[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 94 (Monday, May 16, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 30300]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11437]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 10934-000]

William B. Ruger, Jr.; Notice of Existing Licensee's Failure To
File Notice of Intent To File a Subsequent License Application

    By April 30, 2016, William B. Ruger, Jr., the existing licensee for
the Sugar River II Project No. 10934 was required to file a notice of
intent to file an application for a subsequent license. The existing
license for Project No. 10934 expires on April 30, 2021.
    The 200-kilowatt (kW) project is located on the Sugar River in
Sullivan County, New Hampshire. No federal lands are affected.
    The principal project works consist of: (1) A 44-foot-long, 10-
foot-high concrete dam; (2) a 1.4-acre impoundment; (3) a rectangular
intake; (4) a 650-foot-long, 7-foot diameter steel penstock; (5) a
powerhouse containing one 200-kW turbine-generator unit; (6) a 75-foot-
long transmission line; and (7) appurtenant facilities.
    Pursuant to section 16.19(b) of the Commission's regulations, an
existing licensee with a minor license or a license for a minor part of
a hydroelectric project must file a notice of intent pursuant to
section 16.6(b).
    Pursuant to section 16.6(b) of the Commission's regulations, in
order to notify the Commission whether or not a licensee intends to
file an application for new license, the licensee must file with the
Commission a letter that contains an unequivocal statement of the
licensee's intention to file or not to file an application for a new
license.
    William B. Ruger, Jr. has not filed a notice of intent to file an
application for a subsequent license for this project.
    Pursuant to section 16.23(b) of the Commission's regulations, an
existing licensee of a water power project that fails to file a notice
of intent pursuant to section 16.6(b) shall be deemed to have filed a
notice of intent indicating that it does not intend to file an
application for subsequent license.
    Pursuant to section 16.20 of the Commission's regulations,
applications for subsequent license (except from the existing licensee
which is prohibited from filing) must be filed with the Commission at
least 24 months prior to the expiration of the existing license.
Applications for license for this project must be filed by April 30,
2019. Questions concerning this notice should be directed to Steve
Kartalia at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: May 9, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-11437 Filed 5-13-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 192 (Wednesday, October 5, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60389-60390]
[FR Doc No: 2022-21611]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP22-1244-000.
    Applicants: Carlsbad Gateway, LLC.
    Description: Petition for Approval of Settlement of Carlsbad
Gateway, LLC.
    Filed Date: 9/26/22.
    Accession Number: 20220926-5118.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 10/11/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-1266-000.
    Applicants: Energ[iacute]a de Baja California, S. de R.L. de C.V.,
ENERGIA DE BAJA CALIFORNIA, S, DE, RL DE CV.
    Description: Complaint of Energ[iacute]a Azteca X, S.A. de C.V. and
Energ[iacute]a de Baja California, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. North Baja
Pipeline, LLC.
    Filed Date: 9/29/22.
    Accession Number: 20220929-5072.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 10/04/22.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5
p.m. eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 29, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-21611 Filed 10-4-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: April 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 80)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 21981-21983]
[DOCID:fr27ap10-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 30719 ; Amdt. No. 3369]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or revokes Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports.
These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or
revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National
Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational
facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements.
These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective April 27, 2010. The compliance date for
each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of April 27, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:
    For Examination--
    1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located;
    3. The National Flight Procedures Office, 6500 South MacArthur
Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_
federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    Availability_All SIAPs are available online free of charge. Visit
nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from:
    1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA-200), FAA Headquarters
    Building, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; or
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harry J. Hodges, Flight Procedure
Standards Branch (AFS-420) Flight Technologies and Programs Division,
Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082 Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the
appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data
Center (FDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated
by reference in the amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and
Sec.  97.20 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
    The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a
special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register
expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory
text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts
printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP contained in FAA form documents is
unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections and
specifies the types of SIAP and the corresponding effective dates. This
amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure
and the amendment number.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP as amended in the transmittal. For safety and
timeliness of change considerations, this amendment incorporates only
specific changes contained for each SIAP as modified by FDC/P-NOTAMs.
    The SIAPs, as modified by FDC P-NOTAM, and contained in this
amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to
SIAPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific conditions
existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in this rule
have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an emergency
action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published
aeronautical charts. The circumstances which created the need for all
these SIAP amendments requires making them effective in less than 30
days.
    Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs
and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure
before adopting these SIAPs are impracticable and contrary to the
public interest and, where applicable, that good cause exists for
making these SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.

Conclusion

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR part 97

    Air Traffic Control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, and
Navigation (Air).

    Issued in Washington, DC on April 2, 2010.
John M. Allen,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations, Part 97, 14 CFR part 97, is amended by amending
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, effective at 0901 UTC on the
dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120,
44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:
0
By amending: Sec.  97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or
TACAN; Sec.  97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; Sec.
97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; Sec.  97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV;
Sec.  97.31 RADAR SIAPs; Sec.  97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and Sec.  97.35 COPTER
SIAPs, Identified as follows:

* * * Effective Upon Publication

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      AIRAC date            State               City               Airport          FDC No.      FDC Date                      Subject
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6-May-10.............  MI               DETROIT............  WILLOW RUN.........       0/0421      3/23/10  ILS RWY 23L, AMDT 7B
6-May-10.............  MI               ROGERS CITY........  PRESQUE ISLE COUNTY       0/0426      3/23/10  NDB RWY 27, AMDT 3
6-May-10.............  MN               APPLETON...........  APPLETON MUNI......       0/0494      3/23/10  TAKEOFF MINIMUMS AND OBSTACLE DP, ORIG
6-May-10.............  MN               BIGFORK............  BIGFORK MUNICIPAL..       0/0496      3/23/10  TAKEOFF MINIMUMS AND OBSTACLE DP, ORIG
6-May-10.............  MI               EATON RAPIDS.......  SKYWAY ESTATES.....       0/0497      3/23/10  VOR OR GPS A, AMDT 1

6-May-10.............  MI               ALPENA.............  ALPENA COUNTY RGNL.       0/0498      3/23/10  RNAV (GPS) RWY 1, ORIG
6-May-10.............  MI               WEST BRANCH........  WEST BRANCH               0/0501      3/23/10  VOR RWY 27, ORIG-D
                                                              COMMUNITY.
6-May-10.............  MN               MINNEAPOLIS........  AIRLAKE............       0/0517      3/23/10  ILS OR LOC RWY 30, ORIG-D
6-May-10.............  MI               ALPENA.............  ALPENA COUNTY RGNL.       0/0520      3/23/10  VOR RWY 1, AMDT 14B
6-May-10.............  FL               BOCA RATON.........  BOCA RATON.........       0/0879      3/23/10  VOR/DME A, AMDT 1
6-May-10.............  GA               CORDELE............  CRISP COUNTY--            0/1012      3/17/10  LOC RWY 10, ORIG-B
                                                              CORDELE.
6-May-10.............  MI               GAYLORD............  GAYLORD RGNL.......       0/1035      3/17/10  ILS OR LOC RWY 9, ORIG-A
6-May-10.............  MI               TROY...............  OAKLAND/TROY.......       0/1120      3/23/10  VOR OR GPS A, AMDT 3
6-May-10.............  AZ               GOODYEAR...........  PHOENIX GOODYEAR          0/7677      3/23/10  RNAV (GPS) RWY 3, ORIG
                                                              MUNI.
6-May-10.............  NV               RENO...............  RENO/TAHOE INTL....       0/7823      3/23/10  ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 34L, ORIG-A
6-May-10.............  NV               RENO...............  RENO/TAHOE INTL....       0/7824      3/23/10  RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 16L, AMDT 1
6-May-10.............  NV               RENO...............  RENO/TAHOE INTL....       0/7825      3/23/10  RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 16R, AMDT 1
6-May-10.............  DE               LAUREL.............  LAUREL.............       0/9666      3/23/10  GPS A, ORIG
6-May-10.............  MD               BALTIMORE..........  BALTIMORE-                0/9668      3/23/10  VOR RWY 10, AMDT 17
                                                              WASHINGTON INTL
                                                              THURGOOD MARSHALL.
6-May-10.............  GA               BLAKELY............  EARLY COUNTY.......       0/9324       3/8/10  THIS NOTAM PUBLISHED IN TL 10-09 IS HEREBY
                                                                                RESCINDED IN ITS ENTIRETY RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                                                23, AMDT 1
3-Jun-10.............  VT               BARRE/MONTPELIER...  EDWARD F. KNAPP           0/1764      3/24/10  ILS OR LOC RWY 17, AMDT 6
                                                              STATE.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2010-8834 Filed 4-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 206 (Thursday, October 28, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 59675-59678]
[FR Doc No: 2021-23255]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket Number USCG-2021-0794]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulation; Crown Bay, Charlotte Amalie, U.S.
Virgin Islands

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a temporary special
local

regulation for the St. Thomas Lighted Boat Parade marine event for
certain navigable waters of Crown Bay, Haulover Cut, and Charlotte
Amalie Harbor, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. This action is
necessary to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment
from potential hazards created by the lighted boat parade. Entry of
vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically
authorized by the Captain of the Port San Juan.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before November 29, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2021-0794 using the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Commander Christopher O'Connor, Sector San
Juan Prevention Department, Waterways Management Division U.S. Coast
Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

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

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On July 13, 2021, the St. Thomas/St. John Chamber of Commerce
notified the Coast Guard that it would be conducting a Christmas
Lighted Boat Parade from 6:30 to 9 p.m., on December 17, 2021. The
lighted boat parade will begin in Crown Bay, move east through Haulover
Cay, reach the Charlotte Amalie Harbor and then back to the original
point. Hazards from the lighted boat parade include accidental
collision with other participants' vessels or marine species due to
limited visibility. The Captain of the Port San Juan (COTP) has
determined that potential hazards associated with marine parade event
will pose a safety concern for any persons and vessels within the
regulated area.
    The purpose of this action is to ensure safety of the event
participants, vessels and the marine environment in the navigable
waters of Crown Bay, Haulover Clay and Charlotte Amalie Harbor, St.
Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI), during the St. Thomas Lighted Boat
Parade. The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under authority in
46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231).

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The COTP is proposing to establish a temporary special local
regulation on certain navigable waters of the Crown Bay, Haulover Cut,
and Charlotte Amalie Harbor, St. Thomas, USVI during the St. Thomas
Lighted Boat Parade from 6:30 p.m. through 9:00 p.m., on December 17,
2021. The regulated area will encompass all waters within a 100-foot
radius of participating vessels, beginning with the lead vessel, ending
with the last participating vessel, and at all times extending 100-feet
on either side of the parade vessels. The parade route consist of a
course that starts at Crown Bay Marina in potion 18[deg]19'986'' N,
64[deg]57'088'' W; proceeds thence east through Haulover Cut, thence
northeast through Cay Bay, thence east towards the Coast Guard Base in
Kings Warf and thence back through the same route to the beginning
position. All coordinates are North American Datum 1983. The duration
of the zone is intended to ensure the safety of vessels and navigable
waters of Crown Bay, Haulover Clay and Charlotte Amalie Harbor, St.
Thomas, USVI before, during, and after the scheduled 6:30 p.m. until 9
p.m. lighted boat parade. All persons and non-participating vessels are
prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or
remaining within the regulated area without obtaining permission from
the COTP or a designated representative. The regulatory text we are
proposing appears at the end of this document.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM
has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and time-of-day of the regulated area. The
regulated area will affect a small-designated area of Crown Bay,
Haulover Cut, and St. Thomas Harbor, St. Thomas, USVI, during the event
and thus is limited in scope. The temporary special local regulation
will be enforced for only a total period of 2.5 hours and thus is
limited in time, and during the evening when vessel traffic is normally
low. Although persons and vessels will not be able to enter, transit
through, anchor in, or remain within the zone without authorization
from the Captain of the Port San Juan or a designated representative,
they may operate in the surrounding area during the enforcement period.
The rule will allow vessels to seek permission to enter the regulated
area. Persons and vessels may still enter, transit through, anchor in,
or remain within the regulated area during the enforcement period if
authorized by the Captain of the Port San Juan or a designated
representative. Moreover, the Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast
Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone, and the
rule would allow vessels to seek permission to enter the regulated
area.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule
would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment
(see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to
what degree this rule would economically affect it.

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the proposed rule
would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please call or email the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not
retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this
proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination 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 proposed rule involves a
regulated area in conjunction with a regatta or marine parade to ensure
the safety of vessels, spectators, and the public during the event
lasting only 2.5 hours that will prohibit entry within 100-ft radius of
participating vessels beginning with the lead vessel, ending with the
last participating vessel, and at all times extending 100-feet on
either side of the parade vessels during the Lighted Boat Parade.
Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review
under paragraph L61 of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual
023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A preliminary Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket.
For instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of
this preamble. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.

G. Protest Activities

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

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through
the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG- 2021-0794 in the
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment
option. If you cannot submit your material by using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for alternate
instructions.
    Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting &
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following
instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. We review all comments received, but we will only
post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may
choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that
we receive.
    Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we
post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal
information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions
to the docket in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is
proposing to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGAGLE WATERS

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

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70041; 33 CFR 1.05-1.

0
2. Add Sec.  100.T799-0945 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.T799-0945   Special Local Regulation Safety zones; St. Thomas
Lighted Boat Parade, Crown Bay, Haulover Cut and Charlotte Amalie
Harbor, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.

    (a) Regulated Area. The following area is a special local
regulation: All waters within a 100-foot radius in front of the lead
parade vessel, 100-feet behind the

last participating parade vessel, and at all times extending 100-feet
on either side of participating parade vessels. The St. Thomas Lighted
Boat Parade consists of a course that starts at Crown Bay Marina in
position 18[deg]19'986'' N, 64[deg]57'088'' W; proceeds thence east
through Haulouver Cut, thence northeast through Cay Bay, thence east
towards the Coast Guard Base in Kings Wharf and thence west back
through the same route to the beginning position. All coordinates are
North American Datum 1983.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section--
    Designated representative means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander,
including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer
operating a Coast Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer
designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port San Juan (COTP) in
the enforcement of the regulations in this section.
    Participant means all persons and vessels registered with the event
sponsor as participants in the race.
    (c) Regulations.
    (1) All persons and non-participant vessels are prohibited from
entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the
regulated area unless authorized by the COTP San Juan or a designated
representative.
    (2) Persons and vessels may request authorization to enter, transit
through, anchor in, or remain within the regulated areas by contacting
the COTP San Juan by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a designated
representative via VHF radio on channel 16. If authorization is granted
by the COTP San Juan or a designated representative, all persons and
vessels, receiving such authorization must comply with the instructions
of the COTP San Juan or a designated representative.
    (3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated areas by
Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene
designated representatives.
    (d) Enforcement Period. This rule will be enforced from 6:30 p.m.
until 9:00 p.m., on December 17, 2021, unless sooner terminated by the
COTP San Juan.

Gregory H. Magee
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Juan.
[FR Doc. 2021-23255 Filed 10-27-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 6, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 9431]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04497]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0273]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway,
West Palm Beach, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations; request for
comments, extension.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the Flagler Memorial (SR A1A) Bridge,
mile 1021.8, the Royal Park (SR 704) Bridge, mile 1022.6, and the
Southern Boulevard (SR 700/80) Bridge, mile 1024.7, across the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, at West Palm Beach, Florida. This deviation will
extend the test to change the drawbridge operation schedules to
determine whether permanent changes to the schedules are needed. This
deviation allows the Flagler Memorial, Royal Park and Southern
Boulevard Bridges to operate on alternative schedules when the
President of the United States, members of the First Family, or other
persons under the protection of the Secret Service visit Mar-a-Lago.
This deviation is necessary to accommodate the increase in vehicular
traffic when the presidential motorcade is in transit.

DATES: This deviation is effective without actual notice from March 6,
2018 to 11:59 p.m. on May 31, 2018. For purposes of enforcement, this
deviation is effective from 8 a.m. on February 27, 2018 to March 6,
2018.
    Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before May 7, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2017-0273 using Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this test
deviation, call or email LT Ruth Sadowitz, Coast Guard Sector Miami,
FL, Waterways Management Division, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    On August 17, 2017, the Coast Guard published a notice of deviation
from drawbridge regulation with request for comments in the Federal
Register (82 FR 39019) to test proposed changes. Three comments were
received, which were in favor of the regulation changes. Due to
unanticipated delays in processing this proposed regulatory change, the
Coast Guard finds it necessary to extend the test deviation to allow
additional time for public comment. The changes to the operating
schedules proposed in this deviation will coincide with the
establishment of the proposed Presidential Security Zone (see 82 FR
28036).
    When the President of the United States, members of the First
Family, or other persons under the protection of the Secret Service
visit Mar-a-Lago, drawbridge openings have caused traffic backups in
the West Palm Beach area. The increase in traffic congestion occurs
when the presidential motorcade is in transit, which closes the
Southern Boulevard Bridge to vehicle and vessel traffic. This action
requires through traffic to use the Flagler Memorial and Royal Park
Bridges. The Mayor of Palm Beach has asked the Coast Guard and the
bridge owner, Florida Department of Transportation, to test a change to
the operating regulations of those bridges.
    During this temporary deviation, the Flagler Memorial Bridge is
allowed to remain closed to navigation from 2:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. with
the exception of a once an hour opening at 2:15 p.m., 3:15 p.m., 4:15
p.m. and 5:15 p.m., weekdays only, if vessels are requesting an
opening. The Royal Park Bridge is allowed to remain closed to
navigation from 2:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. with the exception of a once an
hour opening at 2:30 p.m., 3:30 p.m., 4:30 p.m. and 5:30 p.m., weekdays
only, if vessels are requesting an opening. At all other times the
bridges will operate per their normal schedules, published in 33 CFR
117.261(u) and (v), respectively.
    The operating schedule of the Southern Boulevard Bridge, which is
closest to Mar-a-Lago, will be allowed to remain closed to navigation
whenever the presidential motorcade is in transit. At all other times
the bridge shall operate under the normal operating schedule, published
in 33 CFR 117.261(w).
    This test deviation will have an impact on marine traffic while
alleviating some vehicle traffic backups. Tugs with tows are not exempt
from this regulation. Vessels able to pass through the Flagler Memorial
and Royal Park Bridges in the closed position may do so at any time.
The bridges will be able to open for emergencies. The Southern
Boulevard Bridge will be under the control of the on-scene designated
representative.
    The Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through
our Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating
schedule for the bridge so that vessel operators can arrange their
transits to minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridges must return to
their regular operating schedules immediately at the end of the
effective period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the
operating regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

II. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, visit http://www.regulations.gov/privacynotice.
    Documents mentioned in this notice as being available in this
docket and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.

    Dated: March 1, 2018.
Barry L. Dragon,
Director, Bridge Branch, Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2018-04497 Filed 3-5-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 189 (Monday, September 30, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 59927]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23706]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP13-546-000]

ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of Request Under Blanket
Authorization

    Take notice that on September 9, 2013, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR),
717 Texas Street, Houston, Texas 77002-2761, filed in Docket No. CP13-
546-000, a prior notice request pursuant to sections 157.205,
157.208(b), and 157.211(b) of the Commission's Regulations under the
Natural Gas Act (NGA) as amended, requesting authorization to construct
approximately 1.34 miles of 16-inch diameter pipeline, construct an
associated delivery meter station, modify appurtenant facilities at two
locations on its Southwest Mainline system, and improve an existing
county road in conjunction with the local government, all located in
Lee, Jefferson, and Des Moines County, Iowa (Iowa Fertilizer Project).
ANR states that the Iowa Fertilizer Project will deliver 81,000
dekatherms per day to a new nitrogen fertilizer manufacturing plant.
ANR estimates the cost of the Iowa Fertilizer Project to be
approximately $15 million, all as more fully set forth in the
application which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the web at 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, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Linda
Farquhar, Manager, Project Determinations & Regulatory Administration,
ANR Pipeline Company, 717 Texas Street, Houston, Texas 77002-2761, by
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, by facsimile at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 60 days after
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.205 of
the regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205), a protest to the
request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the
proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day
after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed and
not withdrawn within 30 days after the allowed time for filing a
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for
authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding, or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenter's will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenter's will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentary, will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426.

     Dated: September 19, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-23706 Filed 9-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


1 Summary of Response to Comments on Mosquito Labeling PR Notice This document provides an overview of the principal comments received on the Pesticide Registration ( PR) Notice, and the responses the Agency workgroup made to them in terms of changes to the recommendations and to the discussion in the final Notice. Changes made by the workgroup were subject to review and concurrence by EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, Office of Water, Office of General Counsel, and the EPA Regional Offices.

Overview:

89 comments were received. Over half are from private citizens, and virtually all of those are identical and based on a model letter put on the Internet by an environmental group. Several beekeepers and three associations representing beekeepers commented specifically on recommendation number 6. Most of the private citizen letters, as well as environmental groups who co signed a comment letter submitted by the group Beyond Pesticides, generally oppose the PRN proposals as potentially increasing risks to the environment.

Comments were also received from 5 State pesticide regulatory agencies, the Association of American Pesticide Control Officials, the American Association of Pesticide Safety Educators, the American Mosquito Control Association, and 8 local mosquito control agencies. These organizations generally support the proposals, although some of them suggested changes to the recommendations. Three individual pesticide registrants and one industry association ( Responsible Industry for a Sound Environment) also commented.

Comment Summary by Recommendation Recommendation 1. " For use only by federal, state, tribal, or local government officials responsible for public health or vector control, or by persons certified in the appropriate category or otherwise authorized by the state or tribal lead pesticide regulatory agency to perform adult mosquito control applications, or by persons under their direct supervision." [ Unchanged]

This was the least controversial recommendation. No one opposed the idea that mosquito control applicators should be adequately trained and supervised. A few commenters wanted clarification of the responsibility of a supervisor. The discussion section now states that the concept of supervision here should be similar to the definition of " under the direct supervision of a certified applicator" in FIFRA itself   i. e., that an appropriately trained person is responsible for any nontrained applicators, but need not be physically present at the time of an application.

Recommendation 2. " Products labeled for wide area adult mosquito control should not include container labeling for uses unrelated to mosquitos. The standard terrestrial use water hazard 2 statement should not appear on product containers labeled solely for mosquito control. If a container label includes non mosquito control use directions, those directions and associated precautions should be clearly distinguished from those applicable to mosquito control. The terrestrial use statements on a mixed use label should be followed by the statement " See separate directions and precautions for mosquito control applications." [ Unchanged]

Regulatory officials, pesticide educators and vector control agencies all strongly support the view that products should be labeled solely for mosquito control. Some of the pesticide registrants disagreed and stated that this would be an economic burden to them and they might not adopt this recommendation. Registrants did agree that clear demarcation of mosquito directions from any other use directions was appropriate. The workgroup notes that among the most widely used adulticides, most are already labeled for mosquito control only. The Agency did not change the recommendation or the discussion of this issue.

Recommendation 3. " This pesticide is [ toxic/ extremely toxic] to aquatic organisms, including [ insert types of organisms]. Runoff from treated areas or deposition of spray droplets into a body of water may be hazardous to [ insert types of organisms]. [ If appropriate, insert any additional wildlife hazard statements]. [ Bee precaution can be inserted here or as a third paragraph of this section of the label]. [ Insert consultation with state/ tribal agency statement]. [ Unchanged]

" Do not apply over bodies of water ( lakes, rivers, permanent streams, natural ponds, commercial fish ponds, swamps, marshes or estuaries), except when necessary to target those areas where adult mosquitos are present, and weather conditions will result in movement of applied material to the target area. Do not contaminate bodies of water when disposing of equipment rinsate or washwaters ." [ Modified by workgroup to add the weather condition language]

The first part of this recommendation   on hazards to aquatic organisms   was misunderstood by the environmental group commenters. They thought that the Agency was proposing to eliminate the statement " toxic to aquatic organisms" and require only warnings concerning specific species that had been tested. In fact, the recommendation as proposed in the draft does include the statement " toxic to aquatic organisms", and only proposes to add general types of organisms such as fish or crustaceans because these are more readily understood warnings than the abstract " aquatic organisms." Some registrants also thought we meant to list specific test species, and wondered if that meant species for which they had generated data. The Agency does not want to list specific species, but intends to point out to registrants at the time of label amendment that for a particular active ingredient we do have information on types of organisms such as fish, crustaceans, etc. ( if that is the case), and those should be listed as part of the toxicity statement. Language has been added to the discussion section to clarify these points.

The provision to allow applications over water was supported by regulatory and vector control agencies and pesticide safety educators as an improvement that would allow appropriate applications that might otherwise appear to be prohibited by some current labels. The Agency accepted suggestions to add a reference to weather conditions that would help ensure accurately 3 targeting infested areas, and minimize the potential for depositing residues in water. These modifications support the intent of this recommendation.

The environmental group comments argue that this recommendation weakens existing protections, such as the 100 foot buffer zone for permethrin and " avoid application over water" on the resmethrin label. The Agency view is that the flexibility to apply pesticides near or over water when that is necessary to reach mosquitos is a significant benefit, and that such applications can be made without posing unreasonable risks to aquatic life. Mitigating risks to water and aquatic life in a mosquito control application depends on minimizing deposition of droplets to water by controlling for such factors as droplet size, application rate, height and speed of release, and wind direction. As noted in the PR Notice, the permethrin buffer zone was primarily intended to minimize runoff from agricultural applications where significantly higher rates are applied compared to mosquito control. The Agency agreed that label amendments that come in as a result of this Notice should be evaluated to ensure that any new label does not increase risks compared to the existing label. Language was added to make this point in the final Notice.

The environmental group comments also advocate regulation of mosquito control programs under the Clean Water Act. Presumably, the intent is to a suggest a requirement for permits under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES). In that regard, the Agency has issued an interpretative statement and proposed a rule concerning NPDES permits in relation to certain pesticide applications ( January 2005). As in the Agency's memorandum of July 2003, entitled " Statement and Guidance on Application of Pesticides to Waters of the United States in Compliance with FIFRA" , the 2005 interpretative statement and associated proposed rule cite application over or near water for adult mosquito control as one of the types of pesticide application that the Agency believes does not require NPDES permits, provided the application is in accordance with the label.

Recommendation 4. " Before making the first application in a season, it is advisable to consult with the state or tribal agency with primary responsibility for pesticide regulation to determine if other regulatory requirements exist." [ Modified by workgroup   " permits or" is deleted]

Most of the regulatory and vector control commenters support this recommendation as the most reliable way for a pesticide applicator to get information about other requirements that may exist in a state. By being advisory it does not create a record keeping burden on applicators that would be difficult if not impossible to enforce. A number of commenters suggested deleting the word " permits" which could cause confusion because of its association with the NPDES permitting issue. " Other regulatory requirements" is sufficient to cover any type of requirement a state may have.

The group Beyond Pesticides appears to believe that this provision relaxes current requirements and removes accountability of applicators. In fact, the current situation is that many labels do not advise the user to consult anyone, and of those labels that do advise consultation with a state or tribal agency, many are useless because the agency named such as " the State Fish and Wildlife 4 Agency" actually has no role in regulating mosquito control. The Notice points out that if a state does have regulatory requirements in addition to the label, an applicator is fully responsible for compliance   it is not the pesticide label that creates the obligation, it is the applicable state law. Conversely, a pesticide label can not create a new role for a state agency if they do not have it under state law. The Agency believes the recommendation as drafted is useful and will promote compliance with environmental regulations.

Recommendation 5. " Ground based application: Spray equipment must be adjusted so that the volume median diameter is less than [ X = value to be provided by registrant] microns ( Dv 0.5 < X µ m) and that 90% of the spray is contained in droplets smaller than [ Y = value to be provided by registrant] microns ( Dv 0.9 < Y µ m). Directions from the equipment manufacturer or vendor, pesticide registrant or a test facility using a laser based measurement instrument must be used to adjust equipment to produce acceptable droplet size spectra. Application equipment must be tested at least annually to confirm that pressure at the nozzle and nozzle flow rate( s) are properly calibrated."

" Aerial Application: Spray equipment must be adjusted so that the volume median diameter produced is less than [ A = value to be provided by registrant] microns ( Dv 0.5 < A µ m) and that 90% of the spray is contained in droplets smaller than [ B = value to be provided by registrant] microns ( Dv 0.9 < B µ m). The effects of flight speed and, for non rotary nozzles, nozzle angle on the droplet size spectrum must be considered. Directions from the equipment manufacturer or vendor, pesticide registrant or a test facility using a wind tunnel and laser based measurement instrument must be used to adjust equipment to produce acceptable droplet size spectra. Application equipment must be tested at least annually to confirm that pressure at the nozzle and nozzle flow rate( s) are properly calibrated." [ Substantially revised by workgroup].

Over twenty regulatory and vector control organizations and registrants commented on this technical issue which the Agency regards as an important label improvement for ensuring safe and effective mosquito control and for supporting Agency risk assessments for this use pattern. Many commenters suggested separate statements for ground versus aerial application, and several encouraged the inclusion of a calibration requirement. The revisions are meant to accommodate these ideas and to make language communicating droplet size consistent with the industry standard.

A number of commenters suggested that this aspect of labeling should remain flexible and that further discussions and interaction with the Agency would be useful. The Agency believes that going forward with the revised recommendation will help to improve labeling substantially and that this language can be the basis for additional improvements in the future and should not be viewed as proscribing further developments or interactions between EPA and the regulated community. 5 Recommendation 6. "... [ do not apply to blooming crops or weeds when bees are visiting the treatment area], except when applications are made to prevent or control a threat to public and/ or animal health determined by a state, tribal or local health or vector control agency on the basis of documented evidence of disease causing agents in vector mosquitos or the occurrence of mosquito borne disease in animal or human populations, or if specifically approved by the state or tribe during a natural disaster recovery effort." [ Modified by workgroup].

In the draft Notice issued for comment, the basis for such applications was stated in terms of the entities who could declare a threat to public health:

[ do not apply to blooming crops or weeds when bees are visiting the treatment area], except when applications are made to prevent or control an imminent threat to public and/ or animal health declared by state, tribal or local health or vector control agency, or if specifically approved by the state or tribe during a natural disaster recovery effort."

This recommendation was generally opposed by environmental groups and individual beekeepers and supported by regulatory and vector control agencies. The American Beekeeping Federation is willing to allow a public health exemption, but only if the decision authority is at the level of a state health department, and not local entities.

The general issue is how or by whom a decision can be made to make exceptional applications. The Agency workgroup agreed to accept the suggestions of commenters who noted that the word " imminent" was too subjective to be useful, and that the word " declared" sounded like a formal process of declaring an emergency which, typically, is done by a state governor. " Imminent" has been deleted, and " declared" changed to " determined." The workgroup also supported the many commenters who felt that allowing exceptional applications should be linked to evidence of disease causing agents or actual cases of disease. However, like CDC in its guidelines for West Nile Virus control programs, the Agency does not believe it is appropriate to try to specify a national risk trigger or criterion for such applications, or to impose a single definition of appropriate decision making authority at the state or local level.

Recommendation 7. " Do not re treat a site more than once in [ X hours/ days]; no more than [ Y] applications should be made to a site in any [ Z weeks/ months] or [ one year]. More frequent treatments may be made to prevent or control a threat to public and/ or animal health determined by a state, tribal or local health or vector control agency on the basis of documented evidence of disease causing agents in vector mosquitos or the occurrence of mosquito borne disease in animal or human populations, or if specifically approved by the state or tribe during a natural disaster recovery effort." [ Same modification regarding evidence of disease as for Rec. # 6].

This recommendation is regarded by the Agency as an important improvement over the commonly used label statement " repeat as needed." Specifying re treatment limitations is consistent with Agency regulations, reduces the risk of over use, and supports Agency risk assessments. Some registrants argued that setting such limits would be difficult because of geographical/ climatic 6 variations and lack of appropriate data. The Agency believes that registrants do have enough efficacy and environmental fate data on their individual products to propose reasonable timing and frequency limitations. Allowing for exceptions to these limits may be justified on the basis of specific evidence of a threat to public or animal health.

Other Comments The comments of a public interest group includes a discussion of their view that West Nile virus "... being an imminent public health threat is overstated." They note that a relatively low percentage of people infected with the virus develop symptoms of illness, and there is a low fatality rate among those who do develop such illness. The comment also states their opinion that use of adulticides is probably not effective in reducing the incidence of infection and implies that use of the mosquito adulticides may pose risks greater than the disease. A number of individual commenters also expressed the general opinion that pesticide use may pose greater risks than West Nile virus or other diseases.

The Agency regards mosquito control with either larvicides or adulticides to be a public health use of pesticides, independent of the scope of different disease threats at any point in time. The fact is that mosquitos can act as vectors for a variety of human and animal diseases besides West Nile Virus, such as eastern equine, St. Louis and other varieties of encephalitis, dengue fever, and heartworm in domestic animals. Whether mosquito populations in a given area pose a threat that warrants preventive measures is a judgment appropriately made by state and local health or vector control agencies. In registering these pesticides the Agency assessed risks to human health and the environment and concluded that these pesticides could be used for mosquito control without posing unreasonable risks. Recent risk assessments for malathion and naled did not indicate unreasonable risks for the adulticide ULV use pattern. The updated risk assessments for the synthetic pyrethroids will be completed in about one year, and if a potential for unreasonable risks is revealed by any of those assessments, the Agency will take steps to mitigate the risks. At this time the Agency is not aware of evidence that adulticide applications are posing unreasonable risks to human health or the environment. In contrast, the Agency notes that from the outbreak of West Nile virus in 1999 through the end of 2004, the Centers for Disease Control recorded 16,615 cases of human illness with 651 deaths, making this among the most serious vector borne diseases to strike the United States in modern times.

A commenter expressed concern for possible impacts of mosquito control applications to endangered species which have not been systematically assessed. The Agency notes that it is now in the process of implementing procedures to include endangered species assessments as an integral part of registration and reregistration decision processes.


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 2, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11736-11737]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04313]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2011-0032]

Construction Standards on Posting Emergency Telephone Numbers and
Floor Load Limits; Extension of the Office of Management and Budget's
(OMB) Approval of Information Collection (Paperwork) Requirements

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

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning the proposal to
extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the
information collection requirements specified in the Construction
Standards on Posting Emergency Telephone Numbers and Maximum Safe Floor
Load Limits.

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
May 2, 2022.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Documents in the docket are
listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index; however, some
information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available to
read or download through the website. All submissions, including
copyrighted material, are available for inspection through the OSHA
Docket Office. Contact the OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY
(877) 889-5627) for assistance in locating docket submissions.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and OSHA
docket number (OSHA-2011-0032) for the Information Collection Request
(ICR). OSHA will place all comments, including any personal
information, in the public docket, which may be made available online.
Therefore, OSHA cautions interested parties about submitting personal
information such as social security numbers and birthdates. For further
information on submitting comments, see the ``Public Participation''
heading in the section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Seleda Perryman or Theda Kenney,
Directorate of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of the continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, the collection instruments are clearly understood, and
OSHA's estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et
seq.) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or
appropriate for enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing
information regarding the causes and prevention of occupational
injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also
requires that OSHA obtain such information with minimum burden upon
employers, especially those operating small businesses, and to reduce
to the maximum extent feasible unnecessary duplication of effort in
obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657).
    The following sections describe who uses the information collected
under each requirement, as well as how they use it. The purpose of
these requirements is to reduce employees' risk of death or serious
injury by ensuring that employment has been tested and is in safe
operating condition.
    Two construction standards, ``Medical Services and First Aid''
(Sec.  1926.50), and ``General Requirements for Storage'' (Sec.
1926.250), contain posting provisions. Paragraph (f) of Sec.  1926.50
requires employers to conspicuously post emergency telephone numbers
for physicians, hospitals, or ambulances at their worksites if 911
emergency telephone service is not locally available; in the event that
a worker has a serious injury at a worksite, this posting requirement
helps expedite emergency medical treatment of the worker. Paragraph
(a)(2) of Sec.  1926.250 specifies that employers must post the maximum
safe load limits of floors located in storage areas inside buildings or
other structures under construction, unless the floors or slabs are on
grade (sitting on the ground). This provision prohibits employers from
overloading floors in areas used to store material and equipment where
a structure's floors are not supported directly by the ground. This
requirement is intended to prevent floor collapses which could
seriously injure or kill workers.

II. Special Issues for Comment

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

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting that OMB extend the approval of the information
collection requirements contained in the two construction standards,
``Medical Services and First Aid'' paragraph (f) of Sec.  1926.50, and
``General Requirements for Storage'' paragraph (a)(2) of Sec.
1926.250. The agency is requesting an adjustment increase in burden
hours from 36,919 hours to 55,184 hours, a difference of 18,265 hours.
This increase is due to the increase in the number of construction
sites from 707,776 to 885,922 construction sites.
    OSHA will summarize the comments submitted in response to this
notice and will include this summary in the request to OMB to extend
the approval of the information collection requirements.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Construction Standards on the Posting of Emergency Telephone
Numbers and Floor Load Limits (29 CFR 1926.50 and 29 CFR 1926.250).
    OMB Control Number: 1218-0093.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits.
    Number of Respondents: 885,922.
    Number of Responses: 263,262.
    Frequency of Responses: On occasion.
    Average Time per Response: Varies.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 55,184.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $0.

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

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (fax); or (3) by hard copy. Please
note: While OSHA's Docket Office is continuing to accept and process
submissions by regular mail due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Docket
Office is closed to the public and not able to receive submissions to
the docket by hand, express mail, messenger, and courier service. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the agency name
and the OSHA docket number for the ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2011-0032). You
may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference
to an electronic or a facsimile submission, you must submit them to the
OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES).
The additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments
by your name, date, and the docket number so that the agency can attach
them to your comments.
    Due to security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments.
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as social security numbers and
dates of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download from this
website. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on
using the http://www.regulations.gov website to submit comments and
access the docket is available at the website's ``User Tips'' link.
Contact the OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>, (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>)
for information about materials not available from the website, and for
assistance in using the internet to locate docket submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    James S. Frederick, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this
notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012
(77 FR 3912).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on February 15, 2022.
James S. Frederick,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2022-04313 Filed 3-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 124 (Wednesday, June 29, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38660-38661]
[FR Doc No: 2022-13870]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2022-0426]

Safety Zone; Marine Events Within the Eighth Coast Guard
District; Tchefuncte River, Madisonville, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notification of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce a temporary safety zone for a
fireworks display located on the navigable waters of the Tchefuncte
River at approximate position 30[deg]24'11.63'' N, 090[deg]09'17.39''
W. This action is needed to provide for the safety of life on these
navigable waterways during the event. During the enforcement periods,
the operator of any vessel in the regulated area must comply with
directions from the Captain of the Port or a designated representative.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.801, Table 5, line 15 will be
enforced from 8:30 p.m. through 9:30 p.m. on July 4, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notification of enforcement, call or email Lieutenant Commander William
Stewart, Sector New Orleans, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce a temporary
safety zone in 33 CFR 165.801, Table 5, line 15, for the Madisonville
Old Fashioned 4th of July fireworks display event. This regulation will
be enforced from 8:30 p.m. through 9:30 p.m. on July 4, 2022. This
action is being taken to provide for the safety of life on navigable
waterways during this event. Our regulations for marine events within
the Eighth Coast Guard District, 33 CFR 165.801, specifies the
approximate location of the regulated area on the Tchefuncte River as
30[deg]24'11.63'' N, 090[deg]09'17.39'' W. During the enforcement
period, if you are the operator of a vessel in the regulated area, you
must comply with directions from the Captain of the Port or a
designated representative.
    In addition to this notification of enforcement in the Federal
Register, the Coast Guard plans to provide notification of this
enforcement period via Marine Safety Information Bulletin and Broadcast
Notice to Mariners.

    Dated: June 23, 2022.
K.K. Denning,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector New Orleans.
[FR Doc. 2022-13870 Filed 6-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: January 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 8)]
[Notices]
[Page 1498-1499]
[DOCID:fr12ja07-49]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL07-27-000]

East Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc., Tex-La Electric
Cooperative of Texas, Inc., Deep East Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc.;
Notice of Filing

January 4, 2007.
    Take notice that on December 22, 2006, East Texas Electric
Cooperative, Inc., Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas, Inc. and Deep
East Texas Electric Cooperative, Inc. filed a petition for approval of
transmission revenue requirements for inclusion in the open access
transmission tariff of the Southwest Power Pool, Inc., pursuant to Rule
207(a)(5) of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 18 CFR 385.207(a)(5).
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission,

888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

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

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on January 11, 2007.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-271 Filed 1-11-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P