[Federal Register: October 25, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 206)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 62384-62388]
[DOCID:fr25oc06-3]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0531-200618(a); FRL-8233-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Tennessee:
Memphis/Shelby County Area Second 10-Year Maintenance Plan for the
Carbon Monoxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a revision to the Tennessee State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted in final form on May 17, 2006. The
SIP revision provides the second 10-year maintenance plan for the
Memphis/Shelby County Carbon Monoxide (CO) Maintenance Area. The second
10-year maintenance plan includes a new motor vehicle emission budget
(MVEB) for CO for the year 2017. EPA is approving this SIP revision,
including the new 2017 MVEB for CO, because it satisfies the
requirement of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the second 10-year
maintenance plan for the Memphis/Shelby County Area.
    In addition, in this rulemaking, EPA is providing information on
its transportation conformity adequacy determination for the new MVEB
for the year 2017 that is contained in the second 10-year CO
maintenance plan for the Memphis/Shelby County Area.

DATES: This rule is effective on December 26, 2006 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by November 24, 2006. If
we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2006-0531, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0531'', Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Egide Louis, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The
Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday,
8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No.: ``EPA-R04-OAR-
2006-0531''. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at http://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 through
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI

or otherwise protected. The http://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 e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 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. For additional information about EPA's public
docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
.

    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://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 http://www.regulations.gov or

in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding
legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Egide Louis of the Regulatory
Development Section or Ms. Lynorae Benjamin of the Air Quality Modeling
and Transportation Section at the Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Dr.
Louis's telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. He can be reached also via
electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Ms. Benjamin's telephone number
is<PHONE_NUMBER> and her electronic mail is<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What Is the Background for This Action?
II. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Memphis/Shelby County Area's
Second 10-Year Maintenance Plan?
III. What Is EPA's Action on the Memphis/Shelby County Area's Second
10-Year Maintenance Plan?
IV. What Is an Adequacy Determination and What Is EPA's Adequacy
Determination for the Memphis/Shelby County Area's New MVEBs for the
Year 2017?
V. Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Is the Background for This Action?

    In 1992, based on measured air quality data, the Memphis/Shelby
County Area was able to demonstrate attainment with the CO National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) due to numerous control measures
implemented in the Memphis/Shelby County Area. As a result of the
measured air quality data, Tennessee petitioned EPA for redesignation
of this Area to attainment for CO. EPA redesignated the Memphis/Shelby
County Area to attainment based on the measured air quality data and a
10-year maintenance plan submitted for the Memphis/Shelby County Area
on July 26, 1994 (59 FR 37939).
    The air quality maintenance plan is a requirement of the 1990 CAA
amendments for nonattainment areas that come into compliance with the
NAAQS and request redesignation, to assure their continued maintenance
of that standard. Eight years after redesignation to attainment,
section 175A(b) of the CAA requires the state to submit a revised
maintenance plan which demonstrates that attainment will continue to be
maintained for the 10 years following the initial 10-year period (this
is known as the second 10-year maintenance plan). The second 10-year
maintenance plan updates the original 10-year CO maintenance plan for
the next 10-year period. Thus, pursuant to the CAA section 175A(b),
Tennessee was required to submit the second 10-year maintenance plan
for the Memphis/Shelby County Area demonstrating that it would continue
to attain the CO NAAQS in this area through at least 2014.

II. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Memphis/Shelby County Area's Second
10-Year Maintenance Plan?

    On May 17, 2006, the State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee
Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), Air Pollution
Control Division, submitted a SIP revision to EPA that provided for the
second 10-year maintenance plan for the Memphis/Shelby County Area as
required by section 175A(b) of the CAA. This second 10-year maintenance
plan for the Memphis/Shelby County Area includes a new CO emission
inventory for 1990 which reflects emission controls applicable for the
Memphis/Shelby County Area, and actual and projected emissions for
1990, 2002, 2007, and 2017. The SIP revision also establishes a new
MVEB for CO for 2017 for the Memphis/Shelby County Area.
    The emission reduction measures for CO emissions implemented in the
Memphis/Shelby County Area from 1990 to 2002, and control measures that
are projected to occur between 2007 and 2017 are accounted for in the
1990 emission inventory and projected emissions estimates. Tables 1 and
2 provide emissions data and projections for CO with and without the
use of an inspection and maintenance (I&M) program, respectively. The
on-road mobile portion of the data was calculated with MOBILE6.2. The
difference between the 1990 mobile source base year emissions for this
maintenance plan and the initial maintenance plan are primarily a
result of a change in the mobile emissions factor model (e.g.,
MOBILE6.2) that was used to develop these emissions.

  Table 1.--Memphis/Shelby Carbon Monoxide Area--Emission Inventory and Projected CO Emissions (1990-2017)--With
                                                    I&M Plan
                                                 [Tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      On-road
              Year                     Area          Non-road       mobile with        Point           Total
                                                      mobile            I&M
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990............................           10.14          100.83          893.76           22.77         1027.50
2002............................            7.03          115.67          615.98           14.53          753.21
2007............................            7.42          125.85          441.15           15.35          589.77
2017............................            8.08          138.84          327.88           16.56          491.36
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Table 2.--Memphis/Shelby County Carbon Monoxide Area--Emission Inventory and Projected CO Emissions (1990-2017)--Without I&M Plan
                                                                     [Tons per day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                On-road                                      Safety margin
                          Year                                 Area          Non-road     mobile without       Point           Total       based on 1990
                                                                              mobile            I&M                                          emissions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990....................................................           10.14          100.83          893.76           22.77         1027.50             n/a
2002....................................................            7.03          115.67          654.37           14.53          791.60          235.90
2007....................................................            7.42          125.85          492.13           15.35          640.75          386.75
2017....................................................            8.08          138.84          383.33           16.56          546.81          480.69
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The attainment level of emissions is the level of emissions during
one of the years in which the area met the NAAQS. Since 1990, the
Memphis/Shelby County Area has not violated the CO standard for the 8-
hour average concentration as shown by monitoring data in Table 3. The
data also show a consistent downward trend in CO levels

as a result in part of the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program. In
this SIP revision, the emissions from the year 1990 are used to
calculate a new attainment emissions level for the Memphis/Shelby
County Area. The emissions from point, area, non-road, and mobile
sources in 1990 equal 1027.50 tons per day (tpd) of CO. These emission
calculations were made using the MOBILE6.2 model and the most recent
version of the nonroad model. The projected emissions, with and without
I&M, are lower than the attainment level of emissions, thus
demonstrating continued maintenance of the CO NAAQS.

     Table 3.--Summary of Memphis/Shelby County Area Carbon Monoxide
                             Monitoring Data
                         [In parts per million]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Second highest
                                                              CO 8-hr
                  Year                     CO 8-hr NAAQS   average value
                                                                \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990....................................             9.0             8.8
1991....................................             9.0             6.4
1992....................................             9.0             8.2
1993....................................             9.0             8.5
1994....................................             9.0             8.0
1995....................................             9.0             6.2
1996....................................             9.0             6.3
1997....................................             9.0             5.2
1998....................................             9.0             5.4
1999....................................             9.0             4.9
2000....................................             9.0             4.4
2001....................................             9.0             4.3
2002....................................             9.0             3.5
2003....................................             9.0             2.9
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The safety margin is the difference between the attainment level of
emissions (from all sources) and the projected level of emissions (from
all sources) in the maintenance plan. The safety margin credit, or a
portion thereof, can be allocated to the transportation sector,
however, the total emission level must stay below the attainment level.
The safety margin for CO was calculated as the difference between these
amounts or, in this case, 480.69 tpd for 2017. The emissions are
projected to maintain the Memphis/Shelby County Area's air quality
consistent with the CO NAAQS.
    Maintenance plans and other control strategy SIPs create MVEBs for
criteria pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from
cars and trucks. The MVEB is the portion of the total allowable
emissions that is allocated to highway and transit vehicle use and
emissions. The MVEB serves as a ceiling on emissions from an area's
planned transportation system.
    The MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the
November 24, 1993, Transportation Conformity Rule (58 FR 62188). The
preamble also describes how to establish and revise MVEBs in a SIP. In
this SIP revision, the Memphis/Shelby County Area used MOBILE6.2 to
establish a MVEB for CO for the year 2017. The State of Tennessee has
chosen to allocate 95% of the safety margin (i.e., 456.66 tpd) to the
transportation section. This MVEB is listed in Table 4.

        Table 4.--Memphis/Shelby County Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Area MVEB With Safety Margin Included
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      2017 Projected on-
                                                        road emissions     Allocated safety     2017 MVEB with
                                                        (tons per day)          margin           safety margin
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO..................................................             383.33              456.66              839.99
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The MVEB presented in Table 4 is directly reflective of the
combined on-road (or ``highway'') emissions for the Memphis/Shelby
County Area for CO, plus an allocation from the available safety margin
(95%). After allocation of the safety margin to the MVEB, the remaining
safety margin for future allocation is 24.03 tpd. In summary, the new
CO MVEB for the year 2017 is 839.99 tpd.

III. What Is EPA's Action on the Memphis/Shelby County Area's Second
10-Year Maintenance Plan?

    EPA is approving Tennessee's SIP revision pertaining to the
Memphis/Shelby County Area's second 10-year maintenance plan for CO.
Approval of the maintenance plan for Memphis/Shelby County Area is
appropriate, because the State of Tennessee has demonstrated that the
plan meets the requirements of section 175A as described fully in this
rulemaking. Additionally, EPA is finding adequate and approving the new
2017 MVEB, submitted by Tennessee for Memphis/Shelby County, in
conjunction with its maintenance plan update. Within 24 months from the
effective date of this action, the transportation partners will need to
demonstrate conformity to this new MVEB pursuant to 40 CFR 93.104(e).

IV. What Is an Adequacy Determination and What Is EPA's Adequacy
Determination for the Memphis/Shelby County Area's New MVEB for the
Year 2017?

    Under Section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation projects, such
as the construction of new highways, must ``conform'' to (i.e., be
consistent with) the part of the State's air quality plan that
addresses pollution from cars and trucks. ``Conformity'' to the SIP
means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality
violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of
the NAAQS. Under the transportation conformity rule, at 40 CFR part 93,
projected emissions from transportation plans and programs must be
equal to or less than MVEBs for the area. If a transportation plan does
not ``conform,'' most new projects that would expand the capacity of
roadways cannot go forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA
policy, criteria and procedures for demonstrating and assuring
conformity of such transportation activities to a SIP.
    Until MVEBs in a SIP submittal are approved by EPA, they cannot be
used for transportation conformity purposes unless EPA makes an
affirmative finding that the MVEBs contained therein are ``adequate.''
Once EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEBs adequate for
transportation conformity purposes, those MVEBs can be used by the
State and Federal agencies in determining whether proposed
transportation projects ``conform'' to the SIP even though the approval
of the SIP revision containing those MVEBs has not yet been finalized.
EPA's substantive criteria for determining ``adequacy'' of MVEBs in
submitted SIPs are set out in EPA's Transportation Conformity Rule at
40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).
    EPA's process for determining ``adequacy'' consists of three basic
steps: public notification of a SIP submission, a public comment
period, and EPA's

adequacy finding. This process for determining the adequacy of
submitted SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in EPA's May 14, 1999
guidance, ``Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 1999,
Conformity Court Decision.'' This guidance was finalized in the
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the ``New 8-Hour Ozone
and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous
Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments--Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Change'' on
July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). EPA follows this guidance and rulemaking in
making its adequacy determinations.
    Memphis/Shelby County Area's second 10-year maintenance plan
submission contained a new MVEB for the year 2017. The availability of
the SIP submission with the 2017 MVEB was announced for public comment
on EPA's adequacy Web page on June 6, 2006, at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm.
 The adequacy comment period

for this MVEB closed on July 6, 2006. No requests for the submittal or
adverse comments were received during EPA's Adequacy Public Comment
Period.
    Through this rulemaking, EPA is finding adequate this 2017 MVEB for
use to determine transportation conformity because this MVEB meets the
adequacy criteria contained in the Transportation Conformity Rule. The
2017 MVEB for CO for the Memphis/Shelby County Area is 839.99 tpd.

V. Final Action

    EPA is approving the aforementioned changes to the SIP. EPA is
publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views
this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should adverse
comments be filed. This rule will be effective December 26, 2006
without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by
November 24, 2006.
    If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public
is advised that this rule will be effective on December 26, 2006 and no
further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies 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 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it 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).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
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, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the
states, on the relationship between the national government and the
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely affects the status of a
geographical area, does not impose any new requirements on sources or
allow a state to avoid adopting or implementing other requirements, and
does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the CAA. This rule also is not subject
to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because
it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    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 rule 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).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by December 26, 2006. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule 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.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: October 6, 2006.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

0
40 CFR part 52, is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart RR--Tennessee

0
2. Section 52.2220(e) is amended by adding a new entry at the end of
the table for ``Carbon Monoxide Second 10-Year Maintenance Plan for the
Memphis/Shelby County Area'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                                EPA-Approved Tennessee Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Applicable
    Name of nonregulatory SIP        geographic or          State        EPA approval date       Explanation
            provision              nonattainment area  effective date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Carbon Monoxide Second 10-Year    Memphis/Shelby.....       5/10/2006  10/25/2006 [Insert
 Maintenance Plan for the                                               first page of
 Memphis/Shelby County Area.                                            publication].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 [FR Doc. E6-17854 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 102 (Friday, May 25, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31345-31346]
[FR Doc No: 2012-12734]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

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

    Docket Numbers: ER11-2780-002.
    Applicants: Safe Harbor Water Power Corporation.
    Description: Safe Harbor Water Power Corporation's updated market
power analysis and notice of change in status related to the merger of
Exelon Corporation and Constellation Energy Group, Inc.
    Filed Date: 4/11/12.
    Accession Number: 20120411-5297.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/8/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1811-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Notice of Termination of the Gates E&P Agreement to be
effective 3/15/2012.

    Filed Date: 5/18/12.
    Accession Number: 20120518-5000.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/8/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1812-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: Application (Specify * * *) of PacifiCorp for waiver
of tariff provisions.
    Filed Date: 5/17/12.
    Accession Number: 20120517-5127.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/7/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-1813-000.
    Applicants: The Empire District Electric Company.
    Description: Revised OATT Sections to be effective 8/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 5/18/12.
    Accession Number: 20120518-5065.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/8/12.

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

    Docket Numbers: ES12-22-000.
    Applicants: Cross-Sound Cable Company, LLC.
    Description: Supplement to Application of Cross Sound Cable
Company, LLC.
    Filed Date: 5/14/12.
    Accession Number: 20120514-5191.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/24/12.

    Docket Numbers: ES12-34-001.
    Applicants: El Paso Electric Company.
    Description: Submission of El Paso Electric Company.
    Filed Date: 5/17/12.
    Accession Number: 20120517-5077.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/7/12.

    Docket Numbers: ES12-43-000.
    Applicants: MDU Resources Group, Inc.
    Description: MDU Resources Group, Inc. Application for Authority to
Issue Securities.
    Filed Date: 5/18/12.
    Accession Number: 20120518-5117.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/8/12.

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

    Docket Numbers: RR12-9-000.
    Applicants: North American Electric Reliability Corp.
    Description: Petition of the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation for Approval of Amendments to Delegation Agreement with
Midwest Reliability Organization--Amendments to MRO's Bylaws.
    Filed Date: 5/17/12.
    Accession Number: 20120517-5119.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/7/12.

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

    Dated: May 18, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-12734 Filed 5-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 95 (Thursday, May 16, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28852-28853]
[FR Doc No: 2013-11633]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0520]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed;
Animal Proteins Prohibited in Ruminant Feed; Extension

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an
opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain
information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the
Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information,
including each proposed extension of an existing collection of
information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the
notice. This notice solicits comments on extending OMB approval on the
existing recordkeeping requirements for this information collection,
regarding animal proteins prohibited in ruminant feed.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection
of information by July 15, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments on the collection of information
to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments on the
collection of information to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-
305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with the docket
number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonna Capezzuto, Office of Information
Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., PI50-400B,
Rockville, MD 20850,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each extension of an existing collection of information, before
submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this

requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of
information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed; Animal Proteins
Prohibited in Ruminant Feed-21 CFR 589.2000(e)(1)(iv)--(OMB Control
Number 0910-0339)--Extension

    This information collection was established because epidemiological
evidence gathered in the United Kingdom suggested that bovine
spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), a progressively degenerative central
nervous system disease, is spread to ruminant animals by feeding
protein derived from ruminants infected with BSE. This regulation
places general requirements on persons that manufacture, blend,
process, and distribute products that contain or may contain protein
derived from mammalian tissue, and feeds made from such products.
    Specifically, this regulation requires renderers, feed
manufacturers, and others involved in feed and feed ingredient
manufacturing and distribution to maintain written procedures
specifying the cleanout procedures or other means, and specifying the
procedures for separating products that contain or may contain protein
derived from mammalian tissue from all other protein products from the
time of receipt until the time of shipment. These written procedures
are intended to help the firm formalize their processes, and then to
help inspection personnel confirm that the firm is operating in
compliance with the regulation. Inspection personnel will evaluate the
written procedure, and confirm it is being followed when they are
conducting an inspection.
    These written procedures must be maintained as long as the facility
is operating in a manner that necessitates the record, and if the
facility makes changes to an applicable procedure or process the record
must be updated. Written procedures required by this section shall be
made available for inspection and copying by the Food and Drug
Administration.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                               Table 1--Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of                    Average burden
         21 CFR Section              Number of      records per    Total annual         per         Total hours
                                   recordkeepers   recordkeeper       records      recordkeeping
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maintaining written procedures               400               1             400              14            5600
 (Sec.   589.2000 (e)(1)(iv))...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

    Dated: May 10, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-11633 Filed 5-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Air Quality November 4, 1999 Mr. Gregg Worley, Section Chief Operating Source Section United States Environmental Protection Agency Air, Pesticides, and Toxics Management Division Region IV Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW Atlanta, Georgia 30303 8909 Dear Mr. Worley:

The implementation of Title V of the Clean Air Act has been challenging but worthwhile. One of the basic tenets of the Title V program is the clarity required by the Title V permit. This clarity is required to allow the permittee to complete their mandatory annual compliance certification in light of aggressive enforcement penalties associated with that certification. In addition, the far greater involvement of citizen groups demands that compliance be clearly defined. This mandate was set forth in the legislative discussion of the 1990 amendments, ( H. R. Rep. No. 101490, 1015t Cong., 2d Sess., pt 1, at 351 ( 1990)).

"... The permittee, the permitting agency, and the citizen all should be able to look at the permit and know what are the requirements applicable to the source under the Act. It should be emphasized that the permit issued under this title is intended by the Administration to be the single document or source of all the requirements under the Act applicable to the source. Again, the Committee stresses that the permit is the document that everyone should look at to know what the permittees should do to comply with the Clean Air Act."

In many cases, we have had to carefully consider what our own regulations have required, as well as those of Federal programs. Senator Chaffee recognized this challenge in drafting Title V,

"... This would clearly be an improvement over the present system, where both the source and the EPA must search through numerous provisions of State implementation plans and regulations to assemble a complete list of requirements that apply to any particular plant." 1 Excess emission in this context refers to a six minute average of COM data that is greater than 40%.

2 In the particular case of North Carolina's SIP, the rules for start up and shut down have not been approved into the SIP. However, the discussion can assume they are federally approved without loss of generality. Mr. Gregg Worley November 4, 1999 Page 2 This has been beneficial to us as it has, I believe, been beneficial to the sources and citizen groups.

In keeping with this improved way of doing business, we are requesting guidance from your office regarding the use of continuous opacity monitors ( COMs) as periodic monitoring method for opacity standards for boilers, including utility units. In particular, we have had numerous discussions with members of your staff, as well as permit managers from other states in Region IV and elsewhere in the country. In addition, we have read with interest Title V ( and Draft Title V) permits from other states. Finally, we have recently noted the guidance issued by Region VI regarding this very issue ( see attached). It is on this basis that we request this guidance.

Our specific question in this regard has to do with whether the results from a COM, when specifically named as the periodic monitoring method for a SIP opacity standard in the Title V permit, define compliance. A hypothetical example for a utility boiler may be the simplest way of asking the questions:

Given: The SIP emission standard for opacity, as measured in six minute average values, is 40% in North Carolina excluding one exceedance per hour but no more than four in any 24 hour period. The SIP also allows excess emissions1 due to start up, shut down and malfunctions2 to be excused under appropriate circumstances.

Question 1: Excluding excess emissions that occur during these excused periods, is a six minute average of COM data that exceeds 40% considered a violation, for which the permittee must certify noncompliance at the end of the year?

Question 2: If not, is a reference method 9 test ( in the case of opacity) the only way to determine non compliance with an emission standard? Mr. Gregg Worley November 4, 1999 Page 3 We would like to emphasize the distinction between certifying non compliance and subsequent enforcement through penalties or fines. Clearly, discretion can be used in the latter. However, for the purposes of implementing the intent of the Title V program, activities must be considered either in compliance or not in compliance. We do not believe that the intentions of Title V would be served if the regulatory agency allowed, indeed sanctioned, a facility to certify that they did not know what their compliance status was during periods of time. It is difficult to imagine that such an indeterminate state serves the intent of the CAA in promoting citizen involvement.

Question 3: Will the EPA accept a Title V compliance certification from a facility stating that for a given permit condition or requirement the facility " did not know" what their compliance status was?

Thank you for your help in answering these important questions. We hope questions such as these will serve to facilitate the implementation of the Title V permit program. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at ( 919) 715 6253.

Sincerely,

Donald R. van der Vaart, Ph. D., P. E. Supervisor, NSR/ Title V Branch Attachment c: Laura S. Butler Alan W. Klimek


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 92 (Friday, May 12, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30738-30739]
[FR Doc No: 2023-10176]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL23-62-000]

ISO New England, Inc.; Notice of Institution of Section 206
Proceeding and Refund Effective Date

    On May 5, 2023, the Commission issued an order in Docket No. EL23-
62-000, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16
U.S.C. 824e, instituting an investigation into whether ISO New England,
Inc.'s Transmission, Markets and Services Tariff is unjust and
unreasonable or unduly discriminatory or preferential. ISO New England,
Inc., 183 FERC ] 61,091 (2023).
    The refund effective date in Docket No. EL23-62-000, established
pursuant to section 206(b) of the FPA, will be the date of publication
of this notice in the Federal Register.
    Any interested person desiring to be heard in Docket No. EL23-62-
000 must file a notice of intervention or motion to

intervene, as appropriate, with the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, in accordance with Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214 (2022), within 21 days of the
date of issuance of the order.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (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. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC at
[email protected] or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,
(202) 502-8659.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFile'' link at
http://www.ferc.gov. In lieu of electronic filing, you may submit a
paper copy. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be
addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.
Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly
D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

    Dated: May 8, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-10176 Filed 5-11-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 20, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69604-69605]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27783]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Parts 1, 16, 106, 110, 114, 117, 120, 123, 129, 179, and 211

[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0920]
RIN 0910-AG36

Current Good Manufacturing Practice and Hazard Analysis and Risk-
Based Preventive Controls for Human Food; Extension of Comment Periods

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period for the proposed
rule and for its information collection provisions.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is extending the
comment period for the notice of proposed rulemaking that appeared in
the Federal Register of January 16, 2013 (78 FR 3646), entitled
``Current Good Manufacturing Practice and Hazard Analysis and Risk-
Based Preventive Controls for Human Food'' and its information
collection provisions.

DATES: The FDA is extending the comment period for the proposed rule
referenced in the Summary. Submit either electronic or written comments
on the notice of proposed rulemaking by November 22, 2013. Submit
comments on information collection issues under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (the PRA) by November 22, 2013 (see the ``Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995'' section).

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FDA-2011-
N-0920 and/or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) 0910-AG36, by any of
the following methods, except that comments on information collection
issues under the PRA must be submitted to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (see the
``Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995'' section).

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Written Submissions

    Submit written submissions in the following ways:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for paper or CD-ROM
submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Agency name
and Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0920, and RIN 0910-AG36 for this rulemaking.
All comments received may be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For
additional information on submitting comments, see the ``How to Submit
Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into
the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of
Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: With regard to the proposed rule:
Jenny Scott, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-300),
Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD
20740,<PHONE_NUMBER>. With regard to the information collection: Domini
Bean, Office of Information Management, Food and Drug Administration,
1350 Piccard Dr., PI50-400T, Rockville, MD 20850,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In the Federal Register of January 16, 2013 (78 FR 3646), FDA
published a proposed rule entitled ``Current Good Manufacturing
Practice and Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for
Human Food.'' The original comment period of 120 days was extended
several times and interested persons were most recently given until
November 15, 2013 (Federal Register of August 9, 2013, 78 FR 48636), to

comment on the proposed rule and its information collection provisions.

II. Request for Comments

    FDA is extending the comment period due to the inability of some
commenters to submit comments through the http://www.regulations.gov
Web site from November 4, 2013, through November 14, 2013, because of
technical difficulties at that Web site.

III. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    Interested persons may either submit electronic comments regarding
the information collection to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or fax
written comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>. All comments should be
identified with the title ``Current Good Manufacturing Practice and
Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food.''

IV. How To Submit Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: November 15, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-27783 Filed 11-15-13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 132 (Friday, July 10, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 39719]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16880]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 2015 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 284

[Docket No. RM15-19-000]

Petition for a Rulemaking of the Liquids Shippers Group, Airlines
for America, and the National Propane Gas Association

AGENCY:  Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Energy.

ACTION:  Notice of technical conference.

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

SUMMARY:  In this notice, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission) plans to hold a technical conference on July 30, 2015, to
discuss issues raised by the petition for rulemaking. The petition for
rulemaking is requesting that the Commission issue a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NOPR) requiring changes to the FERC Form No. 6 (Annual
Report of Oil Pipeline Companies), Page 700.

DATES:  The technical conference will be held on July 30, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Technical Contact

    Adrianne Cook, Office of Energy Market Regulation, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(202) 502-8849.

Legal Contacts

David Faerberg, Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(202) 502-8275.
Rekha Chandrasekher, Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(202) 502-8865.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice of Technical Conference

    On April 20, 2015, the Liquids Shippers Group, Airlines for America
and the National Propane Gas Association (Joint Petitioners) filed a
petition for rulemaking requesting that the Commission issue a Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) requiring changes to the FERC Form No. 6
(Annual Report of Oil Pipeline Companies), Page 700.
    The Joint Petitioners request that the Commission issue a NOPR in
which it proposes to revise Form No. 6, Page 700 by (1) requiring a
pipeline that (i) files a single Form No. 6 report for both crude oil
and petroleum product systems, and/or (ii) has multiple established and
recognized segments which correspond to how the pipeline's rates are
established or designed, to file a separate Page 700 for each
individual system or segment rather than reporting aggregated cost and
revenue data on a single Page 700; and (2) revising the Page 700
instructions to require crude oil and petroleum product pipelines to
make their workpapers available to shippers and interested persons upon
request, not just to the Commission and its Staff.
    Take notice that the Commission plans to hold a technical
conference on July 30, 2015, to discuss issues raised by the petition
for rulemaking.
    The Commission will issue a subsequent notice organizing the
conference. The Commission contemplates utilizing panels to work
through the issues presented. Those interested in serving on panels are
asked to submit a short notice of intent in the instant docket, along
with the specific issues they plan to address on or before July 10,
2015. Due to time constraints, we may not be able to accommodate all
those interested in speaking.

    Dated: June 30, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-16880 Filed 7-9-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

									Served March 19, 2004

_____________________________________

U.S.-Ukraine Third-Country Code-Share Services Case

Docket OST-2004-17373

_______________________________________

Notice Extending Procedural Dates

On March 19, 2004, the Department issued a Notice inviting U.S.
certificated air carriers interested in using the service opportunity
available in the U.S.-Ukraine market to file applications no later than
March 26, with answers due by March 31 and replies by

April 5.

On March 19, 2004, American Airlines filed a motion requesting an
extension of the period for filing answers from March 31, 2004, to April
2, 2004, and the date for filing replies from April 5, 2004, to April 7,
2004.  American states that United Air Lines, the only other prior
applicant for U.S.-Ukraine third-country code-share services, and
Continental Airlines have no objections to the extension of the answer
and reply dates as proposed.

We see no prejudice to any party or to the public interest from this
extremely limited delay, and accordingly, we have decided to grant
American Airlines’ motion and will extend the answer and  reply dates
as requested.

Therefore, acting under authority assigned to the Director, Office of
International Aviation, 14 CFR Part 385, we establish a date of April 2,
2004, for the filing of answers and the date of April 7, 2004, for
filing replies.

By:

						Paul L. Gretch, Director

						Office of International Aviation

Dated:  March 19, 2004

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp


[Federal Register: February 16, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 32)]
[Notices]
[Page 8291]
[DOCID:fr16fe06-49]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP06-212-000]

Crossroads Pipeline Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC
Gas Tariff

February 9, 2006.
    Take notice that on February 3, 2006, Crossroads Pipeline Company
(Crossroads) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First
Revised Volume No. 1, Second Revised Sheet No. 240, with a proposed
effective date of March 5, 2006.
    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 and 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 in accordance with the provisions of
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210).
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on
or before the intervention or protest date need not 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>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-2252 Filed 2-15-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 4, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 274]
[FR Doc No: 2011-33725]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 2

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

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2172-006; ER10-2174-006; ER10-2176-006; ER10-
2180-006; ER10-2178-006; ER10-2192-006; ER10-2184-006; ER10-1734-003.
    Applicants: Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Baltimore Gas
and Electric Company, Constellation Power Source Generation LLC,
Handsome Lake Energy, LLC, Constellation Energy Commodities Group
Maine, LLC, CER Generation, LLC, Constellation NewEnergy, Inc.,
MXenergy Electric Inc.
    Description: Constellation MBR Entities Triennial Market Power
Analysis for the Southeast Region.
    Filed Date: 12/27/11.
    Accession Number: 20111227-5060.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/27/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2179-007; ER10-2181-007; ER10-2182-007.
    Applicants: R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC, Nine Mile Point
Nuclear Station, LLC, Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, LLC.
    Description: Constellation Nuclear Entities Triennial Market Power
Analysis for the Southeast Region.
    Filed Date: 12/27/11.
    Accession Number: 20111227-5043.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/27/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-694-000.
    Applicants: PacifiCorp.
    Description: PacifiCorp's termination of SA 537 Maintenance
Agreement with Tasco Engineering, Inc.
    Filed Date: 12/27/11.
    Accession Number: 20111227-5051.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-695-000.
    Applicants: Northern Indiana Public Service Company.
    Description: Filing to Bring Accepted WVPA Interconnection
Agreement into eTariff to be effective 12/27/2011.
    Filed Date: 12/27/11.
    Accession Number: 20111227-5064.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-696-000.
    Applicants: Northern Indiana Public Service Company.
    Description: Supplement to Wabash Valley Power Association
Interconnection Agreement to be effective 12/28/2011.
    Filed Date: 12/27/11.
    Accession Number: 20111227-5069.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/12.

    Docket Numbers: ER12-697-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. submits tariff filing per
35.13(a)(2)(iii: Original Service Agreement No. 3160; Queue No. X1-032
to be effective 12/1/2011.
    Filed Date: 12/27/11.
    Accession Number: 20111227-5074.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/12.

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

    Dated: December 27, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-33725 Filed 1-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


                                       Guidelines on Fatigue Module 3

                                   FATIGUE AND THE SEAFARER

 Module 3 contains practical information intended for the seafarer (master, officers, ratings and all other shipboard personnel) working on ships. It is recommended that all seafarers become familiar with Module 1 (Fatigue - Causes and Consequences) first. The management level officers (master and officers) should also become familiar with Module 2 (Fatigue and the Company).      As highlighted in module 2, the responsibility for managing fatigue risks and minimizing the risk to safety is a shared responsibility between the company (as your employer) and yourself (as the employee). The company is primarily responsible for creating a work and living environment that minimizes fatigue-related risks. You are responsible for ensuring that time available for rest and sleep is used appropriately and your behaviour does not create or increase risk.

 1.     What causes fatigue and why is it important?

 The maritime industry operates a variety of work schedules in a wide range of operational environments whichmeans that at some point you are likely to experience fatigue.     Fatigue affects all individuals, regardless of skill, rank, experience, knowledge or training.     The most common causes of fatigue known to seafarers are lack of sleep, poor quality of rest and sleep, stress and excessive workload. There are many other contributors as well, and each will vary depending on the circumstance (i.e. operational, environmental, individual differences).       *      *      *      *     Fatigue may be made worse by one or a combination of factors. These include, ship operational factors (duty schedules, workload), adverse environmental conditions (noise, ship motion, etc.), stress and health (medical condition, sleep disorders, use of supplements, diet, etc.).See Module 1 for more detail.                                    oo

    oo

    oo

    oo

    oo

         oo

    oo                      oo                      oo                      oo                      oo

 When determining why fatigue has occurred, there is often a focus on sleep. This is because  the duration, quantity, and the quality of sleep are especially important for recovery from fatigue and for maintaining normal alertness and performance. Sleep loss and sleepiness can degrade every aspect of a person's performance: physical, mental and behavioral. Studies found the effect of sleep debt to be comparable to alcohol impairment, in terms of negatively impacting performance.   Also, as we get older, it generally becomes more difficult to get to sleep when we want to sleep and to stay asleep. This is particularly true during daytime sleep, but even night-time sleep may prove to be more challenging as we get older. Frequent awakenings can lead to increased sleepiness when you are awake.

 Working at sea may limit seafarers opportunity for sleep and recovery in each 24-hour period. Seafarers working throughtheir window of circadian low ,  will in most cases, be working while fatigued.  Initially trying to sleep during hours when you are ordinarily awake may be difficult.  There are particular times when the risks associated with fatigue are increased, regardless of the relationship between fatigue and recovery sleep. Times when fatigue risk levels are particularly high are:

 * Working during your window of circadian low;   * When regular short breaks have not been taken;  * When duty schedules are longer than 8 hours;   * When adjusting to a new schedule;  * Early duty starts. Early start times often shorten sleep obtained the period before because most people often find it difficult to go to bed earlier in compensation and find it hard to get to sleep quickly if they do go to bed early;  * When new to the job or ship. Learning a new job and/or getting to know a new ship, and crew is often challenging. Some individuals may find they do not sleep well during the first week on a new ship. This is especially worse if they are suffering from jet lag.

 2.     How can you recognize fatigue in yourself and in others (signs/symptoms)?      Fatigue can affect your mind, body and emotions (e.g. your ability to perform tasks involving physical exertion and strength, as well as your ability to solve complex problems or make decisions). When fatigued, your performance is impaired, which means that in some cases you cannot continue to perform shipboard tasks safely and efficiently. A dangerous aspect is that fatigued individuals are poor judges of their own level of fatigue and hence performance,  largely because fatigue can affect their ability to make judgments or solve complex problems.        Fatigue-related signs and symptoms are often divided into three categories: cognitive, physical and behavioural. Table 1.1 in Module 1 lists these fatigue signs and symptoms into the three categories (mental, physical and behavioural). These signs and symptoms of fatigue may be used to identify an individual's level of alertness. .  Nonetheless, You may recognize some of these signs and symptoms in others (with time, you may learn to identify some within yourself).

Some of the more visible signs and symptoms include:

    A. Mental:     * Poor judgment of distance, speed, time, etc.;     * Slow or no response to normal, abnormal or emergency situations;     * Slowed comprehension and learning;     * Reduced attention span;     * Difficulty concentrating and thinking clearly;     * Decreased ability to pay attention.

    B. Physical     * Inability to stay awake (an example is head nodding or falling asleep against your will);     * Difficulty with hand-eye coordination skills (such as, switch selection);     * Speech difficulties (it may be slurred, slowed or garbled);     * Increased frequency of dropping objects like tools or parts;     * Digestion problems;     * Insomnia;     * Change in appetite.             C. Behavioral     * Decreased tolerance and anti-social behavior;     * Increased mood changes (examples are irritability, tiredness and depression);     * Increasing omissions and carelessness.

 Long-term effects of sleep loss may lead to cardiovascular diseases, gastro-intestinal diseases, mental health problems and stress.       The more of the signs and symptoms you observe in others and/or experience yourself the more likely it is that alertness is significantly reduced. Fatigue is not the only cause of such symptoms, but when several occur together, it is likely to indicate fatigue-related impairment.      It is important that you notify your supervisor (or management level officers) when you recognize that you or other crewmembers are fatigued. It is important to have  open communication between you and your supervisor regarding fatigue prevention and detection. Your company's fatigue risk management (FRM) processes should allow for open communication and reporting between you and your supervisor (or management level officers) regarding fatigue prevention and detection.

         oo   oo   oo   oo   oo       oo   oo   oo   oo   oo       oo   oo   oo        oo        oo    oo       oo       oo       oo    oo

     oo   oo   oo   oo       oo   oo   oo   oo   oo   oo   oo

    oo      oo      oo      oo      oo      oo      oo      oo      oo

 3.      What can seafarers do to help reduce and manage the risk of fatigue on ships?           * Obtain adequate sleep The most effective strategy to fight fatigue is to ensure that you get the very best quality and duration of sleep. The provision of adequate sleep opportunity is important to ensure adequate sleep.  As indicated in module 2, the company should provide you with an adequate sleep opportunity for recovery.

In order to be effective in satisfying your body's need, sleep must meet three criteria, and include:

       * Duration/Quantity;        * Quality; and        * Continuity.         *             *

       *         *         *                    *                *

      Sleep is most valuable if obtained in a single block.A short sleep or nap can provide a powerful boost to alertness. However, it is important to know that napping does not eliminate the need for sleep.

       *

       *                   There could be instances in which you may not obtain adequate sleep, even though you are provided with adequate sleep opportunity. Aspects mentioned below can all affect the amount and quality of sleep obtained:

      *       you are working during the night and may simply be unable to sleep during the day;        *       your sleep may have been interrupted by colleagues, unexpected events or operational demands (role-dependent);       *       you may suffer from a sleep disorder, or other medical or physical problem that keeps you awake;       *       emotional stress due to family problems at home;        *       inability to get to sleep due to concerns about work or other worries;       *       the sleeping environment (comfort, noise, darkness, ship motion, privacy) may not allow for adequate sleep;       *       the type of food consumed;        *       medication or use of prescribed/over the counter/natural remedies;        *       consumption of  stimulants (i.e. caffeine, amphetamines,  alcohol);        *       use of personal electronic devices before sleep, which may delay the onset of sleep and not allow adequate sleep to be obtained;       *       social activities or high arousal just before your rest period, and inability to sleep.

      Regardless of the circumstances causing insufficient or poor quality sleep, these should preferably be identified through proactive measures and treated as a potential shipboard hazard. This is an important aspect of any program that includes the need to report sleep related issues.               The company should have  processes in place (Module 2) to provide you the opportunity to report back situations when you have been unable to obtain adequate sleep or feel at risk of making fatigue-related errors, specifically if conducting safety and security critical tasks (such as navigating in congested waters). This can be as simple as verbally reporting to your supervisor, management level officers, the ship's safety committee or by utilising a sleep log or sleep diary to monitor your sleep (see Appendix 3).

      If you continue experiencing inadequate sleep and the opportunity for recovery from work is not provided this will prolong fatigue putting your health, well-being and safety of the ship at risk.         Below is some general guidance on developing good sleep habits:       *                   If possible, develop consistent sleep time(s) (i.e. go to bed at the same time(s) every day);     *          Develop and follow a pre-sleep routine to promote sleep at bedtime (e.g. a warm shower, reading calming material, or just making a ritual of pre-bed preparation).      *  Get sufficient sleep, especially before a period when you expect that time for adequate sleep will not be available.        *          Avoid stimulating activities prior to sleep such as exercise, television and movies, etc.      *                          *          Make the sleep environment conducive to sleep (a dark, quiet and cool environment, and a comfortable bed encourages sleep). A white noise generator or ear plugs can be of used if you can sleep with them in.         *          Block out as much light as possible. This might involve the use of blackout curtains, roller shutters, heavy blinds, or an inexpensive option such as black plastic. . A sleep mask can also be used.       *       Whenever possible, ensure that you give yourself enough time in bed for plenty of sleep.       *       As much as possible, ensure you are not interrupted during your extended period of sleep.         *        *          Avoid alcohol, caffeine, and other stimulants  prior to sleep (keep in mind that coffee, tea, colas, chocolate, and some medications, including cold remedies and aspirin contain alcohol and/or caffeine). Avoid caffeine and other stimulants at least six hours before bedtime.       *          Relaxation techniques may help (such as meditation).       *          Do not nap during the day if you have difficulty sleeping during your normal sleep period.       *          Limit light exposure from the use of personal electronic devices prior to bed time.

    *        Maintain fitness for duty       Ensuring you are fit for duty and able to maintain safe levels of alertness and performance is important. Taking personal responsibility for your duty schedules and rest periods and providing feedback to your supervisor, management level officers and the company is important to ensure that you are provided with the best possible opportunity to maintain fitness for duty.

      There may be instances when changing schedules that even though you are provided with adequate sleep opportunity and you obtain sufficient sleep you may still show signs of fatigue. An example of this is when you are working during your circadian low. Hence, monitoring fatigue prior to and during your duty period is an important aspect of fatigue risk management (FRM). Monitoring and assessing the level of fatigue prior to your duty schedule can also be helpful in ensuring you are able to perform tasks safely.

Some ships may have systems in place to monitor and assess seafarer sleep and fitness for duty. It is important that you contribute to this data collection process. This information provides an  indicator to the management level officers and the company of fatigue levels.

       Below is some general guidance that may help you maintain fitness for duty:

         *                    *           Take strategic naps (the most effective length of time for a nap is about 20 minutes);     *           Take breaks when scheduled short breaks are assigned;          *           Whenever possible, monitor and effectively manage your sleep (can use Appendix 3);     *           Whenever possible, maintain and monitor fitness for duty including medical fitness (can use Appendix 4 and 5);     *           Report any fatigue impairment in yourself and others that could have or may have the potential of effecting ship safety;     *           Record and report actual hours of work and rest. Apart from being a regulatory requirement, these provide anindicator on whether your workload is manageable;          *           Eat regular, well-balanced meals. Try and avoid eating right before sleeping. Try and exercise regularly;     *           Limit the use of seasickness medication (if you are using medication inform your shipboard supervisor).           *

      A number of strategies have been identified, as potentially providing some relief in managing fatigue. It must be emphasized that these strategies will not restore an individual's state of alertness; they only provide short-term relief, and may in fact, simply mask the symptoms temporarily. At some stage, sleep must be obtained for physical and mental recovery to occur.  The following list captures some of these management strategies:                        * Short Rest breaks within duty periods           Rest, apart from sleep, can be provided in the form of breaks or changes in activities during the duty period. Rest pauses or breaks may be helpful  if  performance  is  to  be  maintained over long periods of time. Factors influencing the need for rest are the length and intensity of the activities prior to a break or a change in activity, the length of the break, or the nature or change of the new activity. It is recognised that in a shipboard environment this may not always be feasible, however as much as possible short breaks should be planned into the duty period.                * Strategic Napping                    A short sleep or nap can provide a powerful boost to alertness. Research has identified "strategic napping" as a short-term relief technique to help maintain performance levels during long periods of wakefulness. Naps as short as 10 to 15 minutes are known to deliver measurable benefits. Naps are helpful in maintaining performance if sufficient longer sleep is occasionally missed. The most effective length of time for a nap is about 20 minutes.  It is recommended that you take naps in the way that you believe best suits you. Napping should be encouraged to be a planned activity of fatigue management and prevention. This means that if you have the opportunity to nap you should take it.  However, there are some drawbacks associated with napping. One potential drawback is that naps longer than 30 minutes will cause sleep inertia.

       *           Caffeine            Another popular fatigue countermeasure is the strategic use of caffeine (encountered in coffee and tea, some energy drinks, and to a lesser extent in colas and chocolate) as a stimulant. Caffeine can improve alertness temporarily but it is not a substitute for adequate sleep and rest.  , It takes caffeine 15-30 minutes to take effect and caffeine levels drop by half every 5-6 hours. Its effects can last long after consumption and may interfere with needed sleep. It is important to consider however, that there are individual differences in terms of the effects of caffeine, tolerance and withdrawal can develop.  Caffeine should be avoided before bedtime. In addition, regular usage over time reduces its value as a stimulant and may make you more tired and less able to sleep. Caffeine consumption can also cause other side effects such as hypertension, headaches, mood swings and anxiety.

 4.

              *

::	Nutrition and Hydration Adequate nutrition and hydration is also important for managing and preventing fatigue. Ideally, one should have a balanced diet, eat regularly, have healthy snacks, eat breakfast, plan meals, drink water regularly and avoid late night meals (which result in slower digestion). The recommended daily intake of water is two litres or eight glasses. To be as alert and awake as possible, you need to monitor your fluid intake.

       * Environment (light, temperature, humidity, and sound)           Bright lights, cool dry air, obtrusive or loud music or other annoying irregular sounds may temporarily increase alertness.

       * Muscular activity  Physical well-being has a number of key components: notably exercise, diet, hydration, and sleep. Any type of muscular physical activity helps to keep you alert; running, walking, stretching or even chewing gum can stimulate your level of alertness. Exercise can also improve sleep. Proper physical self-care results in a range of positive outcomes including reserves of energy during the duty period, consistent and restful sleep patterns, proper concentration spans and a satisfying sense of feeling healthy. The benefits of regular exercise include improved mood, better stress coping, and enhanced self-esteem and well-being.                                         *         * Social Interaction                      Social interaction (conversation) can help you stay awake. However, the interaction must be active to be effective.                              *                                    An important consideration is that when feelings of fatigue are high, seafarers may engage in fatigue countermeasures (such as walking around, using caffeine or stimulants, etc.) to reduce the likelihood of fatigue-related errors. However, there may be instances that high levels of fatigue are not be mitigated by individual countermeasures. Hence, prompt, consistent, and appropriate action is required (by the management level officers through company support) whenever a crewmember is potentially not fit for duty. This may include the need for additional actions (such as task rotation, additional supporting resources, etc.) for managing fatigue related risks. The goal should be to maintain and promote safety.      	                	    	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	      	        	     5.      What can management level officers do to reduce and manage the risk of fatigue on ships?

 As highlighted in section 3 there are a number of measures that can be taken to manage and reduce the risk of fatigue. Many of the measures are unfortunately beyond a single person's ability to influence, such as voyage scheduling, ship design, and work scheduling which can all affect the quality and duration of sleep. Therefore, the particular nature of fatigue as a safety hazard makes managing shipboard fatigue and associated risks the shared responsibility of the company (as the employer) and the seafarer (as the employee). Both must be aware of the risks involved, especially the impact of various types of duty and work schedules. Module 2 provides recommended strategies for the company, to manage the risks of fatigue at sea. Some important aspects related to company responsibility include:         * Developing policies and practices within the ship's safety management system to manage fatigue related risks;  * Developing work schedules that prevent high levels of fatigue during duty periods;  * Developing work schedules that allow for adequate rest and recovery periods between duty schedules (if possible allow for an anchor sleep period of 7 to 8 hours);  * Implementing appropriate and safe duty/watch periods taking into account circadian effects;  *  Providing an adequate sleep environment on the ship.  * Ensuring all crew are trained and aware of the causes and consequences of fatigue;  * Promoting a safety reporting culture and open communication; and  * Continuously assessing, controlling, monitoring and evaluating fatigue-related hazards.         The following provides a recommended list of important fatigue management strategies in controlling and reducing the risk of fatigue on board ships, and are within the management level officers' ability to influence and/or implement:

   *    Ensuring compliance with maritime regulations (minimum hours of rest and/or maximum hours of work);        *    Using rested personnel to cover for those traveling long hours to join the ship and whom are expected to go on duty as soon as they arrive on board (e.g. allowing proper time to overcome fatigue and become familiarized with the ship);

   *    Impressing upon shore management the importance and benefits of addressing fatigue management and countermeasures in the context of the company's Safety Management System (as required by the International Safety Management Code) and highlighted in Module 2;

   *    Managing the amount of time seafarers need to spend performing sustained physically and mentally demanding work (tank cleaning, navigation through congested waters, etc.);

   *    Setting standards and policies to allow time for communication at watch/duty handovers;

   *    Ensuring nutritious food options are served on-board and crew have continuous access to drinking water;

   *    Providing nighttime personnel with appropriate meal choices;

   *    Maintain constant interaction between shore management and the ship management with respect to fatigue awareness and preventive measures on board the ships;        *    Creating an open communication environment, by making it clear to the crew that it is important to inform supervisors when fatigue is impairing their performance or that of others and ensuring that there will be no recriminations for such reports;

   *    Ensure that selected seafarers can do the job for which they are assigned to prevent the potential for fatigue in other crew members;

   *    Improving shipboard conditions to ensure that when there is an opportunity to sleep, crew members can take advantage of it without interruptions, e.g. by scheduling drills and routine maintenance functions in a manner that minimizes the disturbance of rest/sleep periods. All relevant crew should be aware of these protected sleep opportunities;

   *    Establishing on-board management techniques when scheduling shipboard work and rest periods and when scheduling work practices and assignment of duties in a more efficient manner (using, where appropriate, IMO and ILO recommended formats  -  "Model Format for Table of Shipboard Working Arrangements" and "Model Format for Records of Hours of Work or Hours of Rest of Seafarers");        *    Assigning work by mixing up tasks to break monotony and to combine work requiring high physical or mental demand with low-demand tasks (job rotation);

   *    Avoid scheduling potentially hazardous tasks during the circadian lows of the seafarers involved, when practicable;

   *    Provide support for seafarers to recognize and deal with the effects of fatigue including onboard training if provided;

   *    Emphasizing the seafarers responsibility to sleep during rest periods to ensure that adequate sleep is obtained;        *    Encourage and facilitate reporting on sleep issues, fatigue and fatigue- related events that effect shipboard health and safety;

   *    Taking time to monitor that  all personnel are getting adequate sleep;

   *    Ensuring that shipboard conditions, within the crew's ability to influence, are maintained in a good state (e.g. maintaining the heating, ventilation and air-conditioning on schedule, light bulbs are replaced, sources of unusual noise are taken care of at the first opportunity);

   *    Re- appraising work patterns and areas of responsibility on board to establish the most efficient utilization of resources (such as sharing the long cargo operations between all the deck officers instead of the traditional pattern and utilizing rested personnel to cover for those who have travelled long hours to join the ship and who may be expected to go on watch as soon as they arrive);

   *    Promoting supportive relationships on board (good morale) and dealing with interpersonal conflict between seafarers;

   *    Establishing shipboard practices for dealing with fatigue incidents and learning from them (e.g. as part of the safety meetings);

   *    Increasing awareness of the benefits of a healthy lifestyle (e.g. exercise, relaxation, proper nutrition).

 6.     What are the seafarer responsibilities in fatigue management on ships?

 As fatigue is a shared responsibility seafarers have a role to play in reducing the risks of fatigue.     Seafarer responsibilities include: 	     * Commencing their duty schedule in a fit state to work the expected duty length and capable of performing assigned shipboard work safely;      * Monitoring and effectively managing hours of sleep.     * ;     * Reporting fatigue related hazards that effect safety in accordance with the ship's safety management system;     * Maintaining appropriate communication about safety;     * Being aware of fatigue and how to counter its effects; and      * Using available rest periods appropriately, in addition to using personal fatigue mitigation strategies.

 Seafarers should monitor and seek appropriate treatment for their health and general well-being, as physical health can impact on fatigue. Health and well-being includes short-term (acute) and chronic health conditions, genetic predispositions, nutrition, hydration and sleep difficulties. A wide range of sleep difficulties can affect fatigue, circadian functions, sleep duration and sleep quality. This includes a diversity of sleep disorders as indicated in Module 1. Hence, when managing fatigue, seafarers are responsible to monitor and manage any health concerns that may impact on their fitness for duty.     7.       	     *      *      *      *      *      *

 8.  What rules and regulations are in place to help manage fatigue?

 Each individual Flag Administration is responsible for the development, acceptance, implementation and enforcement of national and international legislation (conventions, codes, guidelines, etc.) that deal with the various fatigue aspects (Module 6): work hours, work scheduling, rest periods, crew competency and watchkeeping  practices.

 The following international organizations have issued various conventions and other mandatory instruments that address fatigue:

       *               *     International Maritime Organization (IMO)  International Convention on Standards of Training Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as amended (STCW Convention); Seafarer's Training, Certification and Watchkeeping Code (STCW Code) Parts A and B;   International Safety Management Code (ISM Code); and various guidelines/recommendations.  IMO Resolution A.1047(27) Principles of Minimum Safe Manning                *     International Labor Organization (ILO)  Maritime Labor Convention (MLC), 2006 (Regulations, Standards and Guidelines)

 In addition to the international standards, company and flag administration policies, which may be more stringent in some cases, should be followed on board all ships.

 1. How does fatigue relate to these IMO and ILO instruments? [MOVED TO MODULE 1]

       *

       *

 The following IMO instruments contain guidance on fatigue related aspects:

    *     ISM Code     This Code introduces safety management requirements on ship companies to assess all identified risks (both ashore and afloat) that affect safety (to ship and personnel) and environment and establish appropriate safeguards. The fatigue related requirements include the requirement for the company to:        1.        Develop, implement and maintain a safety management system (ISM Code, 1.4)        2.        Ensure that each ship is manned with qualified, certificated and medically fit seafarers in accordance with national and international requirements and  are appropriately manned in order to encompass all aspects of maintaining safe operations on board (ISM Code, 6.2);        3.        Ensure necessary shipboard support is provided so that the master's duties can be safely performed (ISM Code 6.1.3); and        4.        Provide familiarization and training for shipboard personnel.        5.         6.                      *     STCW Convention      Regulation VIII/1 (Fitness for duty) states that "each Administration shall, for the purpose of preventing fatigue:        .1        establish and enforce rest periods for watchkeeping personnel and those whose duties involve designated safety, security and prevention of pollution duties in accordance with the provisions of section A-VIII/1 of the STCW Code; and        .2        require that watch systems are so arranged that the efficiency of all watchkeeping personnel is not impaired by fatigue and that duties are so organized that the first watch at the commencement of a voyage and subsequent relieving watches are sufficiently rested and otherwise fit for duty".     In addition, Part A of the Code sets minimum periods and frequencies of rest and requires that watch schedules be posted where they are easily accessible.

    *     Resolution A.1047(27)  -  Principles of Minimum Safe Manning     This resolution provides guidelines for determining minimum safe manning. In particular and in ensuring `fitness for duty'. Section 1.4.2 of the guideline states that "in determining the minimum safe manning of a ship, consideration should also be given to the capability of the master and the ship's complement to coordinate the activities necessary for the safe operation and for the security of the ship and for the protection of the marine environment".

    *     Resolution A.772(18)  -  Fatigue Factors in Manning and Safety     This Resolution provides a general description of fatigue and identifies the factors of ship operations which may contribute to fatigue.

    *     Other Instruments     The Appendix contains a list of IMO instruments identified as having some applicability to crew fatigue.                The following ILO instruments contain guidance on fatigue related aspects:

    *     Maritime Labor Convention (MLC, 2006). Relevant aspect of the MLC include, but are not limited to:         *       Regulation 2.3 (hours of work and hours of rest) introduces provisions to establish limits on seafarers' maximum working hours or minimum rest periods so as to maintain safe ship operations and minimize fatigue.         *       Regulation 2.7 (manning levels) ensure that seafarers work on board ships with sufficient personnel for the safe, efficient and secure operation of the ship.        *       Regulation 3.1 (accommodation and recreational facilities) ensures that seafarers have decent accommodation and recreational facilities on board.        *       Regulation 3.2 (food and catering) ensure that seafarers have access to good quality food and drinking water provided under regulated hygienic conditions.        *       Regulation 4.3 (health and safety protection and accident prevention) ensure that seafarers' work environment on board ships promotes occupational safety and health.

 References                                                   International Transport Workers' Federation (1997) - Seafarer Fatigue: Wake up to the dangers.  IMO, MSC 69/INF.10 - United Kingdom.    Kroemer, K.H.E., & Grandjean, E. (Re-printed 1999)  -  Fitting the Task to the Human.  Taylor & Francis Ltd.  -  London, United Kingdom.    McCallum, M.C., & Raby, M., Rothblum A. (1996) - Procedures for Investigating and Reporting Human Factors and Fatigue Contributions to Marine Casualties. Report No. CG-D- 09-97. Batelle Seattle Research Center and U.S. Coast Guard Research and Development Center   -  Connecticut, United States.    Moore-Ede M., Mitchell R. E., Heitmann A., Trutsche U., Aguirre A., & Hajarnavis H. (1996) - Canalert 1995: Alertness Assurance in the Canadian Railways - Circadian Technologies, Inc. - Massachusetts, United States.    Parker, A.W., Hubinger, L.M., Green, S., Sargent, L., & Boyd, R. (1997) - A survey of the health, stress and fatigue of Australian Seafarers - Australian Maritime Safety Authority - Australia.    Pollard J.K., Sussman E.D., & Stearns M. (1990) - Shipboard Crew fatigue, Safety and Reduced Manning. Report No. DOT-MA-RD-840-90014. John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center  -  Massachusetts, United States.      Sandquist T., Raby M., Maloney A.L., Carvalhais T. (1996) - Fatigue and Alertness in Merchant Marine Personnel: A field study of work and sleep patterns. Report No. CG-D-06-97. Batelle Seattle Research Center and U.S. Coast Guard Research and Development Center  -  Connecticut, United States.    Transportation Safety Board of Canada (1997) - A Guide for Investigating for Fatigue - Canada.    United Kingdom National Union of Marine Aviation and Shipping Transport Officers (1997) -  Give us a Break: NUMAST Report on Fatigue.  IMO, MSC 68/INF. 9 - United Kingdom.    Videotel (1998). Fatigue and Stress at Sea video- London, United  Kingdom.