[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 83 (Thursday, April 30, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24191-24193]
[FR Doc No: 2015-10102]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. FAA-2015-0757; Special Conditions No. 25-581-SC]

Special Conditions: Bombardier Inc. Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-
2A13 Airplanes; Design Roll-Maneuver Condition

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the Bombardier Inc.
Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes. These airplanes will have
a novel or unusual design feature associated with an electronic flight-
control system that provides roll control of the airplanes through
pilot inputs to the flight computers. The applicable airworthiness
regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for
this design feature. These special conditions contain the additional
safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to
establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the
existing airworthiness standards.

DATES: This action is effective on Bombardier Inc. on April 30, 2015.
We must receive your comments by June 15, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2015-0757
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov/ gov/.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at

http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket, or go to Docket Operations in Room W12-140 of
the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Freisthler, FAA, Airframe and
Cabin Safety Branch, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-
3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has determined that notice of, and
opportunity for prior public comment on, these special conditions is
impracticable because these procedures would significantly delay
issuance of the design approval and thus delivery of the affected
airplane(s).
    In addition, the substance of these special conditions has been
subject to the public comment process in several prior instances with
no substantive comments received. The FAA therefore finds that good
cause exists for making these special conditions effective upon
publication in the Federal Register.

Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by
sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.
    We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for
comments. We may change these special conditions based on the comments
we receive.

Background

    On June 13, 2012, Bombardier Inc. applied for an amended type
certificate for their new Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes.
The BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 augment the existing BD-700 family of
airplanes, and are marketed as the Bombardier Global 7000 and Global
8000, respectively. These are ultra-long-range, executive-interior
business jets equipped with Rockwell Collins ProLine Fusion Integrated
Avionics System. These airplanes have a maximum certified passenger
capacity of 19.
    The design of the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes
includes new high-speed transonic wings with improved aerodynamic
efficiency, a pressurized cabin for luxury interiors, and they share an
identical supplier base and significant common design elements. The
current design roll-maneuver requirement in Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 25 is inadequate for addressing an airplane
with electronic flight controls that affect maneuvering. These special
conditions adjust the current roll-maneuver requirement, Sec.  25.349,
to take into account the effects of an electronic flight-control
system.

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.101, Bombardier Inc. must show
that the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes meet the
applicable provisions of part 25 as amended by Amendments 25-1 through
25-136.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13
airplanes because of a novel or unusual design feature, special
conditions are prescribed under the provisions of Sec.  21.16.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the Model for which
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended
later to include any other model that incorporates the same novel or
unusual design feature, or should any other model already included on
the same type certificate be modified to incorporate the same novel or
unusual design feature, these special conditions would also apply to
the other model under Sec.  21.101.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes must comply
with the fuel-vent and exhaust-emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34,
and the noise-certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36.
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec.  11.38, and they become part of the type-
certification basis under Sec.  21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes will incorporate
the following novel or unusual design features:
    The airplanes are equipped with an electronic flight-control system
that provides control through pilot inputs to the flight computer.
Current part 25 airworthiness regulations account for control laws for
which aileron deflection is proportional to control-stick deflection.
They do not address nonlinearities or other effects on aileron
actuation that electronic flight controls may cause. Because this type
of system may affect flight loads, and therefore the structural
capability of the airplanes, special conditions are needed to address
these effects.

Discussion

    These special conditions differ from current requirements in that
they require that the roll maneuver is based on defined actuation of
the cockpit roll control as opposed to defined deflections of the
aileron itself. Also, the special conditions require an additional load
condition at VA, in which the cockpit roll control is
returned to neutral following the initial roll input.
    These special conditions differ from similar special conditions
applied on previous programs. These special conditions are limited to
the roll axis only, whereas previous special conditions also included
the pitch and yaw axes. Special conditions are no longer needed for the
pitch or yaw axes, because Amendment 25-91 takes into account the
effects of an electronic flight-control system in those axes (Sec.
25.331 for pitch and Sec.  25.351 for yaw).
    These special conditions contain the additional safety standards
that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of
safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness
standards.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes. Should Bombardier Inc.
apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate to include
another model incorporating the same novel or unusual design feature,
these special conditions would apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on Bombardier Inc. Model BD-700-2A12 and BD-700-2A13 airplanes. It is
not a rule of general applicability.
    The substance of these special conditions has been subjected to the
notice and comment period in several prior instances and has been
derived without substantive change from those previously issued. It is
unlikely that prior public comment would result in a significant change
from the substance contained herein. Therefore, because a delay would
significantly affect the certification of the airplane, the FAA has
determined that prior public notice and comment are unnecessary and

impracticable, and good cause exists for adopting these special
conditions upon publication in the Federal Register. The FAA is
requesting comments to allow interested persons to submit views that
may not have been submitted in response to the prior opportunities for
comment described above.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Special Conditions

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type-certification basis for the Bombardier Inc. Model BD-700-2A12
and BD-700-2A13 airplanes.

Design Roll Maneuver Condition

    In lieu of compliance to Sec.  25.349(a):
    The following conditions, speeds, and cockpit roll-control motions
(except as the motions may be limited by pilot effort) must be
considered in combination with an airplane load factor of zero and of
two-thirds of the positive maneuvering factor used in design. In
determining the resulting control-surface deflections, the torsional
flexibility of the wing must be considered in accordance with Sec.
25.301(b):
    1. Bombardier Inc. must investigate conditions corresponding to
steady rolling velocities. In addition, conditions corresponding to
maximum angular acceleration must be investigated for airplanes with
engines or other weight concentrations outboard of the fuselage. For
the angular acceleration conditions, zero rolling velocity may be
assumed in the absence of a rational time-history investigation of the
maneuver.
    2. At VA, sudden movement of the cockpit roll control up
to the limit is assumed. The position of the cockpit roll control must
be maintained until a steady roll rate is achieved and then must be
returned suddenly to the neutral position.
    3. At VC, the cockpit roll control must be moved
suddenly and maintained so as to achieve a roll rate not less than that
obtained in Special Condition 2, above.
    4. At VD, the cockpit roll control must be moved
suddenly and maintained so as to achieve a roll rate not less than one
third of that obtained in Special Condition 2, above.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 17, 2015.
Victor Wicklund,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-10102 Filed 4-29-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 225 (Thursday, November 21, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64403-64405]
[FR Doc No: 2019-25223]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2018-0082; Notice 2]

Yokohama Tire Corporation, Grant of Petition for Decision of
Inconsequential Noncompliance

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

ACTION: Grant of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Yokohama Tire Corporation (YTC) has determined that certain
Yokohama RY023 brand replacement commercial tires do not fully comply
with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 119, New
Pneumatic Tires for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536
kilograms (10,000 lbs) and Motorcycles. YTC filed a noncompliance
report dated July 12, 2018. YTC subsequently petitioned NHTSA on July
31, 2018, and submitted a supplemental petition on February 6, 2019,
for a decision that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety. This document announces the grant of
YTC's petition.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Abraham Diaz, Office of Vehicle Safety
Compliance, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    I. Overview: YTC has determined that certain Yokohama brand RY023
replacement commercial tires do not fully comply with paragraph S6.5(d)
and (j) of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 119, New
Pneumatic Tires for Motor Vehicles with a GVWR of more than 4,536
kilograms (10,000 lbs) and Motorcycles (49 CFR 571.119). YTC filed a
noncompliance report dated July 12, 2018, pursuant to 49 CFR part 573,
Defects and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports. YTC subsequently
petitioned NHTSA on July 31, 2018, and submitted a supplemental
petition on February 6, 2019, for an exemption from the notification
and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301 on the basis that this
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety,
pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556,
Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or Noncompliance.
    Notice of receipt of YTC's petition was published with a 30-day
public comment period, on June 21, 2019, in the Federal Register (84 FR
29280). No comments were received. To view the petition and all
supporting documents log onto the Federal Docket Management System
(FDMS) website at https://www.regulations.gov/. Then follow the online
search instructions to locate docket number ``NHTSA-2018-0082.''
    II. Tires Involved: Approximately 4,704 Yokohama RY023 size 11R22.5
16(LR H) 146/143L commercial tires, manufactured between February 2,
2018, and May 17, 2018, are potentially involved.
    III. Noncompliance: YTC explains that the noncompliance was due to
a mold error in which one sidewall, the serial sidewall, of subject
tires incorrectly state the ply rating, load range and load capacity as
required by paragraph S6.5 (d) and (j) of FMVSS No. 119.
    Specifically, the tires were marked:

14 PR LOAD RANGE G
MAX. LOAD SINGLE 2800 kg (6175 lbs) at 720 kPa (105psi) COLD

MAX. LOAD DUAL 2650 kg (5840 lbs) at 720 kPa (105 psi) COLD

    When they should have been marked:

16 PR LOAD RANGE H
MAX. LOAD SINGLE 3000 kg (6610 lbs) at 830 kPa (120 psi) COLD
MAX. LOAD DUAL 2725 kg (6005 lbs) at 830 kPa (120 psi) COLD

    IV. Rule Requirements: Paragraph S6.5(d) and (j) of FMVSS No. 119,
includes the requirements relevant to this petition:
     Except as specified in paragraph S6.5, each tire shall be
marked on each sidewall with the information specified in paragraphs
(a) through (j) of paragraph S6.5.
     The maximum load rating and corresponding inflation
pressure of the tire, shown as follows:
    (Mark on tires rated for single and dual load): Max load single
__kg (__lb) at __kPa (__psi) cold. Max load dual __kg (__lb) at __kPa
(__psi) cold.
    (Mark on tires rated for only for single load): Max load single
__kg (__lb) at __kPa (__psi) cold.
     Markings must contain the letter designating the tire load
range.
    V. Summary of Petition: YTC described the subject noncompliance and
stated its belief that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it
relates to motor vehicle safety.
    In support of its petition, YTC submitted the following arguments:
    1. This Petition concerns Yokohama 11R22.5 16PR RY023 commercial
truck and bus replacement tires whose branding information incorrectly
states the ply rating, load range and load capacity on one side (serial
side) only, while the branding information on the other side (opposite
serial side) is correct for the subject tires. Because of this mold
branding error, these tires are not in compliance with the tire
labeling requirement found in 49 CFR 571.119 S6.5(d) and (j), even
though all of these tires were manufactured with the correct ply rating
and load range.
    2. YTC implemented verification countermeasures to prevent any
recurrence of any incorrect tire markings. Further investigation
determined that the suspect period ended when the incorrect mold had
been removed from production on May 17, 2018, in the 19th production
week of 2018. The 764 tires in containment will be repaired before they
are sold.
    3. Significantly, these tires were manufactured as designed and
meet or exceed all applicable Federal motor vehicle safety performance
standards. While the sidewall markings are correct on the opposite
serial side, the sidewall markings on the serial side understate the
construction and capacity of the subject tires. The misbranding of
these tires is not a safety concern and also has no impact on the
retreading, repairing and recycling industries. The affected tire mold
has already been corrected and all future production will have the
correct material shown on the sidewall.
    4. NHTSA has studied the impact of tire labeling information on
safety in the context of its rulemaking efforts under the
Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability and Documentation
(TREAD) Act. YTC stated that NHTSA's analysis concluded that tire
construction information on a tire's sidewall is not relied upon by
dealers and consumers in the selling or purchasing of tires and has an
inconsequential impact on motor vehicle safety. In addition, YTC cited
the following petitions that the agency has previously granted for
similar noncompliances: See Sumitomo Rubber Industries, Grant of
Petition for Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance, 83 FR 13002
(March 26, 2018) and Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Grant of Petition for
Decision for Inconsequential Noncompliance, 82 FR 18210 (April 17,
2017).
    The Agency has studied the implications of tire labeling
information on motor vehicle safety during the rulemaking process for
the TREAD Act and the merits for a decision regarding the subject
inconsequential noncompliance petition aligns with previous
inconsequential petitions with similar noncompliances the agency has
granted and as cited by YTC.
    YTC concluded by expressing the belief that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety,
and that its petition to be exempted from providing notification of the
noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the
noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
    YTC's complete petition and all supporting documents are available
by logging onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website at:
https://www.regulations.gov and by following the online search
instructions to locate the docket number as listed in the title of this
notice.
    VI. NHTSA's Analysis: The purpose of the label stating the tire's
load carrying capabilities as described in section S6.5(d), and the
load range marking letter required by paragraph S6.5(j), is to inform
tire purchasers and end-users about the load capacity of the tire. In
the case of the subject tires, YTC explained that the information the
load range letter is meant to convey understates the construction and
capacity of the subject tire RY023 model and size 11R22.5.
Specifically, the tires were marked with the load range ``G'' when in
fact the correct load range is ``H.'' Because the tires were designed
for the higher load capacity, ``H'' at 3000 kg for single load and 2725
kg for dual load, if a consumer followed the load range ``G'' as
marked, indicating the tire was capable of withstanding a 2800 kg for
single load and 2650 kg for dual load, they would be using the tire in
a load-carrying capacity lower than the actual load-carrying capacity
of the subject tires. On February 25, 2013, a similar petition for
inconsequential noncompliance on was granted to Guizhou tyres with
respect of a mismarking of a tire load range, in which was incorrectly
marked as ``F'' when they should be tire load range ``G'' (see 78 FR
12828).
    Because these subject tires have a greater load carrying capability
than the marking load range ``G'' indicates, there is no risk of these
tires being overloaded and thus, no risk to safety based on the
incorrect label.
    VII. NHTSA's Decision: In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA
finds that YTC has met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS
No. 119 noncompliance in the affected tires is inconsequential to motor
vehicle safety. Accordingly, YTC's petition is hereby granted and YTC
is consequently exempted from the obligation of providing notification
of, and a free remedy for, that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and
30120.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on
this petition only applies to the subject tires that YTC no longer
controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed.
However, any decision on this petition does not relieve tire
distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for
sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate
commerce of the noncompliant tires under their control after YTC
notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.

Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2019-25223 Filed 11-20-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 32 (Friday, February 15, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 11265]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03554]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Aircraft
Registration Renewal

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information
collection. Aircraft owners are required to complete the Aircraft
Registration Renewal to verify the registration information and renew
registration triennially. The information collected on an Aircraft Re-
Registration Application, AC Form 8050-1A and an Aircraft Registration
Renewal Application, AC Form 8050-1B, will be used by the FAA to verify
and update aircraft registration information collected for an aircraft
when it was first registered.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by April 16, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathy DePaepe at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0729.
    Title: Aircraft Re-Registration and Registration Renewal.
    Form Numbers: AC Forms 8050-1A and 8050-1B.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The information collected on an Aircraft Re-
Registration Application (AC Form 8050-1A) and Aircraft Registration
Renewal Application (AC Form 8050-1B) will be used by the FAA to verify
and update the aircraft registration information collected for an
aircraft when it was first registered.
    The updated registration database will then be used by the FAA to
monitor and control U.S. airspace and to distribute safety notices and
airworthiness directives to aircraft owners. Law enforcement and
national security agencies will use the database to support drug
interdiction and activities related to national security.
    Respondents: Approximately 121,660 aircraft owners.
    Frequency: Information is collected triennially.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 30 minutes.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 60,830 hours.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the FAA at the following address: Ms. Kathy
DePaepe, Room 126B, Federal Aviation Administration, AES-200, 6500 S.
MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 11, 2013.
Albert R. Spence,
FAA Assistant Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises
Business Services Division, AES-200.
[FR Doc. 2013-03554 Filed 2-14-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 14, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50996-50998]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19763]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2021-0497]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Potomac River, Prince William County, VA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
certain waters of the Potomac River. The safety zone is needed to
protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment on these
navigable waters near Cherry Hill, in Prince William County, VA, on
September 18, 2021, (with alternate date of September 19, 2021) from
potential hazards during a fireworks display to commemorate the the
permanent closing of the Tim's Rivershore Restaurant and Crabhouse of
Dumfries, VA, after operating for many years. Entry of vessels or
persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by
the Captain of the Port, Maryland-National Capital Region or a
designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8:30 p.m. on September 18, 2021,
through 11 p.m. on September 19, 2021.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2021-0497 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Next, in the
Document Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Ron Houck, Sector Maryland-National Capital Region
Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 410-576-
2674, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

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

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On June 16, 2021, Tim's Rivershore Restaurant and Crabhouse
notified the Coast Guard that from 9:30 p.m. to 10 p.m. on September
18, 2021, it will be conducting a fireworks display launched from a
barge in the Potomac River near Cherry Hill, in Prince William County,
VA. In the event of inclement weather, the fireworks display will be
scheduled for September 19, 2021. In response, on August 16, 2021, the
Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled
``Safety Zone; Potomac River, Prince William County, VA'' (86 FR
45699). There we stated why we issued the NPRM, and invited comments on
our proposed regulatory action related to this fireworks display.
During the comment period that ended August 31, 2021, we received no
comments.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest
because immediate action is needed to respond to the potential safety
hazards associated with the fireworks display. Potential safety hazards
include the accidental discharge of fireworks, dangerous projectiles,
and falling hot embers or other debris.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port, Maryland-
National Capital Region (COTP) has determined that potential hazards
associated with the fireworks to be used in this September 18, 2021,
display will be a safety concern for anyone near the fireworks barge.
This rule is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine
environment in the navigable waters within the safety zone before,
during, and after the scheduled event.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone from 8:30 p.m. on
September 18, 2021, to 11 p.m. on September 19, 2021. The safety zone
will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. to 11 p.m. on September 18, 2021, or,
if necessary due to inclement weather on September 18, 2021, from 8:30
p.m. to 11 p.m. on September 19, 2021. The safety zone covers all
navigable waters of the Potomac River within 500 feet of the fireworks
barge in approximate position latitude 38[deg]34'07.97'' N, longitude
077[deg]15'37.39'' W, located near Cherry Hill, in Prince William
County, VA. The size of the zone and duration of the regulation are
intended to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in
these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled 9:30 to
10 p.m. fireworks display. No vessel or person will be permitted to
enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a
designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone, which will impact small
designated areas of the Potomac River for 2.5 hours during the evening
when vessel traffic is normally low. Moreover, the Coast Guard will
issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about
the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and

operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental
jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard
certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    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
call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    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.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this 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.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have 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
safety zone lasting only 2.5 hours that will prohibit entry within a
portion of the Potomac River. It is categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction
Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration
supporting this determination is available in the docket. For
instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this
preamble.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T05-0497 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-0497  Safety Zone; Potomac River, Prince William County,
VA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters of the Potomac River, within 500 feet of the fireworks barge in
approximate position latitude 38[deg]34'07.97'' N, longitude
077[deg]15'37.39'' W, located near Cherry Hill, in Prince William
County, VA. These coordinates are based on datum NAD 83.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section--
    Captain of the Port (COTP) means the Commander, U.S. Coast Guard
Sector Maryland-National Capital Region.
    Designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the
Port Maryland-National Capital Region to assist in enforcing the safety
zone described in paragraph (a) of this section.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in
subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative.
    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's
representative by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or on Marine Band Radio
VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz). The Coast Guard vessels enforcing this
section can be contacted on Marine Band Radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8
MHz). Those in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or
directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative.
    (d) Enforcement officials. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in
the patrol and enforcement of the safety zone by Federal, State, and
local agencies.
    (e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 8:30
p.m. to 11 p.m. on September 18, 2021. If necessary due to inclement
weather on September 18, 2021, it will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. to 11
p.m. on September 19, 2021.

    Dated: September 8, 2021.
David E. O'Connell,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Maryland-National
Capital Region.
[FR Doc. 2021-19763 Filed 9-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 104 (Tuesday, May 31, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32464-32465]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11542]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2016-0005]

Preparations for the 42nd Session of the UN Sub-Committee of
Experts on the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and
Labelling of Chemicals (UNSCEGHS)

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

ACTION: Notice of public meetings.

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

SUMMARY: This notice is to advise interested persons that OSHA will
conduct a virtual public meeting in advance of certain international
meetings. The first meeting will be held in advance of the official
42nd session of the United Nations Sub-Committee of Experts on the
Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals
(UNSCEGHS) to be held as a hybrid (in-person and virtual) meeting July
6-8, 2022, in Geneva, Switzerland. OSHA, along with the U.S.
Interagency Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling
of Chemicals (GHS) Coordinating Group,

plans to consider the comments and information gathered at this public
meeting when developing the U.S. Government positions for the UNSCEGHS
meeting.

DATES: The virtual public meeting will take place on June 15, 2022.
Specific information for each meeting will be posted when available on
the OSHA website at https://www.osha.gov/dsg/hazcom/hazcom_international.html#meeting-notice.

ADDRESSES: The meetings will be virtually hosted through the DOT
Headquarters Conference Center, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington,
DC 20590.
    Written Comments: Interested parties may submit comments between
June 4 through July 5, 2022, on the Working and Informal Papers for the
42nd sessions of the UNSCEGHS to the docket established for
International/Globally Harmonized System (GHS) efforts at: http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. OSHA-2016-0005.
    Registration to Attend and/or to Participate in the Virtual
Meeting: These meetings will be open to the public on a first-come,
first served basis, as space is limited. Advanced meeting registration
information will be posted on the PHMSA website. DOT is committed to
providing equal access to this meeting for all participants. If you
need alternative formats or services because of a disability, such as
sign language, interpretation, or other ancillary aids, please contact
the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    Attendees may use the same form to pre-register for both meetings.
Failure to pre-register may delay your access into the DOT Headquarters
conference call line. Conference call-in and ``Teams meeting''
capability will be provided for both meetings. Information on how to
access the conference call and ``Teams meeting'' will be posted when
available at: https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/international-program/international-program-overview under Upcoming Events. This information
will also be posted on OSHA's Hazard Communication website on the
international tab at: https://www.osha.gov/dsg/hazcom/hazcom_international.html#meeting-notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    At the Department of Transportation: Please contact Mr. Steven Webb
or Mr. Aaron Wiener, Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, Department
of Transportation, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    At the Department of Labor: Please contact Ms. Maureen Ruskin, OSHA
Directorate of Standards and Guidance, Department of Labor, telephone:
(202) 693-1950, email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OSHA will conduct a virtual public meeting
in advance of the 42nd session of the United Nations Sub-Committee of
Experts on the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and
Labelling of Chemicals (UNSCEGHS) to be held as a hybrid meeting in
early July 2022, in Geneva, Switzerland. This virtual public meeting
will occur jointly with the Department of Transportation (DOT),
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) (see FR
Doc. 2020-09076 Filed 4-28-20) to discuss proposals in preparation for
the 60th session of the United Nations Sub-Committee of Experts on the
Transport of Dangerous Goods (UNSCETDG) to be held as a hybrid meeting
June 27--July 6, 2022. Advanced meeting registration information will
be posted on the PHMSA website (see Docket No. PHMSA-2019-0224; Notice
No. 2020-02).
    For each of these meetings, OSHA and PHMSA will solicit public
input on U.S. government positions regarding proposals submitted by
member countries in advance of each meeting.

The OSHA Meeting

    OSHA is hosting an open informal public meeting of the official
42nd session of the UNSCEGHS which will represent the third and final
meeting scheduled for the 2020-2022 biennium. Information on the work
of the UNSCEGHS including meeting agendas, working and informal papers,
reports, and documents from previous sessions can be found on the
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Transport
Division website located at: http://www.unece.org/trans/danger/publi/ghs/ghs_welcome_e.html.

The PHMSA Meeting

    Additional information regarding the UNSCETDG and related matters
can be found on PHMSA's website at: https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/international-program/international-program-overview.

Authority and Signature

    James S. Fredrick, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Occupational
Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Labor, authorized the preparation
of this notice under the authority granted by sections 4, 6, and 8 of
the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,
657), and Secretary's Order 1-2012 (77 FR 3912), (Jan. 25, 2012).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on May 23, 2022.
James S. Fredrick,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2022-11542 Filed 5-27-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 115 (Thursday, June 15, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 39172]
[FR Doc No: 2023-12817]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2023-0475]

Safety Zones; Annual Events in the Captain of the Port Buffalo
Zone

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notification of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce a safety zone for the Cape
Vincent French Festival Fireworks to provide for the safety of life on
navigable waterways, including the St. Lawrence River, during this
event. Our regulation for marine events within the Ninth Coast Guard
District identifies the regulated area for this event as the St.
Lawrence River, Cape Vincent, NY. During the enforcement period, the
operator of any vessel in the regulated area must comply with
directions from the Coast Guard Safety Zone Coordinator or any Official
Patrol displaying a Coast Guard ensign.

DATES: The regulation in 33 CFR 165.939 will be enforced for the Cape
Vincent French Festival Fireworks listed in item b.15 in the table to
Sec.  165.939 from 9:15 p.m. through 10:30 p.m., on July 8, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notification of enforcement, call or email the Marine Event
Coordinator, U.S. Coast Guard MSD Massena; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Notice of Enforcement is issued under
authority of 33 CFR 165.939 and 5 U.S.C. 552(a). The Coast Guard will
enforce a safety zone in 33 CFR 165.939 for the Cape Vincent French
Festival Fireworks regulated area from 9:15 p.m. through 10:30 p.m. on
July 8, 2023. This action is being taken to provide for the safety of
life on navigable waterways during this event. Our regulation for
marine events within the Ninth Coast Guard District, Sec.  165.939,
specifies the location of the regulated area for the French Festival
Fireworks which encompasses portions of the St. Lawrence River. During
the enforcement period as reflected in Sec.  165.939, if you are the
operator of a vessel in the regulated area you must comply with
directions from the Coast Guard Safety Zone Coordinator or any Official
Patrol displaying a Coast Guard ensign.
    In addition to this notification of enforcement in the Federal
Register, the Coast Guard plans to provide notification of this
enforcement period via the Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

    Dated: June 7, 2023.
Mark I. Kuperman,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. 2023-12817 Filed 6-14-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: April 23, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 79)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 21883-21885]
[DOCID:fr23ap08-30]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2008-0272]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zone; Patapsco River, Middle Branch, Baltimore, MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary security
zone on certain waters of the Patapsco River, Middle Branch, in
Baltimore Harbor, Baltimore, Maryland, during the August 9, 2008, USS
Sterett Commissioning ceremony. The security zone is necessary to
provide for the security of the USS Sterett and the safety of life of
event participants, spectators and mariners on U.S. navigable waters
during the event. Entry into the zone is prohibited unless authorized
by the Captain of the Port or a designated representative.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before May 23, 2008.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG-2008-0272 to the Docket Management Facility at the U.S.
Department of Transportation. To avoid duplication, please use only one
of the following methods:
    (1) Online: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) 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.
    (3) Hand delivery: Room W12-140 on the Ground Floor of the West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call Mr. Ronald Houck, at Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, Waterways
Management Division, at telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER> or (410) 576-
2693. 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. We have an agreement with the
Department of Transportation (DOT) to use the Docket Management
Facility. Please see DOT's ``Privacy Act'' paragraph below.

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2008-0272), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and give the reason for each
comment. We recommend that you include your name and a mailing address,
an e-mail address, or a phone number in the body of your document so
that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
You may submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail,
fax, or delivery to the Docket Management Facility at the address under
ADDRESSES; but please submit your comments and material by only one
means. If you submit them by mail or 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. We may change this
proposed rule in view of them.

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 at
any time. Enter the docket number for this rulemaking (USCG-2008-0272)
in the Search box, and click ``Go >>.'' You may also visit either the
Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays; or the Commander, U. S. Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, 2401
Hawkins Point Road, Building 70, Waterways Management Division,
Baltimore, Maryland 21226-1791 between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of all 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 the Department of
Transportation's Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit http://
DocketsInfo.dot.gov.

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one to the Docket Management Facility at the address under
ADDRESSES explaining why one 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.

Background and Purpose

    The ongoing hostilities in Afghanistan and Iraq have made it
prudent for U.S. ports and waterways to be on a higher state of alert
because the al Qaeda organization and other similar organizations have
declared an ongoing intention to conduct armed attacks on U.S.
interests worldwide. Due to increased awareness that future terrorist
attacks are possible the Coast Guard, as lead federal agency for
maritime homeland security, has determined that the Coast Guard Captain
of the Port must have the means to be aware of, deter, detect,
intercept, and respond to asymmetric threats, acts of aggression, and
attacks by terrorists on the American homeland while still maintaining
our freedoms and sustaining the flow of commerce. This security zone is
part of a comprehensive port security regime designed to safeguard
human life, vessels, and waterfront facilities against sabotage or
terrorist attacks.
    The Captain of the Port Baltimore is proposing to establish a
security zone to address the aforementioned security concerns and to
take steps to prevent the catastrophic impact that a terrorist attack
against the USS Sterett and a large number of participants at the South
Locust Point Marine Terminal, and the surrounding waterfront areas and
communities, in Baltimore, Maryland. The proposed security zone is
necessary to safeguard life and property on the navigable waters
immediately before, during, and after the scheduled event. This zone
will

help the Coast Guard prevent vessels or persons from bypassing the
security measures established on shore for the ceremony and engaging in
waterborne terrorist actions during the highly-publicized event.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    On Saturday, August 9, 2008, the USS Sterett's Commissioning
ceremony will be held at the South Locust Point Marine Terminal in
Baltimore Harbor, Baltimore, Maryland. The U.S. Navy's new Arleigh
Burke class Aegis guided missile destroyer, DDG 104, will be berthed at
the facility.
    The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary security zone
from 4 p.m. through 11 p.m. on August 9, 2008, encompassing the waters
of the Patapsco River, Middle Branch, from surface to bottom, by lines
connecting the following points, beginning at 39[deg]15'40'' N.,
076[deg]35'23'' W., thence to 39[deg]15'24'' N., 076[deg]35'18'' W.,
thence to 39[deg]15'25'' N., 076[deg]35'54'' W., thence to
39[deg]15'43'' N., 076[deg]35'58'' W., located approximately 1,600
yards east of the Hanover Street (SR-2) Bridge. This area includes
certain waters of the Ferry Bar Channel and the Locust Point East and
West Channels. Scheduled on a weekend during the summer in Baltimore,
Maryland, the waterfront ceremony is expected to attract a large
recreational boating fleet and will require that persons and vessels be
kept at a safe distance from the USS Sterett during the event.
    No person or vessel may enter or remain in the security zone at any
time without the permission of the Captain of the Port Baltimore.
Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone may contact
the Captain of the Port Baltimore via the Sector Baltimore Command
Center by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or on marine band radio channel
16 VHF-FM (156.8 MHz) to seek permission to transit the area. U.S.
Coast Guard patrol vessels will be on scene to control the movement of
persons and vessels in the security zone and may be assisted in the
patrol and enforcement of the zone by other Federal, State and local
agencies. Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by siren,
radio, flashing light, or other means, the operator of a vessel shall
proceed as directed. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels
must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Baltimore
or his or her designated representative.

Regulatory Evaluation

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

Executive Order 12866

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
and does not require an assessment of potential costs and benefits
under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under that Order.
    We expect the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so
minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation is unnecessary. There is
little vessel traffic associated with recreational boating and
commercial fishing during the effective period, and vessels may seek
permission from the Captain of the Port Baltimore to enter and transit
the zone.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. This proposed rule would affect the following
entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or
operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in a portion of the
Patapsco River, Middle Branch, from 4 p.m. through 11 p.m. on August 9,
2008. Smaller vessels not constrained by their draft, which are more
likely to be small entities, may transit around the security zone. The
duration of the security zone will be limited to seven hours. Because
the zone is of limited size and duration, it is expected that there
will be minimal disruption to the maritime community. Before the
effective period, we will issue maritime advisories widely available to
users of the river.
    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
proposed rule would affect your small business, organization, or
governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its
provisions or options for compliance, please contact Mr. Ronald Houck,
at Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, Waterways Management Division, at
telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER> or<PHONE_NUMBER>. 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.

Collection of Information

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

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this proposed rule
under that Order and have determined that it does not have implications
for federalism.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

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

Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. We
invite your comments on how this proposed rule might impact tribal
governments, even if that impact may not constitute a ``tribal
implication'' under the Order.

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 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 not likely to
have a significant effect on the human environment. A preliminary
``Environmental Analysis Check List'' supporting this preliminary
determination is available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

    2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0272 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0272  Security Zone; Patapsco River, Middle Branch,
Baltimore, MD.

    (a) Location. The following area is a security zone: All waters of
the Patapsco River, Middle Branch, from surface to bottom, encompassed
by lines connecting the following points, beginning at 39[deg]15'40''
N., 076[deg]35'23'' W., thence to 39[deg]15'24'' N., 076[deg]35'18''
W., thence to 39[deg]15'25'' N., 076[deg]35'54'' W., thence to
39[deg]15'43'' N., 076[deg]35'58'' W., located approximately 1,600
yards east of the Hanover Street (SR-2) Bridge. These coordinates are
based upon North American Datum 1983.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, for purposes of enforcing
the security zone identified in paragraph (a) of this section,
designated representative means on-scene Coast Guard patrol personnel,
including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers and other officers
operating Coast Guard vessels, and federal, state, and local officers
designated by the Captain of the Port Baltimore.
    (c) Regulations. (1) All persons are required to comply with the
general regulations governing security zones found in Sec.  165.33 of
this part.
    (2) Entry into or remaining in the security zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section is prohibited unless authorized by the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port Baltimore, Maryland or his or her
designated representative.
    (3) Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone may
contact the Captain of the Port Baltimore at telephone number 410-576-
2674 or on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) to seek
permission to transit the area. On-scene Coast Guard patrol personnel
operating Coast Guard vessels may be contacted on marine band radio
VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) to seek permission to transit the area.
Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by siren, radio,
flashing light, or other means, the operator of a vessel shall proceed
as directed. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels must
comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Baltimore or
his or her designated representative.
    (d) Effective period. This rule is effective from 4 p.m. through 11
p.m. on August 9, 2008.

    Dated: April 10, 2008.
Brian D. Kelley,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland.
[FR Doc. E8-8728 Filed 4-22-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-15-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 188 (Thursday, September 27, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59423-59425]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23763]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-67902; File No. SR-NYSEMKT-2012-23]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE MKT LLC; Order Granting
Approval of a Proposed Rule Change Amending the Members' Schedule of
NYSE Amex Options LLC in Order To Reflect Changes to the Capital
Structure of the Company

September 21, 2012.

I. Introduction

    On July 25, 2012, NYSE MKT LLC (``NYSE MKT'' or ``Exchange'') filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant
to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
amend the Members' Schedule (as defined herein) of NYSE Amex Options
LLC to reflect changes to the capital structure of the company. The
proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register
on August 7, 2012.\3\ The Commission received no comments on the
proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67569 (August 1,
2012), 77 FR 47138.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    NYSE Amex Options LLC (``Company'') was formed as a joint venture
between NYSE MKT \4\ and its corporate parent NYSE Euronext, and seven
firms, for the purpose of operating an options platform as a facility
of NYSE MKT. The seven firms, which are referred to in the joint
venture's operating documents as ``Founding Firms,'' are: Banc of
America Strategic Investments Corporation (``BAML''), Barclays
Electronic Commerce Holdings Inc. (``Barclays''), Citadel Securities
LLC (``Citadel''), Citigroup Financial Strategies, Inc.
(``Citigroup''), Goldman, Sachs & Co. (``Goldman Sachs''), Datek Online
Management Corp. (``TD Ameritrade'') and UBS Americas Inc. (``UBS'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ At the time it entered into the joint venture, NYSE MKT was
referred to as NYSE Amex LLC. On May 14, 2012, NYSE Amex LLC filed a
proposed rule change under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act, 15 U.S.C.
78s(b)(3)(A), to change its name to NYSE MKT LLC. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 67037 (May 21, 2012), 77 FR 31415 (May 25,
2012) (SR-NYSEAmex-2012-32).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Collectively, NYSE MKT and the Founding Firms are ``Members'' of
the Company. Their respective ownership interests are set forth in a
schedule (``Members' Schedule'') to the Company's LLC Agreement, dated
as of June 29, 2011.\5\ The amount of each Member's ownership is
represented by limited liability interests in the Company (``Common
Interests''). The LLC Agreement designates two types of Member, Class A
Member and Class B Member, and the different classes of Members hold
corresponding classes of Interests, i.e., Class A Common Interests and
Class B Common Interests. Although both classes of Common Interests
entitle Members to some measure of voting and economic entitlements,
the two classes of Common Interests are not fungible. Members' voting
and economic entitlements are determined by reference to: (1) Each
Member's holdings of Common Interests, and (2) the aggregate economic
and voting power of the Class A Members relative to the Class B
Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In addition to the LLC Agreement, the Company is governed by
an agreement among the Members, the Company and NYSE Euronext
(``Members Agreement''), also dated as of June 29, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Members' Schedule attached to the LLC Agreement dated as
of June 29, 2011, NYSE MKT was the only Class A Member and therefore
the only Member that held Class A Common Interests. The Founding Firms
were designated Class B Members, each

holding Class B Common Interests. According to this schedule, NYSE MKT
owned Class A Common Interests amounting to an equity interest of
47.20% in the Company, while the Founding Firms collectively owned
Class B Common Interests amounting to an equity interest of the
remaining 52.80% in the Company.
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Members' Schedule to reflect
changes to the capital structure of the Company based on three
transactions that have occurred or will occur since the Commission
approved the Exchange's proposal relating to the formation of the
Company.\6\ The first transaction relates to the admission of NYSE
Market, Inc. (``NYSE Market''), an affiliate of NYSE MKT, on September
19, 2011, as a Member with an equity ownership interest in the Company.
The second transaction relates to the issuance of additional Common
Interests to Class B Members of the Company on February 29, 2012,
pursuant to an annual incentive program as set forth in the Members
Agreement. The third transaction relates to the expected transfer of
Common Interests on or around September 25, 2012, from the Founding
Firms to NYSE Market. These transactions are described in greater
detail below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64742 (June 24,
2011), 76 FR 38436 (June 30, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Admission of NYSE Market as a Member

    Each Founding Firm has the right, pursuant to Section 3.2 of the
Members Agreement and subject to certain conditions and limitations, to
cause NYSE MKT (or an affiliate designated by NYSE MKT) to purchase a
portion of the Founding Firm's Common Interests. All of the Founding
Firms exercised this right on September 19, 2011, thereby causing an
aggregate equity interest of 5.28% in the Company to be transferred
from the Founding Firms to NYSE Market, the NYSE MKT affiliate that
NYSE MKT designated to receive the ownership interest. As a result of
the transaction, NYSE MKT continued to own an equity interest of 47.20%
in the Company, NYSE Market owned an equity interest of 5.28% in the
Company, and the Founding Firms collectively owned the remaining equity
interest of 47.52% in the Company.
    Several provisions of the LLC Agreement impact the terms of this
transfer. Because NYSE Market is an affiliate of NYSE MKT, pursuant to
Section 11.2(c) of the LLC Agreement, Common Interests transferred from
Founding Firms to NYSE Market automatically convert from Class B Common
Interests to Class A Common Interests. Also, under Sections 10.4 and
11.1, upon receiving the transfer of Common Interests and satisfying
certain other conditions, and subject to amendment of the Member's
Schedule, NYSE Market became a Class A Member of the Company.
    NYSE MKT represented that, notwithstanding the transfer of Common
Interests to NYSE Market, the Company's governance structure did not
change. NYSE MKT continues to appoint a majority (7 of 13) of the
Company's Board of Directors, and NYSE Market has no right to appoint a
separate director. According to NYSE MKT, this transaction was
structured as a transfer of Common Interests to NYSE Market, rather
than NYSE MKT, for non-substantive business reasons relating to the
corporate structure of NYSE MKT. NYSE MKT also noted that, as a Member,
NYSE Market is bound by all of the provisions of the LLC Agreement and
the Members Agreement.

Issuance of Annual Incentive Shares

    The Members Agreement provides that each year, until 2015, unless
extended by the Company's Board of Directors, the Company must issue a
specified amount of Annual Incentive Shares to be allocated among
eligible Class B Members. Pursuant to Section 2.1 of the Members
Agreement, the Company must issue a number of Class B Common Interests
equal to 30% of the then-outstanding Class B Common Interests as Annual
Incentive Shares, and such shares are to be allocated among Class B
Members based on each Class B Member's contribution to the volume of
the Exchange relative to volume targets specified for the Members.
While the issuance of Annual Incentive Shares may change the relative
economic and voting rights of and among Class B Members, by its terms
it cannot impact the aggregate economic and voting rights of Class B
Members in relation to Class A Members.
    On February 29, 2012, the Company issued a total of 14.2560 Annual
Incentive Shares to the Founding Firms. Because each Founding Firm
achieved or exceeded its specified volume target, each Founding Firm's
economic and voting interests remained the same in relation to the
other Class B Members. The Exchange proposes to amend the Members'
Schedule to reflect this issuance of Class B Common Interests.

Expected Transfer From Founding Firms to NYSE Market

    Article XI of the LLC Agreement and Section 3.1 of the Members
Agreement provide that a Member may transfer Common Interests to
another Member or to a third party in accordance with the conditions
and limitations set forth therein. In its proposal, NYSE MKT noted that
the Founding Firms collectively intend to transfer an aggregate equity
interest of 5.28% in the Company to NYSE Market. As with the first
transaction noted above, the Founding Firms' Class B Common Interests
will automatically convert to Class A Common Interests upon their
transfer to NYSE Market. As a result of this transfer, NYSE MKT will
continue to own an equity interest of 47.20% in the Company, NYSE
Market will own an equity interest of 10.56% in the Company, and the
Founding Firms, collectively, will own the remaining equity interest of
42.24% in the Company. The Exchange proposes, upon consummation of this
transfer by the Founding Firms, to amend the Members' Schedule to
reflect this transfer.

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange.\7\ In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with Section 6(b)(1) of the Act,\8\ which
requires, among other things, that a national securities exchange be so
organized and have the capacity to carry out the purposes of the Act
and to comply, and to enforce compliance by its members and persons
associated with its members, with the provisions of the Act, the rules
and regulations promulgated thereunder, and the rules of the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In approving the proposal, the Commission has considered the
proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ which requires, among
other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices; to
promote just and equitable principles of trade; to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in

regulating, clearing, settling, and processing information with respect
to, and facilitating transactions in securities; to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system; and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As the Commission noted when it approved the Exchange's proposal
relating to the formation of the Company, while the Company does not
carry out any regulatory functions, all of its activities must be
consistent with the Act.\10\ The Company's LLC Agreement and Members
Agreement must be reasonably designed to enable the Company to operate
in a manner that is consistent with the principle that the Company is
not solely a commercial enterprise, but rather an integral part of an
SRO that is registered pursuant to the Act and therefore subject to
obligations imposed by the Act.\11\ In addition, under Section 4.9 of
the LLC Agreement, because the transactions described in the proposal
result in NYSE Market, a ``Permitted Transferee'' of NYSE MKT,\12\
together with NYSE MKT, owning more than 19.9% of outstanding Common
Interests, the transfer and corresponding amendment to the Member's
Schedule are subject to receipt of Commission approval pursuant to the
rule filing process under Section 19(b) of the Exchange Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See supra note 6, 76 FR at 38439.
    \11\ See id.
    \12\ ``Permitted Transferee'' is defined in Sections 1.1 and
11.4(a) of the LLC Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that the addition of NYSE Market as a Member
of the Company, and the proposed amendments to the Members' Schedule to
reflect the changes in ownership interest percentages as a result of
the three transactions described above, do not significantly alter the
governance structure of the Company. The result of the three
transactions is to increase the equity ownership interest in the
Company of NYSE MKT, together with its affiliate NYSE Market, from
47.20% of the Company to 57.76% of the Company and add NYSE Market as a
Member of the Company. The Commission notes that, NYSE Market, as a new
Member of the Company, is subject to, and bound by, all provisions of
the LLC Agreement and Members Agreement. The Commission notes further
that the provisions in the LLC Agreement and Members Agreement that are
designed to preserve the independence of the Exchange's regulatory
functions and its ability to fulfill the Exchange's regulatory
oversight obligations are unaffected by the proposed rule change.
    For the reasons discussed above, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the Act.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\13\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEMKT-2012-23) be, and
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-23763 Filed 9-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 80929-80930]
[FR Doc No: 2011-33129]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2011-0226; FRL-9509-5]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Metal Coil Surface
Coating (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR which is abstracted below describes the
nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before January 26,
2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2011-0226, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency,
Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, Mail Code
28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB
at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Learia Williams, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On May 9, 2011 (76 FR 26900), EPA sought comments on this ICR
pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any additional
comments on this ICR should be submitted to both EPA and OMB within 30
days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID
number EPA-HQ-OECA-2011-0226, which is available for public viewing
online at http://www.regulations.gov and in person viewing at the
Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The
EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the

Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the
Enforcement and Compliance Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov to submit or view public comments, access the index
listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in
the docket that are available electronically. Once in the system,
select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number identified
above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether
submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public
viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA receives them and without
change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, Confidential
Business Information (CBI), or other information whose public
disclosure is restricted by statute. For further information about the
electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
    Title: NSPS for Metal Coil Surface Coating (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 0660.11, OMB Control Number 2060-0107.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on December 31, 2011.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for the
regulations published at 40 CFR part 60, subpart TT were proposed on
January 5, 1981 and promulgated on November 1, 1982. These regulations
apply to the following surface coating lines in the metal coil surface
coating industry: each prime coat operation, each finish coat
operation, and each prime and finish coat operation cured
simultaneously where the finish coat is applied wet on wet over the
prime coat.
    In general, all New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) require
initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports. Owners
or operators are also required to maintain records of the occurrence
and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation
of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring
system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are
essential in determining compliance, and are required of all sources
subject to NSPS.
    All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority. In
the event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are
sent directly to the EPA regional office. This information is being
collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart TT, as
authorized in sections 112 and 114(a) of the Clean Air Act. The
required information consists of emissions data and other information
that have been determined to be private.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 41
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Metal coil surface coating
facilities.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 158.
    Frequency of Response: Initially, occasionally, annually, and
semiannually.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 15,643.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $1,829,259, which includes $1,497,459
in labor costs, no capital/startup costs, and $331,800 in operation and
maintenance (O&M) costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the labor hours in
this ICR compared to the previous ICR. Consultations with EPA's Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) and trade associations
revealed that there are approximately 158 sources subject to the rule,
with no new facilities expected to be constructed over the next three
years of this ICR.
    However, there is an increase in the estimated burden cost as
currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens. The
increase is not due to any program changes. The change in burden is due
to the use of the most updated labor rates.

    Dated: December 20, 2011.
John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2011-33129 Filed 12-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P