[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 132 (Wednesday, July 10, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32908-32911]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14669]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AD19-16-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-922); Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or
FERC) staff is soliciting public comment on the reinstatement and
revision of the FERC-922, Performance Metrics for ISOs, RTOs, and
Regions Outside ISOs and RTOs.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due September 9,
2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (identified by Docket No. AD19-16-
000) by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Website: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Darren Sheets may be reached at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by email or telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-922, Performance Metrics for ISOs, RTOs, and Regions
Outside ISOs and RTOs.
    OMB Control No: 1902-0262.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Commission previously had Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) approval for the information collection FERC-922 under
OMB Control No. 1902-0262. On August 7, 2018, Commission staff
requested that OMB discontinue this information collection. OMB
approval for the information collection was discontinued on August
31, 2018. Commission staff plans to request authority from OMB to
reinstate the information collection FERC-922, with certain
revisions, as described in more detail herein. See 44 U.S.C. 3507
(2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Type of Request: Reinstatement of the FERC-922 information
collection, with revisions.
    Abstract: In September 2008, the United States Government
Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report recommending that the
Commission, among other actions, work with Regional Transmission
Organizations (RTOs), Independent System Operators (ISOs),
stakeholders, and other experts to develop standardized metrics to
track the performance of RTO/ISO operations and markets and publicly
report on those metrics.\2\ In accordance with the 2008 GAO Report,
Commission staff developed a set of standardized metrics (the Common
Metrics), sought and received OMB approval to collect information on
those metrics from the RTOs/ISOs, and later non-RTOs/ISOs, and
ultimately issued five public reports (Common Metrics Reports).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GAO-08-987, Electricity
Restructuring: FERC Could Take Additional Steps to Analyze Regional
Transmission Organizations' Benefits and Performance (2008) (2008
GAO Report).
    \3\ In 2010 and 2011, Commission staff issued reports authored
by the RTOs/ISOs. In 2012, Commission staff issued a report
concerning the addition of non-RTO/ISO regions to the common metrics
effort. In 2014 and 2016, Commission staff issued reports using
aggregated data on the RTO/ISO and non-RTO/ISO regions. For copies
of the previous reports, see Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
RTO/ISO Performance Metrics (last updated Aug. 3, 2017), available
at http://www.ferc.gov/industries/electric/indus-act/rto/rto-iso-performance.asp (providing links to ISO/RTO Performance Metrics,
Docket No. AD10-5-000 (Oct. 21, 2010); Report to Congress on
Performance Metrics for Independent System Operators and Regional
Transmission Organizations, Docket No. AD10-5-000 (Apr. 2011);
Performance Metrics in Regions Outside ISOs and RTOs, Docket No.
AD12-8-000 (Oct. 15, 2012); Common Metrics, Docket No. AD14-15-000
(Aug. 26, 2014); and Common Metrics Report, Docket No. AD14-15-000
(Aug. 2016, revised Aug. 2017)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In December 2017, the GAO issued a report on the RTOs/ISOs with
centralized capacity markets.\4\ Among other recommendations, the GAO
found that the Commission should take steps to improve the quality of
the data collected for its Common Metrics Report, such as implementing
improved data quality checks and, where feasible, ensuring RTOs/ISOs
are reporting consistent metrics over time by standardizing
definitions; and that the Commission should develop and document an
approach to regularly

identify, assess, and respond to risks that capacity markets face.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GAO-18-131, Electricity
Markets: Four Regions Use Capacity Markets to Help Ensure Adequate
Resources, but FERC Has Not Fully Assessed Their Performance,
(2017), available at https://www.gao.gov/assets/690/689293.pdf (2017
GAO Report).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the 2017 GAO Report, Commission staff has proposed
changes to the Common Metrics information collection. First, Commission
staff proposes to improve the data collection process by creating a
standardized information collection Input Spreadsheet and an updated,
more detailed User Guide, which will provide guidance on completing the
information collection, including information about who should respond,
the timeline for responses, the metrics being collected, including
important definitions and a description of the types of metrics and
their structure in the information collection, and how to properly use
the reporting form. Also, Commission staff proposes to update the list
of Common Metrics to focus on centrally-organized energy markets and
capacity markets, which involves adding capacity market metrics. The
update also involves the elimination of previously collected metrics on
reliability, RTO/ISO billing controls and customer satisfaction,
interconnection and transmission processes, and system lambda.
Commission staff proposes eliminating these metrics because they
provide limited information, are reported publicly elsewhere, or do not
significantly help Commission staff or the public draw any conclusions
regarding the benefits of an RTO/ISO. The revised data collection,
after additions and deletions, consists of 29 Common Metrics.
    In addition to eliminating certain metrics and adding new ones, the
Common Metrics are now organized into three groups: Group 1 metrics are
designed to be collected from all respondents (i.e., all the RTOs/ISOs
and non-RTO/ISO utilities). There are seven Group 1 metrics: Reserve
Margins, Average Heat Rates, Fuel Diversity, Capacity Factor by
Technology Type, Energy Emergency Alerts (EEA Level 1 or Higher),
Performance by Technology Type during EEA Level 1 or Higher, and
Resource Availability (Equivalent Forced Outage Rate Demand (EFORd)).
Group 2 metrics pertain to organized energy markets, and thus are
designed to be collected only from respondents with such energy markets
(i.e., all the RTOs/ISOs). There are 12 Group 2 metrics: Number and
Capacity of Reliability Must-Run Units, Reliability Must-Run Contract
Usage, Demand Response Capability, Unit Hours Mitigated, Wholesale
Power Costs by Charge Type, Price Cost Markup, Fuel Adjusted Wholesale
Energy Price, Energy Market Price Convergence, Congestion Management,
Administrative Cost, New Entrant Net Revenues, and Order No. 825
Shortage Intervals and Reserve Price Impacts.\5\ Finally, Group 3, the
new metrics, pertain to organized capacity markets, and thus are
designed to be collected only from respondents with such capacity
markets (i.e., all RTOs/ISOs with capacity markets). There are 10 Group
3 metrics: Net Cost of New Entry (Net CONE) Value, Resource
Deliverability, New Capacity (Entry), Capacity Retirement (Exit),
Forecasted Demand, Capacity Market Procurement and Prices, Capacity
Obligations and Performance Assessment Events, Capacity Eligible for
Bonus Payments for Over-Performance, Capacity Facing Penalty Payments
for Under-Performance, Total Capacity Bonus Payments and Penalties. A
table showing the revised Common Metrics organized by the three groups
can be found at the back of this Notice. Also, the updated User Guide
for the information collection, and the standardized information
collection reporting form are attached to this Notice. These
attachments will not be published in the Federal Register, but will be
available as part of this notice in the Commission's eLibrary system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Settlement Intervals and Shortage Pricing in Markets
Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent
System Operators, Order No. 825, 155 FERC 61,276 (2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commission staff has had informal contact with stakeholders about
the proposed revisions to the set of Common Metrics, including the
proposed revisions to improve the quality of data collected and to
enhance the Common Metrics Report with capacity market metrics.
Specifically, Commission staff has contacted representatives of the
ISO/RTO Council, the Edison Electric Institute, American Wind Energy
Association, American Public Power Association, and the Energy
Information Administration.
    Commission staff has assured itself, by means of internal review,
that there is specific, objective support for the burden estimates
associated with the information collection requirements.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: 6 Commission staff expects
that respondents will submit information on the Common Metrics every
two years. Commission staff will request a three-year approval from
OMB, so the voluntary information collection would happen in Years 1
and 3.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Burden is defined as 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. For
further explanation of what is included in the information
collection burden, see 5 CFR 1320.3 (2018).
    \7\ The OMB approval is for a maximum of three years.
    \8\ See generally Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational
Employment and Wages, May 2017 (last modified Mar. 30, 2018),
available at: Computer Systems Analysts (15-1121) https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes151121.htm; Lawyers (23-1011) https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes231011.htm; Electrical Engineers (17-
2071) https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes172071.htm; Economists (19-
3011) https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes193011.htm; Chief
Executives (11-1011) https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes111011.htm.
See Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employer Costs for Employee
Compensation, News Release USDL-18-1941 (Dec. 14, 2018), available
at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm. Those hourly wages
(plus benefits) are: $107.61 for the Metrics Data Collection and
Write Performance Analysis categories, and $122.81 for the
Management Review component which is solely based on the Chief
Executive wage rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following table sets forth the estimated annual burden and cost
\8\ for this information collection:
BILLING CODE 2019-14669-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10JY19.000

BILLING CODE 2019-14669-C
    Explanation of the Table: The Number of Respondents (1) in the
first column varies by Group, as all respondents do not provide
information on each of the 29 Common Metrics. Commission staff has
estimated the number of respondents for the first three Groups based on
the assumption that the six jurisdictional RTOs/ISOs and the five non-
RTO/ISO utilities (11 total respondents) that previously responded to
the FERC-922 information collection will provide responses to this
revised FERC-922 information collection. Therefore, the estimated
number of respondents in Group 1 is 11, because all respondents report
on the Group 1 metrics. The estimated number of respondents for Group 2
is six, because only the jurisdictional RTOs/ISOs with energy markets
respond to the Group 2 metrics. Likewise, the estimated number of
respondents in Group 3 is four, because only the jurisdictional RTOs/
ISOs with capacity markets respond to the Group 3 metrics. Finally, the
table includes a burden estimate for potential new respondents. As all
the jurisdictional RTOs/ISOs previously responded to FERC-922, any
potential new respondent would be a utility in a non-RTO/ISO region,
and thus would only be submitting responses to the Group 1 metrics, but
for the first time. Commission staff conservatively estimates that, at
most, one new non-RTO/ISO utility will respond to this revised FERC-922
information collection.
    The second column, Number of Responses in Years 1 & 3 (2) is
characterized by the number of Balancing Authority Areas (BAAs) each
respondent would be reporting on, as the respondent would provide a
response to each metric for each of its BAAs. Each RTO/ISO is a single
BAA and therefore will only provide responses to each metric for one
BAA, but utilities in the non-RTO/ISO regions that previously responded
have reported metrics for more than one BAA (for instance, Duke Energy
has multiple BAAs outside of RTOs/ISOs and filed metrics for each BAA
in the previous information collection). Therefore, the estimated
number of responses for Group 1 (all RTOs/ISOs and non-RTO/ISO
utilities) is the number of BAAs in the RTOs/ISOs, i.e., six, plus the
number of non-RTO/ISO BAAs i.e., 10, which equals 16 total responses.
The estimated number of responses for Group 2 (all RTOs/ISOs with
energy markets) is the same as the number of respondents, i.e., six, as
only the RTOs/ISOs respond and they each only have one BAA. The
estimated number of responses for Group 3 (all RTOs/ISOs with capacity
markets) is the same as the number of respondents, i.e., four, as only
the four RTOs/ISOs with capacity markets respond and they each only
have one BAA. Finally, there is only estimated to be one non-RTO/ISO
utility as a potential new respondent, who would only be responding to
the Group 1 metrics that apply to all respondents.
    The Annual Frequency of Filings (3) is 0.67 for all groups. This
fraction reflects that there will be two information collections or one
each during Years 1 and 3 of the three-year OMB authorization period,
so \2/3\ or 0.67 is the adjustment to reflect a yearly value for the
burden.
    The Total Number of Annual Responses (4) is the product of the
second column, Number of Responses in Years 1 and 3 (2), multiplied by
the third, the Annual Frequency of Filings (3). Thus for the first
group, this value is 16 x 0.67 or 10.72.
    The Estimated Burden Hours per Response (5) reflects the total
number of estimated burden hours, separated into the three reporting
categories (collect, write, review) for all four groups of respondents.
The total estimated burden hours for the first three groups of
respondents are the same as the previous FERC-922 information
collection burden estimates, 401 hours. An increased estimate of the
burden hours, 427 hours, is for Potential New Respondents, in
recognition of the fact that the burden on a new respondent is likely
higher. The number of hours in

each reporting category has been adjusted in this collection, as
compared to the previous FERC-922 collection burden estimate, to
reflect less emphasis on the writing category, as Commission staff has
developed a structured data collection tool which will decrease the
amount of written text that respondents will provide in the information
collection.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The estimated hours per response has increased for: (a)
Metrics Data Collection component to 271 hours (from 229 hours), and
(b) Management Review component to 60 hours (from 33 hours). The
estimated hours per response for Write Performance Analysis has
decreased to 70 hours (from 139 hours).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Estimated Cost per Response (6) is the product of the three
variables: The Estimated Burden Hours per Response (5) for a category,
multiplied by the labor rate (for wages plus benefits) for each
category (which is not shown in the table), multiplied by the
proportion of total hours attributable to this Group, to report on a
category, e.g., the number of metrics in that Group divided by the
total number of metrics (also not shown in table). An example in the
first row is that for Group 1, Metrics Data Collection category, the
$7,039 is the product of 271 hours in column (5) multiplied by the
weighted average labor rate for that category ($107.61) multiplied by
0.242 (the ratio of metrics in the first Group, seven, to the total
number of metrics, 29 or 7 / 29). This fraction is not displayed in the
table.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The fraction for Group 1 and the Potential New Respondents
is 0.242 (the seven metrics in the first Group divided by the total
number of metrics, 29); for Group 2 the fraction is 0.414 (12
divided by 29); for Group 3 the fraction is 0.345 (10 divided by
29).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours (7) is the product of the
Total Number of Annual Responses (4) times the Estimated Burden Hours
per Response (5). For the first row of the first group this value is
2,905 hours = 10.72 x 271 hours.
    Finally, the Estimated Total Annual Cost (8) reflects the total
burden to the industry and is calculated by multiplying the Total
Number of Annual Responses (4) times the Estimated Cost per Response
(6) for each category for all groups and produces an estimated total
cost in the last row of the table. The wage rates utilized in this
burden estimate have been updated to recent Bureau of Labor Statistics
estimates for the same categories as used in the prior burden estimates
for the FERC-922 information collection (i.e., Computer Systems
Analysts, Lawyers, Electrical Engineers, Economists, and the category
Chief Executive). Wage estimates use the 90th percentile wage from the
recent Bureau of Labor Employees Benefit Survey, adjusted upward for
the private industry benefits of 30.3 percent, and are a weighted
average of those categories.
    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology. Further, Commission staff
requests comments on whether the proposed metrics (attached) will
effectively track the performance of the RTO/ISO energy and capacity
markets and the administrative and market functions that are common to
the RTOs/ISOs and the individual utilities in non-RTO/ISO regions.

    Dated: July 3, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-14669 Filed 7-9-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


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

General Comment:McVapour E-Cigs & Novelties 1712 N Nelson Dr Unit B Derby, Ks 67037

24 June 2014

Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane Room 1061 Rockville, MD 20852

Re: Request for Extension of Comment Period: Docket No. FDA-2014-N-0189

We McVapoour have conducted preliminary review of your lengthy proposed regulations and respectfully request that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) extend the comment period for the proposed rule entitled “Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as Amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act; Regulations on the Sale and Distribution of Tobacco Products and Required Warning Statements for Tobacco Products.”

We, McVapour, are small electronic cigarette retailer employing fewer than 350 people. As explained further below, the initial 75-day comment period does not provide enough time for companies like McVapour to adequately analyze the entire proposal and provide substantive comments on the many questions posed by the agency. We need more time to address this 240-page document whose contents will deal a devastating economic blow to our business. The preamble to the proposed rule identifies approximately 70 topics and issues the agency has requested comments on. Many of these issues are complex and difficult and relate to an extremely diverse array of products. Clearly, the lengthy time period that the Agency required to propose these regulations is evidence that the issues addressed in the proposal are multi-faceted and challenging. FDA cannot expect any interested party, and in particular, any manufacturer, to conduct a meaningful review and analysis of these issues and provide detailed and thoughtful comment in a 75-day period.

Therefore, McVapour again respectfully requests that FDA extend the comment period by 105 days and agree to accept comments filed to the docket on or before October 22, 2014. This will help ensure that the final rule is based on an adequate and meaningful administrative record. Thank you in advance for your consideration of this request.

Sincerely,  Byron McNary Co-Owner McVapour E-Cigs & Novelties


[Federal Register: July 31, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 146)]
[Notices]
[Page 38179-38180]
[DOCID:fr31jy09-47]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 1888-027]

York Haven Power Company, LLC; Notice of Intent To File License
Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, Commencement of
Licensing Proceeding, and Scoping; Request for Comments on the Pad and
Scoping Document, and Identification of Issues and Associated Study
Requests

July 24, 2009.
    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application for
a New License and Commencing Licensing Proceeding.
    b. Project No.: 1888-027.
    c. Date Filed: June 1, 2009.
    d. Submitted By: York Haven Power Company, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: York Haven Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On the Susquehanna River, in Dauphin, Lancaster and
York Counties, Pennsylvania. The project does not occupy any federal
lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR Part 5 of the Commission's
Regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Douglas Weaver, York Haven Power
Company, LLC, 1 Hydro Park Drive and Locust Street, York Haven, PA
17370, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and
Mike Hoover, Senior Regulatory Specialist, HDR/DTA, 970 Baxter
Boulevard, Suite 301, Portland, ME 04103, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or e-mail
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: John Smith at<PHONE_NUMBER> or e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the
environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such
requests described in item o. below. Cooperating agencies should note
the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation
of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See, 94 FERC ]
61,076 (2001).
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with:
(a) the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or NOAA Fisheries under
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act and the joint agency
regulations thereunder at 50 CFR, Part 402; and (b) the State Historic
Preservation Officer, as required by Section 106, National Historical
Preservation Act, and the implementing regulations of the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. With this notice, we are designating York Haven Power Company,
LLC as the Commission's non-federal representative for carrying out
informal consultation, pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act and section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
    m. York Haven Power Company, LLC filed a Pre-Application Document
(PAD; including a proposed process plan and schedule) with the
Commission, pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    n. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
(http://www.ferc.gov), using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in paragraph h.
    Register online at http://ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via e-mail of new filing and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.
    o. With this notice, we are soliciting comments on the PAD and
Scoping Document issued July 24, 2009, as well as study requests. All
comments on the PAD and Scoping Document, and study requests should be
sent to the address above in paragraph h. In addition, all comments on
the PAD and Scoping Document, study requests, requests for cooperating
agency status, and all communications to and from Commission staff
related to the merits of the potential application (original and eight
copies) must be filed with the Commission at the following address:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. All filings with the
Commission must include on the first page, the project name (York Haven
Hydroelectric Project) and number (P-1888-027), and bear the heading
Comments on Pre-Application Document, Study Requests, Comments on
Scoping Document, Request for Cooperating Agency Status, or
Communications to and from Commission Staff. Any individual or entity
interested in submitting study requests, commenting on the PAD or
Scoping Document, and any agency requesting cooperating status must do
so by September 29, 2009.
    Comments on the PAD and Scoping Document, study requests, requests
for cooperating agency status, and other permissible forms of
communications with the Commission may be filed electronically via the
Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions
on the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
ferconline.asp) under the e-filing link. For a simpler method of
submitting text only comments, click on ``Quick Comment.''
    p. Although our current intent is to prepare an environmental
assessment (EA), there is the possibility that an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) will be required. Nevertheless, this meeting will
satisfy the NEPA scoping requirements, irrespective of whether an EA or
EIS is issued by the Commission.

Scoping Meetings

    Commission staff will hold two scoping meetings in the vicinity of
the project at the time and place noted below. The daytime meeting will
focus on resource agency, Indian tribes, and non-governmental
organization concerns, while the evening meeting is

primarily for receiving input from the public. We invite all interested
individuals, organizations, and agencies to attend one or both of the
meetings, and to assist staff in identifying particular study needs, as
well as the scope of environmental issues to be addressed in the
environmental document. The times and locations of these meetings are
as follows:

Evening Scoping Meeting

    Date: Wednesday August 26, 2009.
    Time: 7 p.m.
    Location: Holiday Inn Conference Center, PA Turnpike exit 242 and
Interstate 83 exit 40A, New Cumberland, Pennsylvania 17070.
    Phone: Donna Stutz at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Daytime Scoping Meeting

    Date: Thursday August 27, 2009.
    Time: 10 a.m.
    Location: Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission Headquarters,
Susquehanna Room, 1601 Elmerton Avenue, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17110.
    Phone: Larry Miller at<PHONE_NUMBER> or for directions only call
(717) 705-7800.
    The Scoping Document, which outlines the subject areas to be
addressed in the environmental document, was mailed to the individuals
and entities on the Commission's mailing list. Copies of the Scoping
Document will be available at the scoping meetings, or may be viewed on
the Web at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Follow the
directions for accessing information in paragraph n. Based on all oral
and written comments, a revised Scoping Document may be issued which
may include a revised process plan and schedule, as well as a list of
issues, identified through the scoping process.

Site Visit

    The potential applicant and Commission staff will conduct a site
visit of the project on Wednesday August 26, 2009, starting at 10 a.m.
All participants should meet at the York Haven Project at 1 Hydro Park
Drive and Locust Street, York Haven, Pennsylvania 17370. Some
transportation will be provided by York Haven Power Company, LLC or
participants may use their own transportation. Please notify Douglas
Weaver at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Beth Fetzner at
717-266-6454 or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by August 19, 2009, if you
plan to attend the site visit.

Meeting Objectives

    At the scoping meetings, staff will: (1) Initiate scoping of the
issues; (2) review and discuss existing conditions and resource
management objectives; (3) review and discuss existing information and
identify preliminary information and study needs; (4) review and
discuss the process plan and schedule for pre-filing activity that
incorporates the time frames provided for in Part 5 of the Commission's
regulations and, to the extent possible, maximizes coordination of
federal, state, and tribal permitting and certification processes; and
(5) discuss the appropriateness of any federal or state agency or
Indian tribe acting as a cooperating agency for development of an
environmental document.
    Meeting participants should come prepared to discuss their issues
and/or concerns. Please review the PAD in preparation for the scoping
meetings. Directions on how to obtain a copy of the PAD and Scoping
Document are included in item n. of this document.

Meeting Procedures

    The meetings will be recorded by a stenographer and will become
part of the formal record of the Commission proceeding on the project.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-18299 Filed 7-30-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 139 (Thursday, July 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42495-42496]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17626]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0699; FRL-9701-3]

Release of Draft Documents Related to the Review of the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Availability of draft documents for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: On or about July 16, 2012, the Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards (OAQPS) of the EPA is making available for public comment
two draft assessment documents titled, Health Risk and Exposure
Assessment for Ozone, First External Review Draft and Welfare Risk and
Exposure Assessment for Ozone, First External Review Draft. These two
draft assessment documents describe the quantitative analyses the EPA
is conducting as part of the review of the national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) for ozone (O3). In addition, on or about
August 13, 2012, OAQPS will make available for public comment the first
draft document titled, Policy Assessment for the Review of the Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards, First External Review Draft, as
well as appendices and additional technical materials that support the
first draft Policy Assessment and first draft Risk and Exposure
Assessments.

DATES: Comments on all documents should be submitted on or before
September 11, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2008-0699, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     Email: Comments may be sent by electronic mail (email) to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0699.
     Fax: Fax your comments to<PHONE_NUMBER>, Attention Docket
ID. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0699.
     Mail: Send your comments to: Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attention Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0699.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: EPA
Docket Center, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Room 3334, Washington, DC.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2008-0699. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email address will be captured automatically
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or
CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not
be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use
of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any
defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Docket in the EPA
Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC. This Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  For questions related to the draft
document titled, Health Risk and Exposure Assessment for Ozone, First
External Review Draft (EPA-452/P-12-001; July 2012), please contact Ms.
Karen Wesson, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (Mail code
C504-02), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
NC 27711; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:
919-541-5315.
    For questions related to the draft document titled, Welfare Risk
and Exposure Assessment for Ozone, First External Review Draft (EPA-
452/P-12-004; July 2012), please contact Dr. Travis Smith, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards (Mail code C539-07), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711;
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 919-541-
5315.
    For questions related to the draft document titled, Policy
Assessment for the Review of the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards: First External Review Draft (EPA-452/P-12-002; August 2012),
please contact Ms. Susan Lyon Stone, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards (Mail code C504-06), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

General Information

A. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to the EPA
through www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of
the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk
or CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-
ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM
the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
     Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.

     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 108(a) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), the Administrator identifies and lists certain pollutants which
``cause or contribute to air pollution which may reasonably be
anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.'' The EPA then issues
air quality criteria for these listed pollutants, which are commonly
referred to as ``criteria pollutants.'' The air quality criteria are to
``accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge useful in
indicating the kind and extent of all identifiable effects on public
health or welfare which may be expected from the presence of [a]
pollutant in the ambient air, in varying quantities.'' Under section
109 of the CAA, the EPA establishes primary (health-based) and
secondary (welfare-based) NAAQS for pollutants for which air quality
criteria are issued. Section 109(d) of the CAA requires periodic review
and, if appropriate, revision of existing air quality criteria. The
revised air quality criteria reflect advances in scientific knowledge
on the effects of the pollutant on public health or welfare. The EPA is
also required to periodically review and, if appropriate, revise the
NAAQS based on the revised air quality criteria.
    Air quality criteria and NAAQS have been established for
O3 to provide protection of public health and welfare from
O3 and other photochemical oxidants. Presently, the EPA is
reviewing the air quality criteria and NAAQS for O3. The
EPA's overall plan and schedule for this review is presented in the
Integrated Review Plan for the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards.\1\ A draft of the integrated review plan was released for
public review and comment in September 2009 and was the subject of a
consultation with the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC)
on November 13, 2009 (74 FR 54562; October 22, 2009).\2\ Comments
received from that consultation and from the public were considered in
finalizing the plan and in beginning the review of the air quality
criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA 452/R-11-006; April 2011; Available: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/data/2011_04_OzoneIRP.pdf.
    \2\ See http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/WebProjectsbyTopicCASAC!OpenView for more information on CASAC
activities related to the current O3 NAAQS review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of the EPA's review of the primary and secondary
O3 NAAQS,\3\ the Agency is conducting quantitative
assessments characterizing the: (1) Health risks associated with
exposure to ambient O3; (2) welfare risks associated with
exposure to ambient O3; and, (3) associated ambient air
quality analyses. On or about July 16, 2012, the EPA is making
available for public comment two draft assessment documents titled,
Health Risk and Exposure Assessment for Ozone, First External Review
Draft and Welfare Risk and Exposure Assessment for Ozone, First
External Review Draft. These draft assessments may be accessed online
through the EPA's TTN Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/review.html for more
information on the NAAQS review process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA's plans for conducting these assessments, including the
proposed scope and methods of the analyses, were presented in two
planning documents titled, Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards: Scope and Methods Plan for Health Risk and Exposure
Assessment and Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards: Scope and
Methods Plan for Welfare Risk and Exposure Assessment (henceforth,
Scope and Methods Plans).\4\ These documents were released for public
comment in April 2011, and were the subject of a consultation with the
CASAC on May 19-20, 2011 (76 FR 23809; April 28, 2011). In May 2012, a
memo titled, Updates to information presented in the Scope and Methods
Plans for the Ozone NAAQS Health and Welfare Risk and Exposure
Assessments, was made available that described changes to elements of
the scope and methods plans and provided a brief explanation of each
change and the reason for it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ EPA-452/P-11-001 and -002; April 2011; Available: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_2008_pd.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The draft assessment documents announced today convey the
approaches taken to assess exposures to ambient O3 and to
characterize associated health and welfare risks, as well as present
the initial key results, observations, and related uncertainties
associated with the quantitative analyses performed.
    In addition, on or about August 13, 2012, the EPA will make
available the first draft document titled Policy Assessment for the
Review of the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards, First
External Review Draft. This document will serve to ``bridge the gap''
between the scientific information and the judgments required of the
Administrator in determining whether it is appropriate to retain or
revise the standards. The Policy Assessment will build upon information
presented in the Integrated Science Assessment of Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Third draft) \5\ and the two draft assessment
documents described above. At the same time, the EPA will make
available appendices and additional technical materials that support
the first draft Policy Assessment and first draft Risk and Exposure
Assessments. The first draft Policy Assessment, appendices, and
additional technical materials may be accessed online through EPA's TTN
Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/ozone/s_o3_index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ U.S. EPA. Integrated Science Assessment of Ozone and Related
Photochemical Oxidants (Third External Review Draft). U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-10/076C,
2012; Available: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/isa/recordisplay.cfm?deid=242490#Download.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is soliciting advice and recommendations from the CASAC by
means of a review of these three draft documents at an upcoming public
meeting of the CASAC that will be held in September 2012. Information
about these public meetings, including the dates and locations, will be
published as a separate notice in the Federal Register. Following the
CASAC meeting, the EPA will consider comments received from the CASAC
and the public in preparing revisions to these documents.
    The draft documents briefly described above do not represent and
should not be construed to represent any final EPA policy, viewpoint,
or determination. The EPA will consider any public comments submitted
in response to this notice when revising the documents.

    Dated: July 11, 2012.
Mary Henigin,
Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2012-17626 Filed 7-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 7, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 88127-88133]
[FR Doc No: 2016-29256]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

49 CFR Part 207

[Docket No. FRA-2016-0107, Notice No. 1]
RIN 2130-AC62

Railroad Police Officers

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule amends FRA's regulations on railroad police officers
to implement certain provisions of the Fixing America's Surface
Transportation

(FAST) Act. Consistent with the FAST Act, FRA is amending its
regulations to allow: Railroads to hire contractors as railroad police
officers; railroad police officers to transfer from one state to
another without immediately needing to be commissioned or certified in
the new state; and a state to recognize an officer's training at
another state's recognized police academy or at a Federal law
enforcement training center as meeting the state's basic police officer
certification or commissioning requirements.

DATES: This final rule is effective February 6, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gareth Rosenau, Office of Chief
Counsel, Federal Railroad Administration, Mail Stop 10, Room W31-316,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590 (telephone: 202-493-
6054).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Prior to enactment of the FAST Act (Pub. L. 114-94 (Dec. 4, 2015)),
49 U.S.C. 28101 (Section 28101) authorized railroad employees
commissioned or certified as police officers by any state to enforce,
consistent with DOT regulations, the laws of any state where the
railroad police officer's employer owns property to protect railroad
property, personnel, passengers, and cargo. Section 28101 did not allow
railroads to hire contractor railroad police officers or allow a
railroad police officer to transfer from one state to another unless
that officer was immediately commissioned or certified in the new
state. Section 28101 also did not address training railroad police
officers, except general references to the certification or
commissioning of the officers under state law. FRA's regulations at 49
CFR part 207 implement Section 28101.
    FAST Act Section 11412(b) (Section 11412) revised Section 28101 to
allow: (1) Railroads to hire contractors as railroad police officers;
(2) railroad police officers to transfer from one state to another
without immediately needing to be commissioned or certified in the new
state; and (3) a state to recognize an officer's training at another
state's recognized police academy or a Federal law enforcement training
center meets the state's basic police officer certification or
commissioning requirements.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Section 11412 of the FAST Act also contained provisions
modifying 49 U.S.C. 24305(e) (authorizing Amtrak to employ railroad
police officers) and 18 U.S.C. 922(z)(2)(B) (excepting railroad
police officers from certain restrictions related to handguns).
These provisions are self-executing and require no revision to part
207 or any other FRA regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 11412 also requires the Secretary of Transportation
(Secretary) to, within one year of enactment of the FAST Act, revise
part 207 consistent with Section 11412. The authority to carry out this
mandate is delegated to FRA. See 49 CFR 1.89(a). In issuing this final
rule, neither the Secretary nor FRA is exercising any discretion in
modifying part 207. Instead, this final rule merely incorporates the
new Section 11412 statutory language into existing part 207 and, in
certain instances, updates part 207 to ensure consistent application of
the regulation, as modified by the FAST Act.

II. The FAST Act's Specific Mandates Addressed in This Final Rule

    The FAST Act made three substantive revisions to existing Section
28101. First, the FAST Act revised Section 28101 paragraphs (a) and (b)
to allow railroad police officers to be either direct employees of a
railroad or contractors to a railroad (prior to the FAST Act, Section
28101 required railroad police officers to be ``employed by'' a
railroad). Specifically, the FAST Act amended Section 28101(a) (the
general authorizing provision for railroad police officers) to specify
railroad police officers may be ``directly employed by or contracted
by'' railroads. This change allows railroads to not only directly
employ railroad police officers, but also to hire contractors as
railroad police officers. In Section 28101(b) (which allows a railroad
police officer to be temporarily assigned to assist a second railroad),
the FAST Act revised the words ``employed by'' to ``directly employed
by or contracted by'' and specified that a railroad police officer
assisting a second railroad is an employee ``or agent, as applicable''
of the second railroad carrier.
    Second, the FAST Act added a new paragraph (c) to Section 28101
addressing the transfer of railroad police officers from one state of
employment or residence to a state other than the one where he or she
is commissioned. New paragraph (c) provides a one year interim period
for the officer to become commissioned in the new state, while
retaining authority to enforce laws in the new state under Section
28101.
    Third, the FAST Act added a new paragraph (d) to Section 28101
specifically allowing a state to allow a railroad police officer's
training at another state's recognized police academy or at a Federal
law enforcement training center to meet the state's basic police
officer certification or commissioning requirements.

III. Justification for Final Rule

    FRA is proceeding directly to a final rule in this proceeding
because it finds, for good cause, notice and public comment is
unnecessary because the public would not benefit from such notice. See
5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). In this rule, FRA is merely incorporating the new
statutory language of the FAST Act into existing part 207, and, in
doing so, is exercising no discretion. See, e.g., Komjathy v. National
Transp. Safety Bd., 832 F.2d 1294 (D.C. Cir. 1987), cert. denied,
Komjathy v. Administrator, Federal Aviation Admin., 486 U.S. 1057
(1988).

IV. Section-by-Section Analysis

Section 207.1 Application

    Existing Sec.  207.1 states part 207 applies to ``all railroads,''
as defined in section 202(e) of the Federal Railroad Safety Act of
1970. FRA is updating this section to accurately reflect the current
statutory cite for the term ``railroad.'' 49 U.S.C. 20103. This only
updates an outdated statutory citation and is not a substantive
amendment.

Section 207.2 Definitions

    Existing paragraph (a) of Sec.  207.2 defines ``railroad police
officer'' as a ``peace officer who is commissioned in his or her state
of legal residence or state of primary employment and employed by a
railroad to enforce state laws for the protection of railroad property,
personnel, passengers, and/or cargo.'' Consistent with the mandate of
Section 11412, this rule revises this definition by clarifying that
term includes peace officers ``directly employed by'' or ``contracted
by'' a railroad.

Section 207.3 Designation and Commissioning

    Existing paragraph (b) of Sec.  207.3 requires railroad police
officers to be commissioned by the officer's state of legal residence
or the officer's state of primary employment. Consistent with Section
11412's new provision providing for a one year interim period for an
officer transferring from one state of employment or residence to
another to become commissioned or certified in the new state, FRA is
revising this paragraph to except railroad police officers from this
commissioning requirement during such an interim period by referencing
new Sec.  207.6 (discussed below).

Section 207.6 Transfers

    Consistent with new Section 28101(c), FRA is adding new Sec.  207.6
to address transferring railroad police officers from one state of
employment or residence to a state other than the one where he or she
is commissioned. Section 207.6(a) provides that if a railroad police
officer certified or commissioned as a police officer under the laws of
a state or jurisdiction transfers primary employment or residence from
the certifying or commissioning state to another state or jurisdiction,
then the railroad police officer must apply to be certified or
commissioned as a police officer under the laws of the state of new
primary employment or residence not later than one year after the date
of transfer. Section 207.6(b) provides that during the period beginning
on the date of transfer and ending one year after the date of transfer,
a railroad police officer certified or commissioned as a police officer
under the laws of a state may enforce the laws of the new state or
jurisdiction in which the railroad police officer resides, to the same
extent as provided in existing Sec.  207.5(a) governing the authority
of railroad police officers in states where the officer is not
commissioned or certified.

Section 207.7 Training

    Consistent with new Section 28101, FRA is adding new Sec.  207.7
specifically allowing a state to recognize a railroad police officer's
training at another state's recognized police academy or at a Federal
law enforcement training center meets the state's basic police officer
certification or commissioning requirements. Tracking paragraph (d)(1)
of Section 28101, paragraph (a) of new Sec.  207.7 specifically allows
states to recognize its basic police officer certification or
commissioning requirements for qualification as a railroad police
officer are met by any individual who successfully completes a program
at another state's state-recognized police training academy or a
Federal law enforcement training center and who is certified or
commissioned as a police officer by that other state. Tracking
paragraph (d)(2) of Section 28101, paragraph (b) of new Sec.  207.7
explains the rule may not be construed to supersede or affect any state
training requirements related to criminal law, civil procedure, motor
vehicle code, any other state law, or state-mandated comparative or
annual in-service training academy or Federal law enforcement training
center.

V. Regulatory Impact and Notices

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures

    FRA evaluated this final rule under existing policies and
procedures and determined it is non-significant, under both Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563, and DOT policies and procedures. See 44 FR
11034, Feb. 26, 1979. Because FRA determined the anticipated costs from
this final rule are de minimis, FRA did not prepare a separate
regulatory impact assessment document. Instead, FRA summarized its
assessment of the cost and benefit expected to result from
implementation of this final rule here.
    First, FRA found this final rule will not create any additional
burden on any entities. Thus, we do not expect the rule to result in
any costs, either quantifiable or non-quantifiable, as the rule does
not create any additional requirements entities must follow.
    Second, FRA found the final rule provides benefits to entities and
benefits to workers from the three provisions allowing: (1) Railroads
to hire contractor police officers; (2) railroad police officers to
transfer from one state to another without immediately needing to be
commissioned or certified in the new state; and (3) a state to
recognize an officer's training at another state's recognized police
academy or at a Federal law enforcement training center meets the
state's basic police officer certification or commissioning
requirements.
    Providing entities with the ability to employ contractor police
officers more easily allows entities to adjust employment rolls based
upon their business needs. Providing flexibility for railroad police
officers to transfer from one state to another allows for increased
mobility of railroad police officers to meet interstate business needs.
Increased interstate worker mobility addresses the current geographic
immobility of railroad police officers caused by existing law that
typically requires railroad police officers to be commissioned within
their states of residence or primary employment. Similar to how
allowing railroads to employ contractor police officers will lead to
increased interstate worker mobility, allowing states to recognize an
officer's training completed within another state or at a Federal law
enforcement training center as meeting that state's basic police
officer certification or commissioning requirements will likewise
increase the interstate mobility of railroad police officers.
    Thus, FRA concludes this final rule will result in several non-
quantifiable benefits that allow railroads to more efficiently allocate
the railroad police officer workforce based upon employment needs.
Therefore, the final rule benefits workers because there is increased
worker mobility, and the final rule benefits railroads, because of the
increased flexibility and efficiency they have to allocate railroad
police officers.
    It is important to note the total number of railroad police
officers is not expected to change as a result of this final rule.
However, this final rule may result in a more stable labor market for
railroad police officers, with a lower employment turnover rate, since
railroad police officers can more easily relocate.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 13272; Certification

    FRA developed this final rule under Executive Order 13272 (``Proper
Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking'') and DOT's
procedures and policies to promote compliance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) to ensure potential impacts of
rules on small entities are properly considered.
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires an agency to review
regulations to assess their impact on small entities. An agency must
conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis unless it determines and
certifies that a rule is not expected to have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    This final rule will apply to all entities employing or contracting
for railroad police officers. Because the final rule does not impose
any substantive requirements on regulated entities (either large or
small), FRA estimates this rule imposes no costs on regulated entities.
Thus, because this final rule does not create any costs, it will not
result in greater costs per employee for small entities as compared to
large entities.
    FRA estimates there are fewer than 5 railroads that are both small
entities for purposes of this analysis, and that employ or contract for
railroad police officers. Moreover, because there are no costs
associated with this final rule, the economic impact on these small
entities is not significant.
1. Description of Regulated Entities and Impacts
    The ``universe'' of entities under consideration includes only
those small entities that can reasonably be expected to be directly
affected by this final rule. The only small entities potentially

affected by this final rule are small railroads that employ or contract
for railroad police officers.
    ``Small entity'' is defined in 5 U.S.C. 601 (Section 601). Section
601(6) defines ``small entity'' as having ``the same meaning as the
terms `small business', `small organization' and `small governmental
jurisdiction' '' as defined by Section 601. Section 601(3) defines
``small business'' as having the same meaning as ``small business
concern'' under Section 3 of the Small Business Act. Section 601(4)
defines ``small organization'' as ``any not-for-profit enterprise which
is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.''
Section 601(5) defines ``small governmental jurisdiction'' as
``governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school
districts, or special districts, with a population of less than fifty
thousand.''
    The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) stipulates ``size
standards'' for small entities. It provides that the largest a for-
profit railroad business firm may be (and still be classified as a
``small entity'') is 1,500 employees for ``Line-Haul Operating
Railroads'' and 500 employees for ``Short-Line Operating
Railroads.''\2\ Additionally, 5 U.S.C. 601(5) defines as ``small
entities'' governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, villages,
school districts, or special districts with populations less than
50,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``Table of Size Standards,'' U.S. Small Business
Administration, Jan. 31, 1996, 13 CFR part 121.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Federal agencies may adopt their own size standards for small
entities in consultation with SBA and in conjunction with public
comment. Under that authority, FRA has published a final statement of
agency policy formally establishing for FRA's regulatory purposes
``small entities'' or ``small businesses'' as railroads, contractors,
and hazardous materials shippers that meet the revenue requirements of
a Class III railroad as set forth in 49 CFR 1201.1-1 (which is $20
million or less in inflation-adjusted annual revenues, and commuter
railroads or small governmental jurisdictions that serve populations of
50,000 or less).\3\ FRA used this definition for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 49 CFR part 209, appendix C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FRA could not exactly quantify the number of entities that could be
impacted by this final rule if there was a burden. However, evidence
exists that, because of resource constraints, most Class III railroads
(small entities) do not employ railroad police officers. See ASLRRA
Aims to Help 560 Roads Address Hazmat Car Security, Progressive
Railroading, April 2009. Nevertheless, there may be commuter railroads
or small governmental jurisdictions that serve populations of 50,000 or
less that would be considered small entities and would be impacted by
this final rule with no associated burden. Although there is no
associated burden, FRA conservatively estimates this final rule will
impact approximately 30 railroads, five of which meet FRA's definition
of a ``small entity.''
    There are approximately 695 small railroads (as defined by revenue
size). Class III railroads do not report to the STB, and the precise
number of Class III railroads is difficult to ascertain due to
conflicting definitions, conglomerates, and even seasonal operations.
Potentially, all small railroads could be impacted by this final
regulation, but there is no reason to believe that any additional small
railroads are likely to employ or contract for railroad police
officers.
Significant Economic Impact Criteria
    Previously, FRA sampled small railroads and found that revenue
averaged approximately $4.7 million (not discounted) in 2006. One
percent of that average annual revenue per small railroad is $47,000.
FRA realizes that some railroads will have lower revenue than $4.7
million. FRA estimates that this rule will not result in any additional
expense to small railroads over the next ten years, as the final rule
does not require entities to comply with anything. That is, while this
final rule provides entities with relaxed constraints on how to employ
railroad police officers, this final rule does not introduce any new
requirements itself. Therefore, FRA concludes there is no expected
burden for this final rule so it will not have a significant impact on
the financial position of small entities, or on the small entity
segment of the railroad industry as a whole.
Substantial Number Criteria
    Because this final rule does not contain any provision requiring
action on the part of entities, either large or small, this final rule
will not impact a substantial number of small entities.
2. Certification
    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), FRA
certifies this final rule will not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this final rule are
being submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
The sections that contain the new and current information collection
requirements are duly designated, and the estimated time to fulfill
each requirement is as follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Total annual       Average time per    Total annual
       CFR Section/subject         Respondent universe       responses             response        burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
207.4--RR Notice to State          763 railroads......  35 notices.........  5 hours............             175
 Officials--Written notice of RR
 police officer's commission to
 each state in which the RR
 police officer shall protect the
 railroad's property, personnel,
 passengers, and cargo.
    --RR Copy of Written Notices   763 railroads......  35 records/copies..  10 minutes.........               6
     to State Officials.
207.6--Transfers--Application by   763 railroads......  30 state             1 hour.............              30
 RR police officer for new state                         certification
 certification/commission when                           applications.
 transferring primary employment
 or residence from one State to
 Another (New Provision).

207.7--Training--RR police         763 railroads......  30 trained RR        40 hours...........           1,200
 officer training successful                             police officers.
 completion at a state's police
 academy training program in one
 state recognized by other state
 (New Provision).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All estimates include the time for reviewing instructions;
searching existing data sources; gathering or maintaining the needed
data; and reviewing the information. For information or a copy of the
unchanged paperwork package submitted to OMB, contact Mr. Robert Brogan
at<PHONE_NUMBER> or Ms. Kimberly Toone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or via email at
the following addresses<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Organizations and individuals desiring to submit comments on the
collection of information requirements should direct them to the Office
of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Washington, DC 20503, Attention: FRA Desk Officer. Comments may also be
sent via email to the Office of Management and Budget at the following
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of
information requirements contained in this final rule between 30 and 60
days after publication of this document in the Federal Register.
Therefore, a comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect
if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication.
    FRA cannot impose a penalty on persons for violating information
collection requirements which do not display a current OMB control
number, if required. FRA intends to obtain current OMB control numbers
for any new information collection requirements resulting from this
rulemaking action prior to the effective date of the final rule. The
OMB control number, when assigned, will be announced by separate notice
in the Federal Register.

D. Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, Aug. 10, 1999),
requires FRA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by State and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies
that have federalism implications'' are defined in the Executive Order
to include regulations that have ``substantial direct effects 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, the agency
may not issue a regulation with federalism implications that imposes
substantial direct compliance costs and that is not required by
statute, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to
pay the direct compliance costs incurred by state and local
governments, or the agency consults with state and local government
officials early in the process of developing the regulation. Where a
regulation has federalism implications and preempts state law, the
agency seeks to consult with state and local officials in the process
of developing the regulation.
    This final rule has been analyzed consistent with the principles
and criteria in Executive Order 13132. FRA has determined this rule
does not have 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. This rule does not impose substantial direct compliance
costs on state and local governments. Therefore, the consultation and
funding requirements of Executive Order 13132 do not apply.

E. Environmental Impact

    FRA has evaluated this final rule consistent with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), other
environmental statutes, related regulatory requirements, and its
``Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts'' (FRA's Procedures)
(64 FR 28545, May 26, 1999). FRA has determined this final rule is
categorically excluded from detailed environmental review under section
4(c)(20) of FRA's NEPA Procedures, ``Promulgation of railroad safety
rules and policy statements that do not result in significantly
increased emissions of air or water pollutants or noise or increased
traffic congestion in any mode of transportation.'' See 64 FR 28547,
May 26, 1999. Categorical exclusions (CEs) are actions identified in an
agency's NEPA implementing procedures that do not normally have a
significant impact on the environment and therefore do not require
either an environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact
statement (EIS). See 40 CFR 1508.4.
    In analyzing the applicability of a CE, the agency must also
consider whether extraordinary circumstances are present that would
warrant a more detailed environmental review through the preparation of
an EA or EIS. Id. Consistent with section 4(c) and (e) of FRA's
Procedures, the agency has further concluded no extraordinary
circumstances exist with respect to this regulation that might trigger
the need for a more detailed environmental review. The purpose of this
rulemaking is to conform FRA's regulation on railroad police officers
to the statutory provisions of Section 11412 of the FAST Act which
provide additional flexibility for railroads to hire, employ, and train
railroad police officers than previously provided. FRA does not
anticipate any environmental impacts from this requirement and finds
that there are no extraordinary circumstances present in connection
with this final rule.

F. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)

    FRA has evaluated this final rule consistent with the principles
and criteria in Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments, dated November 6, 2000. The final rule
would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, would not impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian
tribal governments, and would not preempt tribal laws. Therefore, the
funding and consultation requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not
apply, and a tribal summary impact statement is not required.

G. Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice)

    Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, and DOT
Order 5610.2(a) (91 FR 27534, May 10, 2012) require DOT agencies to
achieve environmental justice as part of their mission by identifying
and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse
human health or

environmental effects, including interrelated social and economic
effects, of their programs, policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income populations. The DOT Order instructs DOT
agencies to address compliance with Executive Order 12898 and
requirements within the DOT Order in rulemaking activities, as
appropriate. FRA has evaluated this rule under Executive Order 12898
and the DOT Order and determined it would not cause disproportionately
high and adverse human health and environmental effects on minority
populations or low-income populations.

H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Under Section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub.
L. 104-4, 2 U.S.C. 1531), each Federal agency ``shall, unless otherwise
prohibited by law, assess the effects of Federal regulatory actions on
State, local, and tribal governments, and the private sector (other
than to the extent that such regulations incorporate requirements
specifically set forth in law).'' Section 202 of the Act (2 U.S.C.
1532) further requires that

before promulgating any general notice of proposed rulemaking that
is likely to result in the promulgation of any rule that includes
any Federal mandate that may result in expenditure by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector,
of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any 1
year, and before promulgating any final rule for which a general
notice of proposed rulemaking was published, the agency shall
prepare a written statement

detailing the effect on state, local, and tribal governments and the
private sector. This final rule will not result in the expenditure, in
the aggregate, of $100,000,000 or more (as adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year, and thus preparation of such a statement is
not required.

I. Energy Impact

    Executive Order 13211 requires Federal agencies to prepare a
Statement of Energy Effects for any ``significant energy action.'' 66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001. Under the Executive Order, a ``significant
energy action'' is defined as any action by an agency (normally
published in the Federal Register) that promulgates or is expected to
lead to the promulgation of a final rule or regulation, including
notices of inquiry, advance notices of proposed rulemaking, and notices
of proposed rulemaking: (1)(i) That is a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866 or any successor order, and (ii) is likely
to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or
use of energy; or (2) that is designated by the Administrator of the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy
action. FRA has evaluated this final rule consistent with Executive
Order 13211. FRA has determined this final rule is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. Consequently, FRA has determined this final rule is not a
``significant energy action'' within the meaning of Executive Order
13211.

J. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39, 19 U.S.C. 2501 et
seq.) prohibits Federal agencies from engaging in any standards setting
or related activities that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States. Legitimate domestic objectives, such as
safety, are not considered unnecessary obstacles. The statute also
requires consideration of international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards.
    FRA has assessed the potential effect of this final rule on foreign
commerce and believes its requirements are consistent with the Trade
Agreements Act of 1979. The requirements imposed relate to safety
standards, which, as noted, are not considered unnecessary obstacles to
trade.

K. Privacy Act

    Consistent with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides to, www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 207

    Law enforcement, Law enforcement officers, Railroad employees,
Railroad safety.

The Rule

    In consideration of the foregoing, FRA amends chapter II, subtitle
B of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 207--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 207 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 28101; 49 CFR 1.89.

0
2. Revise Sec.  207.1 to read as follows:

Sec.  207.1  Application.

    This part applies to all railroads as defined in 49 U.S.C. 20103.

0
3. Revise Sec.  207.2(a) to read as follows:

Sec.  207.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (a) Railroad police officer means a peace officer who is
commissioned in his or her state of legal residence or state of primary
employment and directly employed by or contracted by a railroad to
enforce state laws for the protection of railroad property, personnel,
passengers, and/or cargo.
* * * * *

0
4. Revise Sec.  207.3(b) to read as follows:

Sec.  207.3  Designation and commissioning.

* * * * *
    (b) Except as provided by Sec.  207.6, the designated railroad
police officer shall be commissioned by the railroad police officer's
state of legal residence or the railroad police officer's state of
primary employment.

0
5. Add Sec.  207.6 to read as follows:

Sec.  207.6  Transfers.

    (a) General. If a railroad police officer certified or commissioned
as a police officer under the laws of a state or jurisdiction transfers
primary employment or residence from the certifying or commissioning
state to another state or jurisdiction, then the railroad police
officer must apply to be certified or commissioned as a police officer
under the laws of the state of new primary employment or residence not
later than one (1) year after the date of transfer.
    (b) Interim period. During the period beginning on the date of
transfer and ending one year after the date of transfer, a railroad
police officer certified or commissioned as a police officer under the
laws of a state may enforce the laws of the new state or jurisdiction
in which the railroad police officer resides, to the same extent as
provided in Sec.  207.5(a).

0
6. Add Sec.  207.7 to read as follows:

Sec.  207.7  Training.

    (a) A state may consider an individual to have met that state's
basic police officer certification or commissioning requirements for
qualification as a railroad police officer under this section if that
individual:
    (1) Has successfully completed a program at a state-recognized
police training academy in another state or at a Federal law
enforcement training center; and
    (2) Is certified or commissioned as a police officer by the other
state.

    (b) Nothing in this section shall be construed as superseding or
affecting any state training requirements related to criminal law,
civil procedure, motor vehicle code, any other state law, or state-
mandated comparative or annual in-service training academy or Federal
law enforcement training center.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 1, 2016.
Amitabha Bose,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-29256 Filed 12-6-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 100 (Tuesday, May 26, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 30068]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12617]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14372-001]

Grand Coulee Project Hydroelectric Authority; Notice of Surrender
of Preliminary Permit

    Take notice that Grand Coulee Project Hydroelectric Authority,
permittee for the proposed Rocky Coulee Wasteway Hydroelectric Project,
has requested that its preliminary permit be terminated. The permit was
issued on July 11, 2012, and would have expired on June 30, 2015.\1\
The project would have been located on the Rocky Coulee Wasteway near
Moses Lake in Grant County, Washington.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 140 FERC ] 62,036 122 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The preliminary permit for Project No. 14372 will remain in effect
until the close of business, June 18, 2015. But, if the Commission is
closed on this day, then the permit remains in effect until the close
of business on the next day in which the Commission is open.\2\ New
applications for this site may not be submitted until after the permit
surrender is effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 18 CFR Sec.  385.2007(a)(2) (2014).

    Dated: May 19, 2015.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-12617 Filed 5-22-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P