elmira, NY; INT Elmira 002[deg]
and Rochester, NY, 120[deg] radials; Rochester; to INT Rochester
279[deg] and Jamestown, NY, 024[deg] radials.
* * * * *

V-36 [Amended]

    From Thunder Bay, ON, Canada; Wawa, ON, Canada; Sault Ste Marie,
MI; Elliot Lake, ON, Canada; Wiarton, ON, Canada; to INT Wiarton
150[deg] and Toronto, ON, Canada, 304[deg] radials. From Elmira, NY;
INT Elmira 110[deg] and LaGuardia, NY, 310[deg] radials; to INT
LaGuardia 310[deg] and Stillwater, NJ, 043[deg] radials. The
airspace within Canada is excluded.
* * * * *

V-84 [Amended]

    From Northbrook, IL; to Pullman, MI. From Geneseo, NY; INT
Geneseo 091[deg] and Syracuse, NY, 240[deg] radials; to Syracuse.
* * * * *

V-252 [Amended]

    From INT Jamestown, NY, 024[deg] and Geneseo, NY, 305[deg]
radials; Geneseo; Binghamton, NY; Huguenot, NY; INT Huguenot
196[deg] and Robbinsville, NJ, 351[deg] radials; Robbinsville; to
Dupont, DE.
* * * * *

V-510 [Amended]

    From Dickinson, ND; INT Dickinson 078[deg] and Bismarck, ND,
290[deg] radials; 28 miles 38 MSL, Bismarck; INT Bismarck 067[deg]
and Jamestown, ND, 279[deg] radials; 14 miles, 65 miles 34 MSL,
Jamestown; Fargo, ND; INT Fargo 110[deg] and Alexandria, MN,
321[deg] radials; Alexandria; INT Alexandria 110[deg] and Gopher,
MN, 321[deg] radials; Gopher; INT Gopher 109[deg] and Nodine, MN,
328[deg] radials; Nodine; to Dells, WI.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 3, 2021.
Michael R. Beckles,
Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2021-24559 Filed 11-10-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Graphic Arts Coalition

Representing the Graphic Communications Industries

March 23, 2007

Ms. Kim Teal

Mail Code XXX

US Environmental Protection Agency

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Re: 	Comments on Scope and Applicability of the Paper, Film, Foil
Coating Control Techniques Guideline

Dear Ms. Teal:

This letter is in response to the discussions that occurred during the
initial meeting held on Feb. 12, 2007 focusing on the development of the
Paper, Film, Foil Coating Control Techniques Guideline (PFFC CTG).
During the meeting, feedback on the scope of the PFFC CTG was requested.

There are two significant matters that EPA needs to address with respect
to the scope of the PFFC CTG: exclusion of non-coating operations,
including certain printing operations, and a clear definition of
coating.  Both of these issues are critical to avoid duplicative and
unnecessary regulation.  If not addressed, these topics will cause
considerable confusion by both the regulated community and state/local
air pollution control authorities.  Each area is discussed below in more
detail.

Background on Printing and Packaging Operations

The printing, publishing, packaging and allied industries comprise one
of the largest and most diverse industries in the United States.  The
businesses involved in these industries are divided by both the printing
process utilized and the products produced.  These industries cut across
several North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
categories and represent a significant portion of the economy.

There are six main printing processes that comprise these industry
segments: offset lithographic, flexographic, rotogravure, screen,
letterpress and digital printing.  In terms of market share, lithography
is the largest followed by rotogravure, flexography, screen, digital and
letterpress.  While the ultimate goal of each printing process is to
reproduce and transfer images and text on any number of substrates, they
differ dramatically in how this is accomplished.

These industries produce a variety printed products, packages, and
services, including, but not limited to, books, periodicals, newspapers,
business forms, greeting cards, textiles, wallpaper, billboards, signs,
labels, and general commercial printing, which can include annual
reports, direct mail, advertising, newspaper inserts, directories, and
catalogs.

The packaging industry segment includes products such as folding
cartons, corrugated boxes and other products, flexible packaging,
labels, and cans.  Flexible packages can be made of metal, plastic or
resins, or a combination of both.

These industry segments represent one of the most viable and vital
industries in the United States.  These segments have posted impressive
growth rates with future predictions of continued economic growth.

Definition of Coating and Coating Application Operations

One of the most critical aspects of this CTG will be the definition of
coating and coating application units and how they relate to printing
and printing operations.  Historically, the differences between printing
and coating operations have been a subject of controversy and source of
confusion.  However, it is clear from the development of previous
coating- and printing-related CTGs and MACT standards, that the scope of
a coating rule should exclude printing operations. The development of
this CTG provides an opportunity to provide definitive clarification of
this issue.

Because of this long-standing confusion, printers are frequently
required to demonstrate that the limits established for paper coating
operations are not applicable to printing operations.  This is a
particularly confusing area for those operations where coatings are
applied over the printed substrate.  This coating application can either
occur in-line (during printing) or off-line (with a stand alone coater)
at printing facilities.

Including ink and adhesives in the definition of coating materials
without qualifying them relative to the process in which they are being
applied will lead to further confusion regarding applicability and
intent.  This concern is based on the common, mistaken classification of
printers as surface coating sources, resulting in the air pollution
control authority incorrectly applying the nonapplicable surface coating
requirements to graphic arts sources.  It is our recommendation that
inks, adhesives, and other overprint coatings applied at printing
operations either be eliminated from the definition or be qualified with
respect to application in the PFFC CTG so that this confusion is
removed.

During the development of the Printing and Publishing (40 CFR Part 63,
Subpart KK) and Paper and Other Web Coating (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart
JJJJ) MACT standards, the definition of printing, coating, and coating
application units was discussed and, even though progress was made, the
lack of a definitive distinction between printing and coating still
remains.  In looking at the options for the PFFC CTG, there appear to be
two approaches to address the issue. The first is to revise the
definition of coating so that it clearly identifies which coating
operations are addressed in the CTG.  The second is to define the scope
of covered operations from an application perspective.

The preferred approach would be to include definitions that clarify the
PFFC CTG’s applicability.  Traditionally, functional based definitions
have been used to describe applicability and exclusions for CTG and NSPS
rules and, more recently, MACT standards. However, the use of a
functional definition to eliminate inks, adhesives, and other materials
from the definition of coatings may not accomplish the goal of
eliminating confusion and potential misapplication of this CTG.

It appears that the only practical method to clarify the cope of the
PFFC CTG is to provide applicability and exclusion provisions based on
process type.  A process based approach would clearly delineate which
coating application processes are subject to this CTG and those that are
excluded. For those coating operations that will be subject to the CTG,
a process based approach can also include those input materials that
would be subject to rules based on the CTG’s recommendations.

In the revisions to the Printing and Publishing NESHAP, promulgated on
May 6, 2006 (71 FR 29792), EPA provided clarification with respect to
the differences between printing and coating operations.  However, the
definitions do not go far enough to clearly address the application of
coating that occurs either inline or offline at printing operations.

Coating means material applied onto or impregnated into a substrate for
decorative, protective, or functional purposes. Such materials include,
but are not limited to, solvent-borne coatings, waterborne coatings, wax
coatings, wax laminations, extrusion coatings, extrusion laminations,
100 percent solid adhesives, ultra-violet cured coatings, electron beam
cured coatings, hot melt coatings, and cold seal coatings. Materials
used to form unsupported substrates such as calendaring of vinyl, blown
film, cast film, extruded film, and coextruded film are not considered
coatings.

Printing operation means the formation of words, designs, or pictures on
a substrate other than wood furniture components as defined in the Wood
Furniture Manufacturing Operations NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart JJ),
wood building products as defined in the Surface Coating of Wood
Building Products NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart QQQQ), and fabric or
other textiles as defined in the Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabric
and Other Textiles NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart OOOO), except for
fabric or other textiles for use in flexible packaging.

In the development of the Paper and Other Web Coating NESHAP, EPA
provided a clearer statement regarding the applicability of the coating
rule with respect to printing operations. In the Final Rule (67 FR
72342), EPA specifically excluded printing operations in Section
63.3300:

…Web coating lines specified in paragraphs (a) through (g) of this
section are not part of the affected source of this subpart.

Any web coating line that is stand-alone coating equipment under subpart
KK of this part (national emission standards for the printing and
publishing industry) which the owner or operator includes in the
affected source under subpart KK.

Any web coating line that is a product and packaging rotogravure or
wide-web flexographic press under subpart KK of this part (national
emission standards for the printing and publishing industry) which is
included in the affected source under subpart KK.

Web coating in lithography, screenprinting, letterpress, and narrow-web
flexographic printing processes.

Any web coating line subject to subpart EE of this part (national
emission standards for magnetic tape manufacturing operations).

Any web coating line that will be subject to the national emission
standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for surface coating of
metal coil currently under development.

Any web coating line that will be subject to the NESHAP for the
printing, coating, and dyeing of fabric and other textiles currently
under development. This would include any web coating line that coats
both a paper or other web substrate and a fabric or other textile
substrate, except for a fabric substrate used for pressure sensitive
tape and abrasive materials.

Any web coating line that is defined as research or laboratory equipment
in §63.3310.

The combined printing and coating operation and its classification was
addressed in Section 1.2.4 of the Control Techniques Guidelines for
Graphic Arts-Rotogravure and Flexography (EPA-450/2-78-033). This
document contains a provision specifying that a combination of printing
and coating would all be considered printing and subject to the graphic
arts regulations.

This classification was also included in the recently issued CTG for
Flexible Packaging (EPA-450/2-78-033) in the definition a flexible
package and the definition of a flexographic and rotogravure press. The
definitions are as follows:

Definition of Flexible Packaging

Printing, coating, and laminating may all be performed on or in-line
with a flexible package printing press and these activities are included
in the source category. One portion of the flexible packaging industry
provides fully printed packaging materials (designated "preformed
specialty bags") to contract packagers. Another portion provides
combination or laminated materials (designated converted wrap) for
printing and/or final packing by captive packaging operations. Applying
coatings is a major capability of flexible packaging converters, so the
same facilities may be used to manufacture non-packaging materials such
as gift wraps and hot stamp foils.

Definition of Press

Rotogravure press means an unwind or feed section, which may include
more than one unwind or feed station (such as on a laminator), a series
of individual work stations, one or more of which is a rotogravure print
station, any dryers associated with the work stations, and a rewind,
stack, or collection section. Inboard and outboard work stations,
including those employing any other technology, such as flexography, are
included if they are capable of printing or coating on the same
substrate.

Flexographic press means an unwind or feed section, which may include
more than one unwind or feed station (such as on a laminator), a series
of individual work stations, one or more of which is a flexographic
print station, any dryers (including interstage dryers and overhead
tunnel dryers) associated with the work stations, and a rewind, stack,
or collection section. The work stations may be oriented vertically,
horizontally, or around the circumference of a single large impression
cylinder. Inboard and outboard work stations, including those employing
any other technology, such as rotogravure, are included if they are
capable of printing or coating on the same substrate.

In addition, when EPA finalized the Control Techniques Guideline for
Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing (EPA 453/R-06-002)
in September 2006, the issue of coating application was also addressed.
On page 7, it states:

Varnishes are unpigmented offset lithographic inks. They are applied on
offset lithographic presses in the same manner (i.e., using a
lithographic printing plate, fountain solution and blanket cylinder) as
offset lithographic ink. Heatset varnishes are unpigmented heatset inks.
The emissions generated by heatset varnishes are similar in nature to
the emissions generated by heatset inks and they can be controlled in
the same manner. Sheet-fed and coldset web varnishes are unpigmented
sheet-fed and coldset web inks. Sheet-fed and coldset web varnishes
exhibit the same high level of ink oil retention and generate the same
inherently low emissions as sheet-fed and coldset web inks. The coatings
used on offset lithographic presses are predominantly waterbased or
radiation (ultra-violet or electron beam) cured materials which generate
minimal VOC emissions. We recommend that varnishes and coatings used on
offset lithographic printing presses be considered part of the offset
lithographic printing process and that the recommendations described
below in section VI for heatset web offset lithographic inks and dryers
apply equally to varnishes. We recommend that varnishes and coatings
used on offset lithographic printing presses not be considered as a
separate process (e.g., paper coating).

It is clear from the intent of the development of previous CTGs and MACT
standards, that the scope of a coating rule should exclude printing
operations. Therefore, to ensure that printing operations are not
inadvertently included in the CTG, the following exclusionary provision
is offered for inclusion in the rule:

For purposes of this CTG, any offset lithographic, screen, letterpress,
flexographic, rotogravure, or digital printing and packaging line
including any in-line and auxiliary coating, laminating, and adhesive
application is not subject to the recommendations in this CTG. Inks,
adhesives, and other coating materials used in these operations are also
not subject to the recommended limits of this CTG.

Sources Addressed by Other CTGs

To avoid confusion and duplication of regulation, those sources and
processes that have been addressed by previously issued CTGs or will be
evaluated in future CTGs should be specifically excluded from this CTG.
This request is consistent with the recent development of the CTG for
Industrial Cleaning Solvents (EPA 453/R-06-001), in which EPA was
requested to provide an exclusion for any industrial sources with
current limits for cleaning activities in source-specific state
regulations.  The final version of the Industrial Cleaning Solvent CTG
does in fact provide clear language excluding these sources from the
recommendations found in the document. .  EPA provided the requested
exclusion by including a recommendation that states consider excluding
those source categories that would have limits for cleaning included in
their respective state regulations.  On page 5, of the Industrial
Solvent Cleaning CTG, the following statement appears:

Some industries with solvent cleaning operations are presently covered
by an existing CTG (e.g., aerospace). Other industries with solvent
cleaning operations may be the subject of a CTG that is presently being
developed (e.g., printing) or may be the subject of a future CTG (e.g.,
automobiles and light trucks coatings). CTGs often recommend control
approaches for a particular industry, like printing, and those
approaches achieve important VOC emission reductions. We recommend that
States consider excluding from the applicability of their State rules
promulgated in response to this CTG, those industries relevant to the
product categories listed for regulation under CAA section 183(e). See
71 FR 44540. We list below the section 183(e) industries that the States
may wish to consider excluding from the applicability of their State
rules.

On page 15 of the Industrial Solvent Cleaning CTG, the list of other
industries that have cleaning solvent limits as referenced in the
paragraph on page 5 is provided. The list is as follows:

We recommend that the States exclude from applicability those cleaning

operations in the following categories listed for regulation under CAA
section 183(e):

1.  Aerospace coatings;

2.  Wood furniture coatings;

3.  Shipbuilding and repair coatings;

4.  Flexible packaging printing materials;

5.  Lithographic printing materials;

6.  Letterpress printing materials;

7.  Flat wood paneling coatings;

8.  Large appliance coatings;

9.  Metal furniture coatings;

10.  Paper film and foil coating;

11.  Plastic parts coatings;

12.  Miscellaneous metals parts coatings;

13.  Fiberglass boat manufacturing materials;

14.  Miscellaneous industrial adhesives; and

15.  Auto and light-duty truck assembly coatings.

We request that USEPA include a  similar exemption provision in this CTG
for industries that have or will have limits imposed on their coatings
or coating application process in their respective source-specific CTGs,
or for those processes where EPA has determined that separate
limitations on coatings are not warranted.  An example is the
above-referenced Control Techniques Guideline for Offset Lithographic
Printing and Letterpress Printing, where EPA concluded that coatings
applied in the printing process are adequately addressed in this CTG and
determined that these coatings be considered part of the printing
operation and should not be considered a separate (i.e., coating)
process.  The PFFC CTG should be consistent with such previous EPA
determinations in its scope.

Summary and Conclusion

Experience has shown that it is equally as critical to articulate what
operations are not covered by a rule as it is to define which operations
are subject the rule. This is especially important when the CTG covers
only certain sub-segments of a larger industrial sector.  Since EPA will
be developing a CTG to address Paper, Film, and Foil Coating operations,
an opportunity now presents itself to clarify the applicability of the
guidance document (and any subsequently promulgated regulations) to
printing operations.

Questions regarding the applicability of printing and coating limits by
permitting authorities have historically triggered intense discussions
and in many instances produced results that have been less than
satisfactory.  Since the intent of the PFFC CTG is to address coating
operations, the scope must be crafted in such a way as to not
inadvertently include sources and operations that have already been
covered by other regulation or those that are not coating operations.
Therefore, an explicit, clearly defined scope for the PFFC CTG is
paramount in producing a document and a set of recommended control
requirements that is specific and appropriate to the sources being
addressed.

We look forward to meeting with you to discuss the comments contained in
this letter.  Feel free to contact any of the undersigned for more
information.

Sincerely,

Gary Jones

Director, Environmental, Health and Safety Affairs

Printing Industries of America /Graphic Arts Technical Foundation

412/259-1794

Marcia Y. Kinter

Vice President – Government Affairs and Business Development

Screenprinting and Graphic Imaging Association International

703-359-1313

Doreen Monteleone

Director of Environmental Affairs

Foundation of Flexographic Technical Association

631/737-6020

The following definitions are also offered:

Lithographic printing is defined as follows: A planographic printing
system where the image and nonimage areas are chemically differentiated;
the image area is oil receptive and nonimage area is water receptive.
Ink film from the lithographic plate is transferred to an intermediary
surface (blanket), which, in turn, transfers the ink film to the
substrate. Fountain solution is applied to maintain the hydrophilic
properties of the nonimage area. Ink drying is divided into heatset and
nonheatset.

Fountain solution is defined as follows:  A mixture of water and other
volatile and non-volatile chemicals and additives that maintains the
quality of the printing plate and reduces the surface tension of the
water so that it spreads easily across the printing plate surface. The
fountain solution wets the nonimage area so that the ink is maintained
within the image areas.  Non-volatile additives include mineral salts
and hydrophilic gums.  Alcohol and alcohol substitutes, including
isopropyl alcohol, glycol ethers, and ethylene glycol, are the most
common VOC additives used to reduce the surface tension of the fountain
solution.

Heatset is defined as follows:  A lithographic web printing process
where heat is used to evaporate ink oils from the printing ink. Heatset
dryers (typically hot air) are used to deliver the heat to the printed
web.

Non-heatset is defined as follows:  A lithographic printing process
where the printing inks are set without the use of heat. Traditional
non-heatset inks set and dry by absorption and/or oxidation of the ink
oils. For the purposes of this rule, ultraviolet-cured and electron
beam-cured inks are considered non-heatset, although radiant energy is
required to cure these inks.

Flexographic printing is defined as follows: A printing system utilizing
a flexible rubber or elastomeric image carrier in which the image area
is raised relative to the nonimage area. The image is transferred to the
substrate through first applying ink to a smooth roller which in turn
transfers the ink onto the raised pattern of the rubber or elastomeric
image carrier fastened around a second roller, which then transfers the
ink onto the substrate.

Rotogravure printing is defined as follows: A printing system utilizing
a chrome plated cylinder where the image area is recessed relative to
the nonimage area. Images are transferred onto a substrate through first
applying ink to a cylinder, which has been etched with small shallow
cells to form a pattern, then wiping the lands between the cells free of
ink with a doctor blade, and finally rolling the cylinder over the
substrate so that the surface of the substrate is pressed into the cells
thus transferring the ink to the substrate.

Screen printing is defined as follows: A printing system where the
printing ink passes through a web or fabric to which a refined form of
stencil has been applied. The stencil openings determine the form and
dimensions of the imprint.

Digital Printing is defined as follows:  A printing system engaged in
which the image area is created electronically and regenerated for every
single image. The image can either be directly transferred to the
substrate or indirectly transferred through an intermediary system
through digital output devices.

Letterpress printing is defined as follows: A printing system in which
the image area is raised relative to nonimage area and the ink is
transferred to the substrate directly from the image surface.

 PAGE

 PAGE   8

  PAGE  1


[Federal Register: July 15, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 135)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 41074-41075]
[DOCID:fr15jy10-2]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2009-1105; Airspace Docket No. 09-ANM-23]

Amendment of Class D and E Airspace; Everett, WA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action will amend Class D and E airspace at Snohomish
County Airport (Paine Field), Everett, WA, by updating the geographic
coordinates of the airport, and removes the operating hours established
by a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) for the Class E surface area airspace.
This action enhances the safety and management of Instrument Flight
Rules (IFR) operations at Snohomish County Airport (Paine Field).

DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, September 23, 2010. The Director of
the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action
under 1 CFR Part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9
and publication of conforming amendments.

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:

History

    On February 4, 2010, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to amend Class D and E airspace at
Everett, WA (75 FR 5702). Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.
    Subsequent to publication, the FAA found that the operating hours
for the Class D airspace had not changed and, therefore, will continue
the operating hours to be effective during the specific dates and times
established in advance by NOTAM.
    With the exception of editorial changes, and the changes described
above, this rule is the same as that proposed in the NPRM.
    Class D and Class E airspace designations are published in
paragraph 5000 and 6002, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9T signed
August 27, 2009, and effective September 15, 2009, 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 that Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Part 71 by amending Class D airspace, updating the geographic
coordinates for Snohomish County Airport (Paine Field), Everett, WA,
and continues the operating hours to be effective during specific dates
and times established in advance by NOTAM. The Class E surface area
airspace at Snohomish County Airport (Paine Field) will be continuous
24 hours, and no longer effective during specific dates and times
established in

advance by NOTAM. The geographic coordinates of the airport also will
be updated. This action is necessary for the safety and management of
IFR operations at the airport.
    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.
Therefore, this 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 rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to
issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S.
Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 discusses 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
controlled airspace at Snohomish County Airport (Paine Field), Everett,
WA.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
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 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]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9T, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, signed August 27, 2009, and effective September 15,
2009 is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

ANM WA D Everett, WA [Amended]

Everett, Snohomish County Airport (Paine Field), WA
    (Lat. 47[deg]54'25'' N., long. 122[deg]16'54'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
3,100 feet MSL within a 4.5-mile radius of the Snohomish County
Airport (Paine Field). This Class D airspace area is effective
during specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice
to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter by
continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.

Paragraph 6002 Class E airspace Designated as Surface Areas.

* * * * *

ANM WA E2 Everett, WA [Amended]

Everett, Snohomish County Airport (Paine Field), WA
    (Lat. 47[deg]54'25'' N., long. 122[deg]16'54'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
3,100 feet MSL within a 4.5-mile radius of the Snohomish County
Airport (Paine Field).

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on June 30, 2010.
John Warner,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2010-17130 Filed 7-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: June 30, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 126)]
[Notices]
[Page 36905-36906]
[DOCID:fr30jn08-121]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2008-0019]

On-site Consultation Programs; Extension of the Office of
Management and Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information Collection
(Paperwork) Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits comments concerning its proposal to extend OMB
approval of the information collection requirements contained in the
Standard on Consultation Agreements (hereinafter, the On-site
Consultation Program regulations) (29 CFR part 1908). The Consultation
Program regulations specify services to be provided, and practices and
procedures to be followed by the State On-site Consultation Programs.
Information collection requirements set forth in the On-site
Consultation Program regulations are in two categories: State
Responsibilities and Employer Responsibilities. Eight regulatory
provisions require information collection activities by the State. The
Federal government provides 90 percent of funds for on-site
consultation services delivered by the States, which result in the
collection of information. Four requirements apply to employers and
specify conditions for receiving the free on-site consultation
services.

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
August 29, 2008.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit three copies of your comments
and attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket No. OSHA-2008-0019,
U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20210. Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier
service) are accepted during the Department of Labor's and Docket
Office's normal business hours, 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., e.t.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and OSHA
docket number for the ICR (OSHA-2008-0019). All comments, including any
personal information you provide, are placed in the public docket
without change, and may be made available online at http://
www.regulations.gov. For further information on submitting comments see
the ``Public Participation'' heading in the section of this notice
titled ``SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION .''
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the address above. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download through the Web site. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Larry
Liberatore at the address below to obtain a copy of the ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Liberatore, Acting Director,
Office of Small Business Assistance, Directorate of Cooperative and
State Programs, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3660, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-
2220.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance process to provide the public with an opportunity to
comment on proposed and continuing information collection requirements
in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that information is in the desired
format, reporting burden (time and costs) is minimal, collection
instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's estimate of the
information collection burden is accurate. The Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.) authorizes
information collection by employers as necessary or appropriate for
enforcement of the Act or for developing information regarding the
causes and prevention of occupational injuries, illnesses, and
accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also requires that OSHA obtain
such information with minimum burden upon employers, especially those
operating small businesses, and to reduce to the maximum extent
feasible unnecessary duplication of efforts in obtaining information
(29 U.S.C. 657).
    Section 7(c)(1) of the OSH Act authorizes the Secretary of Labor
to, ``with the consent of any State or political subdivision thereof,
accept and use the services, facilities, and personnel of any agency of
such State or subdivision with reimbursement.'' Section 21(C) of the
Act authorizes the Secretary of Labor (Secretary) to, ``consult with
and advise employers and employees * * * as to effective means of
preventing occupational illnesses and injuries.''
    Additionally, Section 21(d) of the OSH Act instructs the Secretary
to ``establish and support cooperative agreements with the States under
which employers subject to the Act may consult with State personnel
with respect to the application of occupational safety and health
requirements under the Act or under State plans approved under section
18 of the Act.'' This gives the Secretary authority to enter into
agreements with the States to provide on-site consultation services,
and establish rules under which employers may qualify for an inspection
exemption. To satisfy the intent of these and other sections of the OSH
Act, OSHA codified the terms that govern cooperative agreements between
OSHA and State governments whereby State agencies provide on-site
consultation services to private employers to assist them in complying
with the requirements of the OSH Act. The terms were codified as the
Consultation Program regulations (29 CFR Part 1908).
    The Consultation Program regulations specify services to be
provided, and practices and procedures to be followed by the State On-
site Consultation Programs. Information collection requirements set
forth in the On-site Consultation Program regulations are in two
categories: State Responsibilities and Employer Responsibilities. Eight
regulatory provisions require information collection activities by the
State. The Federal government provides 90 percent of funds for on-site
consultation services delivered by the States, which result in the
information collection. Four requirements apply to employers and
specify conditions for receiving the free consultation services.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions,
including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting that OMB extend its approval of the information
collection requirements contained in the Standard on On-site
Consultation Agreements (29 CFR part 1908). The Agency is requesting to
increase its current burden hour estimate associated with this Program
from 21,771 hours to 231,207 hours, a total increase of 209,436 hours.
The increase is a result of the following:
     Previously, a large percentage (over 90%) of all On-site
Consultation Programs visits were deemed to be limited in scope. Over
half of all such visits are now comprehensive in nature due to the
States continued emphasis on providing comprehensive advice on safety
and health management systems.
     We had previously estimated that only visits that were
comprehensive in nature would provide a written report. Now all visits,
whether comprehensive or limited in scope provide a written report to
the employer, in accordance with our Consultation Policies and
Procedures Manual.
     We had previously estimated that it took only 0.5 hours to
complete a written report. As we have received input from our
stakeholders in updating the Consultation Program policies and
procedures, our small employers requested specific guidelines and
information in order to implement the recommended safety and health
improvements noted during our On-site Consultation visits. A recent
survey of our Consultation Projects indicated that approximately 7.5
hours are spent on these technical assistance reports (a range of 6-9
hours).
    The Agency will summarize the comments submitted in response to
this notice and will include this summary in the request to OMB.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Consultation Agreements (29 CFR part 1908).
    OMB Number: 1218-0110.
    Affected Public: State Government, Local or Tribal Government,
Federal Government, Not-for-profit institutions, Business or other for-
profits.
    Number of Respondents: 27,854.
    Frequency: Ranges from each visit to every other year.
    Average Time per Response: Ranges from 5 minutes (.08 hour) to 7.5
hours.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 231,207.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on This Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (FAX); or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the Agency name
and the OSHA docket number for the ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2008-0019). You
may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference
to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit them to the
OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES).
The additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments
by your name, date, and the docket number so the Agency can attach them
to your comments.
    Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about
security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,
express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the
OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as social security numbers and
date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://
www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download through this
Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are
available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
Information on using the http://www.regulations.gov Web site to submit
comments and access the docket is available at the Web site's ``User
Tips'' link. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about
materials not available through the Web site, and for assistance in
using the Internet to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational
Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this notice. The
authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 5-2007 (72 FR
31159).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on June 23, 2008.
Edwin G. Foulke, Jr.
Assistant Secretary of Labor, for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. E8-14671 Filed 6-27-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 136 (Thursday, July 16, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42030-42032]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17455]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket Number USCG-2015-0045]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulations; Southeast Drag Boat Championships,
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway; Bucksport, SC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a special local regulation on
the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway in Bucksport, South Carolina during
the Southeast Drag Boat Championships, a series of high-speed boat
races. The event will take place from 10 a.m. until 6 p.m. daily from
July 24, 2015 through July 26, 2015. Approximately 50 high-speed race
boats are expected to participate in the races. This special local
regulation is necessary to provide for the safety of life and property
on navigable waters of the United States during the event. Furthermore,
this special local regulation will temporarily restrict vessel traffic
in a portion of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway. Persons and vessels
that are not participating in the races will be prohibited from
entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the
regulated area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston
or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from July 24, 2015 until July 26, 2015.
This rule will be enforced daily from 10 a.m. until 6 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
USCG-2015-0045. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Chief Warrant Officer Christopher Ruleman, Sector
Charleston Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone (843) 740-
3184, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on
viewing the docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking

A. Regulatory History and Information

    On May 14, 2015, the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) entitled Special Local Regulations; Southeast Drag
Boat Championships, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Bucksport, SC in
the Federal Register (78 FR 16205). We received no comments on the
proposed rule. No public meeting was requested and none was held.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the rule is the Coast Guard's authority to
establish special local regulations: 33 U.S.C. 1233. The purpose of the
rule is to ensure safety of life and property on navigable waters of
the United States during the Southeast Drag Boat Championships.

C. Discussion of Rule

    From July 24, 2015 until July 26, 2015, the Bucksport Marina will
host the Southeast Drag Boat Championships, a series of high-speed boat
races. The event will be held on a portion of the Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway in Bucksport, South Carolina. Approximately 50 high-speed race
boats are anticipated to participate in the races.
    This special local regulation encompasses certain waters of the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway in Bucksport, South Carolina. This
special local regulation will be enforced daily from 10 a.m. until 6
p.m. on July 24, 2015 until July 26, 2015. This special local
regulation consists of a regulated area around vessels participating in
the event. Persons and vessels that are not participating in the event
are prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or
remaining within the regulated area unless specifically authorized by
the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.
Persons and vessels may request authorization to enter, transit
through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area by contacting
the Captain of the Port Charleston by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a
designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16 to seek
authorization. If authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in,
or remain within the regulated area is granted by the Captain of the
Port Charleston or a designated representative, all persons and vessels
receiving such permission must comply with the instructions of the
Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative. The
Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated areas by Local Notice
to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene designated
representatives.

D. Regulatory Analyses

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

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    The economic impact of this rule is not expected to be significant
for the following reasons: (1) Although persons and vessels will not be
able to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the race
area without authorization from the Captain of the Port Charleston or a
designated representative, they may operate in the surrounding area
during the effective period; (2) persons and vessels may still enter,
transit through, anchor in, or remain within the race area if
authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated

representative; and (3) advance notification will be made to the local
maritime community via broadcast notice to mariners.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    This rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to enter,
transit through, anchor in, or remain within that portion of the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway encompassed within the regulated area
from 10 a.m. until 6 p.m. daily from July 24, 2015 through July 26,
2015. However, this special local regulation would be activated, and
thus subject to enforcement, for only three days over a weekend.
Additionally, traffic will be allowed to pass through the regulated
area with the authorization of the Captain of the Port of Charleston or
a designated representative, and all vessels will be permitted to
operate in the surrounding area during the effective period.
    For the reasons discussed in the Regulatory Planning and Review
section above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.

3. 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 rule. 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 the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

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

7. 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 rule will not result in
such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in
this preamble.

 8. Taking of Private Property

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

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This 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.

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

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

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
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.

12. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves a special local regulation issued in
conjunction with a regatta or marine parade. This rule is categorically
excluded from further review under paragraph 34(h) of Figure 2-1 of the
Commandant Instruction. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

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

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

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

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

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1233

0
2. Add a temporary Sec.  100.35T07-0045 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.35T07-0045  Special Local Regulations; Southeast Drag Boat
Championships, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Bucksport, SC.

    (a) Regulated area. The following regulated area is established as
a special local regulation: All waters of the Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway encompassed within the following points; starting at point 1
in position 33[deg]39'11.46'' N, 079[deg]05'36.78'' W; thence west to
point 2 in position 33[deg]39'12.18'' N, 079[deg]05'47.76'' W; thence
south to point 3 in position 33[deg]38'39.48'' N, 079[deg]05'37.44'' W;
thence east to point 4 in position 33[deg]38'42.3'' N,
079[deg]05'30.6'' W; thence north back to origin. All coordinates are
North American Datum 1983.
    (b) Definition. The term ``designated representative'' means Coast
Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty
officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and
Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Charleston in the enforcement of the regulated
area.
    (c) Regulations. (1) All persons and vessels, except those persons
and vessels participating in the event, are prohibited from entering,
transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the regulated
area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Charleston or a
designated representative.
    (2) Nonparticipant persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit
through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated area may contact the
Captain of the Port Charleston by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a
designated representative via VHF radio on channel 16 to seek
authorization. If authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in,
or remain within the regulated area is granted by the Captain of the
Port Charleston or a designated representative, all persons and vessels
receiving such permission must comply with the instructions of the
Captain of the Port Charleston or a designated representative.
    (3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area by
Broadcast Notice to Mariners, Local Notice to Mariners, and on-scene
designated representatives.
    (d) Enforcement date. This rule will be enforced from 10 a.m. until
6 p.m. daily from July 24, 2015 through July 26, 2015.

    Dated: June 30, 2015.
B.D. Falk,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port Charleston.
[FR Doc. 2015-17455 Filed 7-15-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 48 (Friday, March 11, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13438-13439]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5644]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

AccessTel, Inc., American Asset Management Corp., DME Interactive
Holdings, Inc., DocuPort, Inc., and iCarbon Corp., Order of Suspension
of Trading

March 8, 2011.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
AccessTel, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since the
period ended March 31, 2005.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
American Asset Management Corp. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended March 31, 2005.

    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
DME Interactive Holdings, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended March 31, 2001.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
DocuPort, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since the
period ended September 30, 2000.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
iCarbon Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports since the
period ended December 31, 2006.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed companies. Therefore, it is ordered,
pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that
trading in the securities of the above-listed companies is suspended
for the period from 9:30 a.m. EST on March 8, 2011, through 11:59 p.m.
EDT on March 21, 2011.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-5644 Filed 3-8-11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 63 (Tuesday, April 2, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19725-19726]
[FR Doc No: 2013-07574]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0089]

Merchant Mariner Medical Evaluation Program

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is seeking public comment regarding the
merchant mariner medical evaluation program. Section 718 of the Coast
Guard Authorization Act of 2012 directed the Commandant of the Coast
Guard to submit to Congress an assessment of the Coast Guard National
Maritime Center's merchant mariner medical evaluation program and
alternatives to the program. Congress specifically asked the Coast
Guard to include an analysis of how a system similar to the Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Administration's National Registry of Certified
Medical Examiners program, and the Federal Aviation Administration's
Designated Aviation Medical Examiners program, could be applied by the
Coast Guard in making medical fitness determinations for issuance of
merchant mariners' documents. The Coast Guard will accept comments from
the public on the perceived benefits and concerns with adopting a
similar program for the medical evaluation of merchant mariners.

DATES: Comments and related material must either be submitted to our
online docket via http://www.regulations.gov on or before May 2, 2013
or reach the Docket Management Facility by that date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2013-0089 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section below for instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notice, call or email Lieutenant Ashley Holm, Office of Commercial
Vessel Compliance(CG-CVC-4), U.S. Coast Guard, telephone (202) 372-
1128, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing
material in the docket, call Ms. Barbara Hairston, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation

    You may submit comments and related material regarding this notice.
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 notice (USCG-2013-0089) and provide a reason for
each suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and
material online or by fax, mail or hand delivery, but please use only
one of these means. We recommend that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email 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 and
insert

``USCG-2013-0089'' in the ``Search'' box. Click ``Search,'' find this
notice in the list of Results, and then click on the corresponding
``Comment Now'' box. If you submit your comments by mail or hand
delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11
inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    We will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period.
    Viewing the comments: To view comments, as well as documents
mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov and use ``USCG-2013-0089'' as your search term.
Use the filters on the left side of the page to highlight ``Public
Submissions'' or other document types. If you do not have access to the
Internet, you may view the docket online by visiting 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 system of records notice regarding our public dockets in
the January 17, 2008 issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

Background and Purpose

    Section 718 of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2012 (Pub. L.
112-213) directed the Commandant of the Coast Guard to, not later than
180 days after enactment, submit to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate an assessment of
the Coast Guard National Maritime Center's merchant mariner medical
evaluation program and alternatives to the program. Section 718 also
directed that the assessment contain the following:
    (1) An overview of the adequacy of the program for making medical
certification determinations for issuance of merchant mariners'
documents;
    (2) An analysis of how a system similar to the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration's National Registry of Certified Medical
Examiners program, and the Federal Aviation Administration's Designated
Aviation Medical Examiners program, could be applied by the Coast Guard
in making medical fitness determinations for issuance of merchant
mariners' documents; and
    (3) An explanation of how the amendments to the International
Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for
Seafarers, 1978, that entered into force on January 1, 2012, required
changes to the Coast Guard's merchant mariner medical evaluation
program.
    Currently, the Coast Guard maintains an ``open'' system of medical
evaluation. While the ultimate determination of medical fitness rests
with the Coast Guard, mariners may have any authorized medical
professional fill out the appropriate evaluation forms which are then
submitted to the Coast Guard. The evaluation reports are reviewed by
the National Maritime Center and a fitness determination is then made.
Conversely, a ``closed'' system would require mariners to have their
physical evaluations done by designated medical examiners who are
authorized by the Coast Guard to conduct physical examinations of
mariners. Subject to detailed policy guidance, medical certificates may
be issued by the designated medical examiner.
    Finally, a hybrid system could be adopted whereby the designated
medical examiner would issue medical certificates when mariners meet
certain pre-established criteria, and the Coast Guard would only be
involved in reviewing those mariners who have certain conditions.
    The Coast Guard would like public input on the relative merits of a
closed, open, or hybrid system of medical evaluation, noting advantages
and disadvantages of the different systems. We would also be interested
in knowing any other suggestions or comments that address the subject
of the assessment required by section 718 of the Coast Guard
Authorization Act of 2012.

Authority

    This notice is issued under the authority of 46 U.S.C chapter 71,
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0710.1, and 46 CFR
10.215.

    Dated: March 27, 2013.
D.S. Fish,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Office of Investigations and
Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2013-07574 Filed 4-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: April 17, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 73)]
[Notices]
[Page 17846-17847]
[DOCID:fr17ap09-52]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings  1

April 9, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC09-66-000.
    Applicants: Lehman White Creek Wind Holdings LLC, White Creek Wind
I Holdings, LLC, White Creek I, LLC, New York Life Insurance Company.
    Description: Joint Application for Authorization for Disposition of
Jurisdictional Facilities and Acquisition of Securities and Request for
Confidential Treatment, Certain Waivers, and Expedited Notice and
Action by May 15, 2009.
    Filed Date: 04/08/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090408-5135.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 29, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER00-2173-009; ER00-3219-007.
    Applicants: Northern Indiana Public Service Company; Energy USA-TPC
Corp.
    Description: Supplemental Information/Request of Northern Indiana
Public Service Company.
    Filed Date: 03/24/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090324-5097.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, April 14, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-963-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
submits Original Service Agreement 7224 to FERC Electric Tariff, Third
Revised Volume 1; request to terminate the Market Participant Agreement
and Service Agreement.
    Filed Date: 04/07/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090408-0246.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, April 28, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-964-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
submits request to terminate the market participant agreement between
the Midwest ISO and the AI Funds, LLC and notice regarding continuing
and anticipated default.
    Filed Date: 04/07/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090408-0248.

    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, April 28, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-965-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
submits request to terminate the market participant agreement between
the Midwest ISO and Palms Asset Management LLC and notice regarding
continuing and anticipated default.
    Filed Date: 04/07/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090408-0139.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, April 28, 2009.

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

    Docket Numbers: ES07-34-001; ES08-29-002.
    Applicants: System Energy Resources, Inc.; Entergy Services, Inc.
    Description: Supplemental Information of System Energy Resources,
Inc.
    Filed Date: 04/08/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090408-5121.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 20, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following open access
transmission tariff filings:

    Docket Numbers: OA07-53-005.
    Applicants: Progress Energy, Inc.
    Description: Annual Penalty Revenues Refund Report of Carolina
Power & Light Company and Florida Power Corporation.
    Filed Date: 04/09/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090409-5031.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 30, 2009.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. 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. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-8770 Filed 4-16-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P