[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 116 (Thursday, June 16, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36366-36369]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12942]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2022-0002-N-10]

Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment
Request

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

ACTION: Notice of information collection; request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) and its
implementing regulations, FRA seeks approval of the Information
Collection Request (ICRs) abstracted below. Before submitting these
ICRs to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval, FRA is
soliciting public comment on specific aspects of the activities
identified in the ICRs.

DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before
August 15, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed ICRs
should be submitted on regulations.gov to the docket, Docket No. FRA-
2022-0002. All comments received will be posted without change to the
docket, including any personal information provided. Please refer to
the assigned OMB control number in any correspondence submitted. FRA
will summarize comments received in response to this notice in a
subsequent notice and include them in its information collection
submission to OMB for approval.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Hodan Wells, Information
Collection Clearance Officer, at email: [email protected] or
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520, and its
implementing regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, require Federal agencies to
provide 60-days' notice to the public to allow comment on information
collection activities before seeking OMB approval of the activities.
See 44 U.S.C. 3506, 3507; 5 CFR 1320.8 through 1320.12. Specifically,
FRA invites interested parties to comment on the following ICRs
regarding: (1) whether the information collection activities are
necessary for FRA to properly execute its functions, including whether
the activities will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FRA's
estimates of the burden of the information collection activities,
including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used to
determine the estimates; (3) ways for FRA to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information being collected; and (4) ways
for FRA to minimize the burden of information collection activities on
the public, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology. See 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A); 5
CFR 1320.8(d)(1).
    FRA believes that soliciting public comment may reduce the
administrative and paperwork burdens associated with the collection of
information that Federal regulations mandate. In summary, FRA reasons
that comments received will advance three objectives: (1) reduce
reporting burdens; (2) organize information collection requirements in
a ``user-friendly'' format to improve the use of such information; and
(3) accurately assess the resources expended to retrieve and produce
information requested. See 44 U.S.C. 3501.
    The summaries below describe the ICRs that FRA will submit for OMB
clearance as the PRA requires:
    Title: Special Notice for Repairs.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0504.
    Abstract: Under 49 CFR part 216, FRA and State inspectors may issue
a Special Notice for Repairs to notify a railroad in writing of an
unsafe condition involving a locomotive, car, or track. The railroad
must notify FRA in writing when the equipment is returned to service or
the track is restored to a condition permitting operations at speeds
authorized for a higher class, specifying

the repairs completed. FRA and State inspectors use this information to
remove from service freight cars, passenger cars, and locomotives until
they can be restored to a serviceable condition. They also use this
information to reduce the maximum authorized speed on a section of
track until repairs can be made.
    In this 60-day notice, FRA made adjustments which decreased the
previously approved burden hours from 16 hours to 3 hours. For
instance:
     Under Sec.  216.15(b), the burden decreased from 13 hours
to .25 hour due to changes in the number of responses--from fifty (50)
form replies to one (1) form reply per year. FRA's estimate is based on
how infrequently these replies have been submitted to date.
     FRA anticipates zero submissions under Sec.  216.25 as
noted in the PRA table printed below.
    Type of Request: Extension without change (with changes in
estimates) of a currently approved collection.
    Affected Public: Businesses.
    Form(s): FRA F 6180.8; FRA F 6180.8A.
    Respondent Universe: 754 railroads.
    Frequency of Submission: On occasion.
    Reporting Burden:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Total cost
           Section                Respondent      Total annual     Average time    Total annual    equivalent in
                                   universe        responses      per  responses   burden hours     U.S. dollar
                                                (A)............  (B)............     (C = A * B)   (D = C * wage
                                                                                rates) \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
216.13(b)--Special Notice for  754 railroads..  5 form replies.  15 minutes.....            1.25           96.80
 Repairs: Locomotive--RR
 reply to special notice for
 repair informing FRA that
 affected locomotive is
 returned to service--FRA
 Form F 6180.8.
216.15(b)--Special Notice for  754 railroads..  1 form reply...  15 minutes.....             .25           19.36
 Repairs: Track--RR reply to
 special notice for repair
 informing FRA that affected
 track is restored to
 condition permitting
 operations at speeds
 authorized at higher speeds--
 FRA Form F 6180.8a.
216.21(b)--Notice of track     754 railroads..  1 letter.......  1 hour.........            1.00           77.44
 conditions: Letter from
 railroad to FRA track
 engineer that affected track
 has been repaired and is
 ready for re-inspection.
                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
216.25--Issuance of review                FRA anticipates zero submissions in this 3-year ICR period.
 and emergency order:
 Petition for review of order
 or letter stating track has
 been repaired.
                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total \2\................  754 railroads..  7 responses....  N/A............               3             194
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total Estimated Annual Responses: 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The dollar equivalent cost is derived from the Surface
Transportation Board's 2020 Full Year Wage A&B data series for
railroad workers. The wage rate of $77.44 per hour includes a 75-
percent overhead charge.
    \2\ Totals may not add due to rounding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total Estimated Annual Burden: 3 hours.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden Hour Dollar Cost Equivalent: $194.
    Title: Bridge Safety Standards.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0586.
    Abstract: The Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST
Act) (Pub. L. 114-94, Dec. 4, 2015), Section 11405, ``Bridge Inspection
Reports,'' provides a means for a State or a political subdivision of a
State to obtain a public version of a bridge inspection report
generated by a railroad for a bridge located within its respective
jurisdiction. While the FAST Act specifies that requests for such
reports are to be filed with the Secretary of Transportation, the
responsibility for fulfilling these requests is delegated to FRA.\3\
FRA developed a form titled ``Bridge Inspection Report Public Version
Request Form'' (FRA F 6180.167) to facilitate such requests by States
and their political subdivisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 49 CFR 1.89(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the collection of information set forth under 49 CFR
214.105(c) establishes standards and practices for safety net systems.
Safety nets and net installations must be drop-tested at the job site
after initial installation and before being used as a fall-protection
system, after major repairs, and at 6-month intervals if left at one
site. If a drop-test is not feasible and is not performed, then the
railroad or railroad contractor, or a designated certified person, must
provide written certification the net complies with the safety
standards under Sec.  214.105. FRA and State inspectors use the
information to enforce Federal regulations. The information maintained
at the job site promotes safe bridge worker practices while providing
flexibility at bridge work job sites.
    Furthermore, the collection of information set forth under 49 CFR
part 237 normalized and established Federal requirements for railroad
bridges.\4\ In particular, the collection of information is used by FRA
to confirm that railroads/track owners adopt and implement bridge
management programs to properly inspect, maintain, modify, and repair
all bridges that carry trains for which they are responsible.
Railroads/track owners must conduct annual inspections of railroad
bridges, as well as special inspections, which must be carried out if
natural or accidental events cause conditions that warrant such
inspections. Further, railroads/track owners must incorporate
provisions for internal audits into their bridge management programs
and must conduct internal audits of bridge inspection reports. FRA uses
the information collected to ensure that railroads/track owners meet
Federal

standards for bridge safety and comply with all the requirements of
part 237.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 75 FR 41281 (July 15, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this 60-day notice, FRA made several adjustments which increased
the previously approved burden hours from 4,858 hours to 34,616 hours.
For instance:
     Under Sec.  237.31, the burden increased by 360 hours
because FRA anticipates it will receive 15 bridge management programs.
     Under Sec.  237.109, FRA corrected the number of bridge
inspection reports anticipated from 15,450 to 100,000 reports which
consequently increased the burden by 21,137 hours.
     Under Sec.  237.109, FRA updated this burden which added
8,333 hours.
     FRA found that the burden associated with Sec.  237.109(g)
is covered under Sec.  237.109. Thus, FRA removed the duplicative
burden of 25 hours and included an explanatory note in the PRA table
printed below.
    Type of Request: Extension without change (with changes in
estimates) of a currently approved collection.
    Affected Public: Businesses (railroads and track owners), States,
the District of Columbia (DC), and political subdivisions of States.
    Form(s): FRA F 6180.167.
    Respondent Universe: 784 track owners, 50 States and DC, and 200
political subdivisions of States.
    Frequency of Submission: On occasion and annual.
    Reporting Burden:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Total cost
                                  Respondent      Total annual     Average time    Total annual    equivalent in
         Section \5\               universe        responses      per  responses   burden hours     U.S. dollar
                                                                                \6\
                                                (A)............  (B)............     (C = A * B)   (D = C * wage
                                                                                rates)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAST Act, Section 11405--      50 states and    50 forms or      5 minutes......            4.17          340.73
 Written request or filing of   DC and 200       written
 Form FRA F 6180.167 ``Bridge   state            requests.
 Inspection Report Public       political
 Version Request Form'' by      subdivisions.
 State or a political
 subdivision of a State.
FAST Act, Section 11405--      754 railroads..  47 reports.....  1 hour.........           47.00        3,639.68
 Submission of public version
 of bridge inspection report
 from railroads to FRA.
214.105(c)(4)--Fall            754 railroads..  3 written        5 minutes......             .25           19.36
 protection systems standards                    certification
 and practices--Safety net                       records.
 systems certification
 records.
237.3(b)--Notifications to     784 track        10               2 hours........           20.00        1,548.80
 FRA of assignment of bridge    owners.          notifications.
 responsibility and signed
 statement by assignee
 concerning bridge
 responsibility.
237.9--Waivers...............  784 track        .33 petition...  4 hours........            1.32          102.22
                                owners.
237.31--Adoption of bridge     784 track        15 programs....  24 hours.......          360.00       27,878.40
 management programs--          owners.
 Existing and new track
 owners.
237.57--Designation of         784 track        200 records....  15 minutes.....           50.00        3,872.00
 qualified individuals.         owners.
                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
237.71--Determination of       The burden associated with this requirement is covered above under Sec.   237.31.
 bridge load capacities.
                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
237.73--Protection of bridges  784 track        100 written      2 hours........          200.00       15,488.00
 from over-weight and over-     owners.          instructions.
 dimension loads--Issuance of
 instructions to railroad
 personnel by track owner.
                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
237.109--Bridge inspection     784 track        100,000          15 minutes.....       25,000.00    1,936,000.00
 records--Reports and records.  owners.          inspection
                                                 reports and
                                                 records.
                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--(g) Report of deficient           The burden associated with this requirement is covered above under Sec.
 condition on a bridge.                                             237.109.
                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
237.111--Review of bridge      784 track        100,000 reviews  5 minutes......        8,333.33      645,333.08
 inspection reports by          owners.
 railroad bridge supervisors.
237.155--Documents & records-- 784 track        5 electronic     80 hours.......          400.00       30,976.00
 Establishment of information   owners.          recordkeeping
 technology security systems                     systems.
 for electronic recordkeeping.
--(a)(4) Training of track     784 track        50 information   4 hours........          200.00       15,488.00
 owner's employees who use      owners.          system
 the system on the proper use                    trainings.
 of the electronic
 recordkeeping system.
                                                                                -------------------------------
    Total \7\................  784 track        200,480          N/A............          34,616       2,680,686
                                owners, 50       responses.
                                States and DC,
                                and 200
                                political
                                subdivisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total Estimated Annual Responses: 200,480.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The burden associated with Sec.  214.105(c)(4), formerly
covered under OMB Control No. 2130-0535, is now combined with the
burden under OMB Control No. 2130-0586.
    \6\ For State respondents, the dollar equivalent cost is derived
from the Bureau of Labor Statistics data for management occupations,
NAICS 99920--State Government, excluding schools and hospitals, for
State government employees. To calculate the mean hourly wage of
$46.69 for this category of workers, FRA included a 75-percent
charge for overhead costs. The calculation is $46.69 per hour * 1.75
= $81.71. The Web address for this data is: https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_999200.htm#11-0000. Additionally, for railroad and
track owner respondents, the dollar equivalent cost is derived from
the Surface Transportation Board's 2020 Full Year Wage A&B data
series for railroad workers. The wage rate of $77.44 per hour
includes a 75-percent overhead charge.
    \7\ Totals may not add due to rounding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total Estimated Annual Burden: 34,616 hours.
    Total Estimated Annual Burden Hour Dollar Cost Equivalent:
$2,680,686.
    FRA informs all interested parties that it may not conduct or
sponsor, and a respondent is not required to respond to, a collection
of information that does not display a currently valid OMB control
number.

(Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520)

Brett A. Jortland,
Deputy Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2022-12942 Filed 6-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 62 (Monday, April 1, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19421-19424]
[FR Doc No: 2013-07384]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0082; FRL-9795-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Transportation Conformity Regulations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the
State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia. This revision amends Virginia's transportation conformity
requirements in order to be consistent with EPA's revised
transportation conformity requirements. EPA is approving these
revisions in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act
(CAA).

DATES: This rule is effective on May 31, 2013 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse written comment by May 1, 2013. If EPA
receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that
the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2013-0082, by one of the following methods:
    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2013-0082, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
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-R03-OAR-
2013-0082. 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 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 EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured 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, 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 EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, 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 electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the Commonwealth's
submittal are available at the Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality, 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Becoat,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Transportation conformity is required under section 176(c) of the
CAA to ensure that Federally supported highway, transit projects, and
other activities are consistent with (conform to) the purpose of the
SIP. Conformity currently applies to areas that are designated
nonattainment and those redesignated to attainment after 1990
(maintenance areas), with plans developed under section 175A of the CAA
for the following transportation related criteria pollutants: ozone,
fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and coarse particulate
matter (PM10), carbon monoxide (CO), and nitrogen dioxide
(NO2). Conformity to the purpose of the SIP means that
transportation activities will not cause new air quality violations,
worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the relevant
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).
    On March 14, 2012 (77 FR 14979), EPA promulgated various
administrative amendments to the Federal transportation regulation. As
a result of this rulemaking, under 40 CFR 51.390, Virginia is required
to submit a SIP revision that establishes conformity criteria and
procedures consistent with the transportation conformity regulation
promulgated in 40 CFR part 93.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

    In order to implement the Federal transportation conformity
requirements, the Commonwealth of Virginia's regulation must reflect
the recent revisions made to the Federal regulations. On October 1,
2012, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ)
submitted a revision to its SIP for Transportation Conformity purposes.
The SIP revision consists of amendments to the Commonwealth Regulation
for Transportation Conformity (9VAC5 Chapter 151). This SIP revision
addresses provisions of the EPA Conformity Rule required under 40 CFR
part 93. The revision amends 9VAC5-151-40, entitled ``General,'' in
order to change the date of the specific version of the provisions
incorporated by reference from 40 CFR part 93 (2010) in effect July 1,
2010 to 40 CFR part 93 (2012) in effect July 1, 2012. The SIP

revision also amends 9VAC5-151-70, entitled ``Consultation,'' in order
to change conformity tests and methodologies for isolated rural
nonattainment and maintenance areas as required by 40 CFR
93.109(n)(2)(iii) to those required by 40 CFR 93.109(g)(2)(iii).
    EPA's review of Virginia's SIP revisions indicates that it is
consistent with EPA's Conformity Rule. Virginia met the requirements
under 40 CFR 51.390 to establish conformity criteria and procedures
consistent with the transportation conformity regulation promulgated by
EPA under 40 CFR part 93. In order to implement the Federal
transportation conformity requirements, Virginia's regulation must
reflect the most recent rulemaking promulgated by EPA on March 14, 2012
(77 FR 14979).

III. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia

    In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to
certain conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit)
``privilege'' for voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a
regulated entity. The legislation further addresses the relative burden
of proof for parties either asserting the privilege or seeking
disclosure of documents for which the privilege is claimed. Virginia's
legislation also provides, subject to certain conditions, for a penalty
waiver for violations of environmental laws when a regulated entity
discovers such violations pursuant to a voluntary compliance evaluation
and voluntarily discloses such violations to the Commonwealth and takes
prompt and appropriate measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's
Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-
1198, provides a privilege that protects from disclosure documents and
information about the content of those documents that are the product
of a voluntary environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not
extend to documents or information (1) That: are generated or developed
before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2)
are prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) demonstrate a
clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or
environment; or (4) are required by law.
    On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the
Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the
Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege
to documents and information ``required by law,'' including documents
and information ``required by Federal law to maintain program
delegation, authorization or approval,'' since Virginia must ``enforce
Federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less
stringent than their Federal counterparts * * *.'' The opinion
concludes that ``[r]egarding Sec.  10.1-1198, therefore, documents or
other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one of
these programs could not be privileged because such documents and
information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required
by Federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or
approval.''
    Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that
``[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by Federal
law,'' any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a
state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute,
regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from
administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12,
1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute
inapplicable to enforcement of any Federally authorized programs, since
``no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal
penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with
Federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.''
    Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and
Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its
program consistent with the Federal requirements. In any event, because
EPA has also determined that a state audit privilege and immunity law
can affect only state enforcement and cannot have any impact on Federal
enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under
the CAA, including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to
enforce the requirements or prohibitions of the State plan,
independently of any State enforcement effort. In addition, citizen
enforcement under section 304 of the CAA is likewise unaffected by
this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity law.

IV. Final Action

    EPA is approving the Virginia SIP revision for transportation
conformity, which was submitted on October 1, 2012. EPA is publishing
this rule without prior proposal because EPA views this as a
noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comment. However,
in the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal Register, EPA is
publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to
approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are filed. This rule will
be effective on May 31, 2013 without further notice unless EPA receives
adverse comment by May 1, 2013. If EPA receives adverse comment, EPA
will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the
public that the rule will not take effect. EPA will address all public
comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA
will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time. Please note that if
EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of
the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are
not the subject of an adverse comment.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or

safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by May 31, 2013. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final
rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel
notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed
rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an
immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so
that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in
the proposed rulemaking.
    This action to approve the Virginia Transportation Conformity
Regulation may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See CAA section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

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

    Dated: March 20, 2013.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for 40 CFR part 52 continues to read as
follows:

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

Subpart VV--Virginia

0
2. In Sec.  52.2420, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entries for Sections 5-151-40 and 5-151-70. The revised text reads
as follows:

Sec.  52.2420  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                                     EPA-Approved Virginia Regulations and Statutes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                State
          State citation                Title/subject      effective date             EPA approval date              Explanation [former SIP citation]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Chapter 151 (9 VAC 5) Transportation Conformity
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Part III Criteria and Procedures for Making Conformity Determinations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5-151-40..........................  General..............         8/15/12  4/1/13 [Insert page number where the    .....................................
                                                                            document begins].

                                                                      * * * * * * *
5-151-70..........................  Consultation.........         8/15/12  4/1/13 [Insert page number where the    Section D.1.f. is amended.
                                                                            document begins].

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

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-07384 Filed 3-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 3 (Friday, January 4, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 669-671]
[FR Doc No: 2012-31648]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2012-1055]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Hampton Harbor Channel Obstruction, Hampton Harbor;
Hampton, NH

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
navigable waters of Hampton Harbor in the vicinity of Hampton Harbor
Bridge due to a partially submerged dredge excavator obstructing the
channel. This temporary final rule is necessary to protect vessels
transiting the area from the obstruction. This zone is intended to
prohibit vessels from coming within 100 yards of point 42 53'763'' N,
070 48'986'' W until the obstruction is cleared. Persons or vessels may
not enter into this zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port,
Sector Northern New England.

DATES: This rule is effective in the CFR on January 4, 2013 until
January 31, 2013. This rule is effective with actual notice for
purposes of enforcement on November 30, 2012. This rule will remain in
effect through January 31, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
[USCG-2012-1055]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also
visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Ensign Elizabeth V. Morris, Waterways Management Division
at Coast Guard Sector Northern New England, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Regulatory History and Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this final rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision
authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to

comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are
``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.''
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists
for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) with respect
to this rule because doing so would be impracticable and contrary to
the public interest. The Coast Guard was notified of the obstruction
immediately upon its occurrence late in the evening on November 29,
2012 but this was insufficient time to publish an NPRM. Thus, delaying
the effective date of this rule to wait for a comment period to run
would be both impracticable and contrary to the public interest because
this regulation is necessary to ensure the immediate safety of users of
the waterway.
    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. For the same reasons discussed in
the preceding paragraph, waiting for a 30 day notice period to run
would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the temporary rule is 33 U.S.C. 1231, 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; Public Law 107-295, 116
Stat. 2064; and Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1,
which collectively authorize the Coast Guard to define safety zones.
    The safety zone is being issued to ensure the safety of persons and
vessels in Hampton Harbor within the proximity of the partially
submerged excavator.

C. Discussion of the Final Rule

    On the evening of November 29, 2012, a dredging barge was working
in the vicinity of the Hampton Harbor Bridge. During operations, a
cable snapped and the excavator on board the barge fell into the water
within the channel. The excavator is now partially submerged near the
bridge. This safety zone is required to protect persons and vessels
from the safety hazards associated with this obstruction to the
channel. This safety zone will encompass all waters within a 100 yard
radius of center point 42 53'763'' N, 070 48'986'' W and will be
effective immediately and until January 31, 2013.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 14 of these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    The economic effect of this rule will not be significant for the
following reasons: The safety zone will be of limited duration. Vessels
may be authorized to transit the zone with permission of the Captain of
the Port, Sector Northern New England. Additionally, maritime
advisories will be broadcast during the duration of the enforcement
period.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The 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.
    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this 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 rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    This rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit
the safety zone. However, this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities due to the
time of year in which this rule takes place and advance notifications
will be made to the local community by marine information broadcasts.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

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

6. Protest Activities

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

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or

more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this
preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

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

9. Civil Justice Reform

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

10. Protection of Children

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

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

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

13. Technical Standards

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

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1,
paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction. This rule involves creation of a
temporary safety zone for a limited period of time. An environmental
analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion determination will be
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and 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:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C.
191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116
Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T01-1055 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T01-1055  Safety Zone; Hampton Harbor Channel Obstruction,
Hampton Harbor; Hampton, NH.

    (a) Location. All navigable waters from surface to bottom within a
100 yard radius of position 42 53'763'' N, 070 48'986'' W.
    (b) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR
165.23 apply. During the enforcement period, entry into, transiting,
mooring, anchoring or remaining within this safety zone is prohibited
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or his designated
representatives.
    (2) This temporary safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic,
except as may be permitted by the Captain of the Port or his designated
on-scene patrol personnel. Vessel operators given permission to enter
or operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to
them by the Captain of the Port or his designated representatives.
    (3) Persons and vessels may request permission to enter the Safety
Zone by contacting the Captain of the Port or the Captain of the Port's
on-scene representative on VHF-16 or via phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) The ``designated representative'' is any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been designated by the
Captain of the Port to act on his behalf. The on-scene representative
may be on a Coast Guard vessel, a Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel, or
onboard a local or state agency vessel that is authorized to act in
support of the Coast Guard. Additionally, the Coast Guard Auxiliary may
be present to inform vessel operators of this regulation.
    (5) Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by siren, radio,
flashing light or other means, the operator of the vessel must proceed
as directed.

    Dated: November 30, 2012.
B. S. Gilda,
Captain, U. S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port, Sector Northern
New England.
[FR Doc. 2012-31648 Filed 1-3-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: December 13, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 239)]
[Notices]
[Page 70907]
[DOCID:fr13de07-103]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

Federal Register citation of previous announcement:  72 FR 69258,
December 7, 2007.

Status:  Open Meeting.

Place:  100 F Street, NW., Washington, DC.

Date and time of previously announced meeting:  Tuesday, December 11,
2007.

Change in the meeting:  Deletion of an Item.
    The following item was not considered during the Open Meeting on
Tuesday, December 11, 2007:

    Whether to approve the 2008 budget of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board and will consider the related annual
accounting support fee for the Board under Section 109 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed,
please contact the Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 11, 2007.
Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-24213 Filed 12-12-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P