[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 7, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12822-12823]
[FR Doc No: 2017-04380]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket Number USCG-2017-0033]

Waterway Suitability Assessment for Construction of a Liquefied
Natural Gas Facility; Jacksonville, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard Sector Jacksonville received a Letter of
Intent (LOI) and Waterways Suitability Assessment (WSA) for a Liquefied
Natural Gas (LNG) facility construction project in Jacksonville,
Florida. The LOI and WSA for Eagle LNG were submitted by Rodino, Inc.
The Coast Guard requests comments on the proposed construction of this
LNG facility, as defined by 33 CFR 127.005.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before April 6, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2017-0033 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this document:
call or email Lieutenant Allan Storm, Sector Jacksonville, Waterways
Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
I. Background and Purpose

    Under 33 CFR 127.007(a), an owner or operator intending to build a
new facility handling LNG, or an owner or operator planning new
construction to expand or modify marine terminal operations in an
existing facility handling LNG, where the construction, expansion, or
modification would result in an increase in the size and/or frequency
of LNG marine traffic on the waterway associated with a proposed
facility or modification to an existing facility, must submit an LOI to
the Captain of the Port (COTP) of the zone in which the facility is or
will be located. Eagle LNG submitted an LOI and WSA on November 25,
2014, and a Follow-on WSA on November 10, 2016.
    Under 33 CFR 127.009, after receiving an LOI, the COTP issues a
Letter of Recommendation (LOR) as to the suitability of the waterway
for LNG marine traffic to the appropriate jurisdictional authorities.
The LOR is based on a series of factors outlined in 33 CFR 127.009 that
relate to the physical nature of the affected waterway and issues of
safety and security associated with LNG marine traffic on the affected
waterway.
    The purpose of this notice is to solicit public comments on the
proposed construction project as submitted by Rodino, Inc. on behalf of
Eagle LNG. Input from the public may be useful to the COTP with respect
to developing the LOR. The Coast Guard requests comments to help assess
the suitability of the associated waterway for increased LNG marine
traffic as it relates to navigation, safety, and security.
    On January 24, 2011, the Coast Guard published Navigation and
Vessel Inspection Circular (NVIC) 01-2011, ``Guidance Related to
Waterfront Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Facilities.'' NVIC 01-2011
provides guidance for owners and operators seeking approval to
construct and operate LNG facilities. The Coast Guard will refer to
NVIC 01-2011 for process information and guidance in evaluating the
project included in the LOIs and WSAs submitted by Rodino, Inc. A copy
of NVIC 01-2011 is available on the Coast Guard's Web site at http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/nvic/2010s.asp.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 U.S.C. 1223-1225,
Department of Homeland Security Delegation Number 0170.1(70), 33 CFR
127.009, and 33 CFR 103.205.

II. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments on this notice for the waterway
suitability assessment for the construction of this LNG facility. We
will consider all submissions and may adjust our final action based on
your comments. If you submit a comment, please include the docket
number for this notice, indicate the specific section of this document
to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion
or recommendation. More information regarding this project can be found
on the following Web site: http://eaglelng.com/projects/jacksonville-fl.
    Please submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using
http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions. Documents mentioned in this notice and all public
comments, are in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally,
if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will
be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://

www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have
provided. For more about privacy and the docket, you may review a
Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Management System in
the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 FR 15086).

    Dated: February 28, 2017.
J.F. Dixon,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Jacksonville.
[FR Doc. 2017-04380 Filed 3-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 179 (Wednesday, September 16, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55711-55712]
[FR Doc No: 2015-23225]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2015-0007-N-24]

Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities; Comment
Request

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

ACTION: Notice and Request for Comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
notice announces that the renewal Information Collection Requests
(ICRs) abstracted below are being forwarded to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The ICRs describes the nature
of the information collection and its expected burden. The Federal
Register notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on the
following collections of information was published on June 22, 2015.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before October 16, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Brogan, Office of Planning
and Evaluation Division, RRS-21, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200
New Jersey Ave. SE., Mail Stop 25, Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone:
(202) 493-6292), or Ms. Kimberly Toone, Office of Information
Technology, RAD-20, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Ave. SE., Mail Stop 35, Washington, DC 20590 (Telephone: (202) 493-
6132). (These telephone numbers are not toll-free.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA),
Public Law 104-13, sec. 2, 109 Stat. 163 (1995) (codified as revised at
44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), and its implementing regulations, 5 CFR part
1320, require Federal agencies to issue two notices seeking public
comment on information collection activities before OMB may approve
paperwork packages. 44 U.S.C. 3506, 3507; 5 CFR 1320.5, 1320.8(d)(1),
and 1320.12. On June 22, 2015, FRA published a 60-day notice in the
Federal Register soliciting comment

on ICR that the agency is seeking OMB approval. See 80 FR 35712. FRA
received no comments in response to this notice.
    Before OMB decides whether to approve these proposed collections of
information, it must provide 30 days for public comment. 44 U.S.C.
3507(b); 5 CFR 1320.12(d). Federal law requires OMB to approve or
disapprove paperwork packages between 30 and 60 days after the 30 day
notice is published. 44 U.S.C. 3507 (b)-(c); 5 CFR 1320.12(d); see also
60 FR 44978, 44983, Aug. 29, 1995. OMB believes that the 30 day notice
informs the regulated community to file relevant comments and affords
the agency adequate time to digest public comments before it renders a
decision. 60 FR 44983, Aug. 29, 1995. Therefore, respondents should
submit their respective comments to OMB within 30 days of publication
to best ensure having their full effect. 5 CFR 1320.12(c); see also 60
FR 44983, Aug. 29, 1995.
    The summary below describes the nature of the information
collection requests (ICRs) and the expected burden. The revised request
is being submitted for clearance by OMB as required by the PRA.
    Title: Railroad Locomotive Safety Standards and Event Recorders.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0004.
    Abstract: The Locomotive Inspection requires railroads to inspect,
repair, and maintain locomotives and event recorders so that they are
safe, free of defects, and can be placed in service without peril to
life. Crashworthy locomotive event recorders provide FRA with
verifiable factual information about how trains are maintained and
operated, and are used by FRA and State inspectors for part 229 rule
enforcement. The information garnered from crashworthy event recorders
is also used by railroads to monitor railroad operations and by
railroad employees (locomotive engineers, train crews, dispatchers) to
improve train handling, and promote the safe and efficient operation of
trains throughout the country, based on a surer knowledge of different
control inputs.
    Type of Request: Extension with Change of a Currently Approved
Information Collection.
    Affected Public: Businesses (Railroads).
    Form(s): FRA F 6180.49A.
    Annual Estimated Burden: 2,087,543 hours.

    Title: FRA Emergency Order No. 31, Notice No. 1.
    OMB Control Number: 2130-0611.
    Abstract: On May 21, 2015, FRA issued Emergency Order No. 31 (EO or
Order) to require that the National Railroad Passenger Corporation
(Amtrak) take actions to control passenger train speed at certain
locations on main line track in the Northeast Corridor (as defined by
49 U.S.C. 24905(c)(1)(A)). Amtrak was required to immediately implement
code changes to its Automatic Train Control (ATC) System to enforce the
passenger train speed limit ahead of the curve at Frankford Junction in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, where a fatal accident occurred on May 12,
2015. Amtrak was also required to identify all other curves on the
Northeast Corridor where there is a significant reduction (more than 20
miles per hour (mph)) from the maximum authorized approach speed to
those curves for passenger trains. Amtrak was then required to develop
and comply with an FRA-approved action plan to modify its existing ATC
System or other signal systems (or take alternative operational
actions) to enable enforcement of passenger train speeds at the
identified curves. Amtrak also had to install additional wayside
passenger train speed limit signage at appropriate locations on its
Northeast Corridor right-of-way. FRA is continuing this Emergency Order
in full force and effect, and is now seeking regular clearance for the
information collection associated with this Emergency Order.
    Type of Request: Extension with Change of a Currently Approved
Information Collection.
    Affected Public: Businesses (Railroads).
    Form(s): N/A.
    Annual Estimated Burden: 245 hours.
    Addressee: Send comments regarding these information collections to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, 725 Seventeenth Street NW., Washington, DC, 20503,
Attention: FRA Desk Officer. Comments may also be sent via email to OMB
at the following address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Comments are invited on the following: Whether the proposed
collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Department, including whether the information will
have practical utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimates of
the burden of the proposed information collections; ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
ways to minimize the burden of the collections of information on
respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
    A comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB
receives it within 30 days of publication of this notice in the Federal
Register.

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

Corey Hill,
Executive Officer.
[FR Doc. 2015-23225 Filed 9-15-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 68 (Monday, April 9, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21000-21002]
[FR Doc No: C1-2011-31276]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 67

[Docket ID FEMA-2011-0002]

Final Flood Elevation Determinations

Correction

    In rule document 2011-31276 beginning on page 76055 in the issue of
Tuesday, December 6, 2011, make the following corrections:

Sec.  67.11  [Corrected]

0
1. On page 76056, under the ADDRESSES heading, the following text
should read as set forth below:

City of Lebanon
Maps are available for inspection at the Municipal Building, 401 South
 Meridian Street, Lebanon, IN 46052.

Town of Whitestown
Maps are available for inspection at the Town Hall, 3 South Main Street,
 Whitestown, IN 46075.

                  Unincorporated Areas of Boone County
Maps are available for inspection at the Boone County Area Plan
 Commission, 116 West Washington Street, Lebanon, IN 46052.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
2. On page 76057, under the ADDRESSES heading, the following text
should read as set forth below:

City of East Chicago
Maps are available for inspection at 4444 Railroad Avenue, East Chicago,
 IN 46312.

City of Gary
Maps are available for inspection at 401 West Broadway, Gary, IN 46402.

City of Hammond
Maps are available for inspection at 5925 Calumet Avenue, Hammond, IN
 46322.

City of Whiting
Maps are available for inspection at 1443 119th Street, Whiting, IN
 46394.

Town of Dyer
Maps are available for inspection at 1 Town Square, Dyer, IN 46311.

Town of Griffith
Maps are available for inspection at 111 North Broad Street, Griffith,
 IN 46319.

Town of Lowell
Maps are available for inspection at 501 East Main Street, Lowell, IN
 46356.

Town of Merrillville
Maps are available for inspection at 7820 Broadway, Merrillville, IN
 46410.

Town of Munster
Maps are available for inspection at 1005 Ridge Road, Munster, IN 46321.

Town of Schererville
Maps are available for inspection at 10 East Joliet Street,
 Schererville, IN 46375.

                   Unincorporated Areas of Lake County
Maps are available for inspection at 2293 North Main Street, Crown
 Point, IN 46307.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
3. On the same page, under the second ADDRESSES heading, the following
text should read as set forth below:

Town of Cruger
Maps are available for inspection at the Town Hall, 225 Railroad Street,
 Cruger, MS 38924.

                  Unincorporated Areas of Holmes County
Maps are available for inspection at the Holmes County Courthouse, 300
 Yazoo Street, Lexington, MS 39095.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
4. On page 76058, under the ADDRESSES heading, the following text
should read as set forth below:

Township of Fox
Maps are available for inspection at the Fox Township Municipal
 Building, 116 Irishtown Road, Kersey, PA 15846.

Township of Ridgway
Maps are available for inspection at the Township Municipal Building,
 164 Ridgway Drive, Ridgway, PA 15853.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
5. On the same page, under the second ADDRESSES heading, the following
text should read as set forth below:

Township of Antrim
Maps are available for inspection at the Antrim Township Municipal
 Building, 10655 Antrim Church Road, Greencastle, PA 17225.

Township of Guilford
Maps are available for inspection at the Guilford Township Building, 115
 Spring Valley Road, Chambersburg, PA 17201.

Township of Letterkenny
Maps are available for inspection at the Letterkenny Township Building,
 4924 Orrstown Road, Orrstown, PA 17244.

Township of Lurgan
Maps are available for inspection at the Lurgan Township Building, 8650
 McClays Mill Road, Newburg, PA 17240.

Township of Peters
Maps are available for inspection at the Peters Township Building, 5342
 Lemar Road, Mercersburg, PA 17236.

Township of Southampton

Maps are available for inspection at the Township Building, 705
 Municipal Drive, Southampton, PA 17257.

Township of Washington
Maps are available for inspection at the Washington Township Building,
 13013 Welty Road, Waynesboro, PA 17268.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
6. On page 76059, under the ADDRESSES heading, the following text
should read as set forth below:

Borough of New Beaver
Maps are available for inspection at the New Beaver Borough Office, 778
 Wampum New Galilee Road, New Galilee, PA 16141.

Borough of Wampum
Maps are available for inspection at the Borough Secretary's Office, 355
 Main Street, Wampum, PA 16157.

Township of Hickory
Maps are available for inspection at the Hickory Township Hall, 127
 Eastbrook-Neshannock Falls Road, New Castle, PA 16105.

Township of Mahoning
Maps are available for inspection at the Mahoning Township Municipal
 Building, 4538 West State Street, Hillsville, PA 16132.

Township of Perry
Maps are available for inspection at the Perry Township Hall, 284 Reno
 Road, Portersville, PA 16051.

Township of Pulaski
Maps are available for inspection at the Township Hall, 1172 State Route
 208, Pulaski, PA 16117.

Township of Taylor
Maps are available for inspection at the Taylor Township Board of
 Supervisors Office, 218 Industrial Street, West Pittsburg, PA 16160.

Township of Union
Maps are available for inspection at the Union Township Board of
 Supervisors Office, 1910 Wilson Drive, New Castle, PA 16101.

Township of Wilmington
Maps are available for inspection at the Wilmington Township Hall, 669
 Wilson Mill Road, New Castle, PA 16105.

[FR Doc. C1-2011-31276 Filed 4-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1501-05-D


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 30, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34731-34732]
[FR Doc No: 2021-13926]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER21-2109-000]

Wheatridge Solar Energy Center, LLC; Supplemental Notice That
Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section
204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Wheatridge Solar Energy Center, LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC
20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules
of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a
motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on
the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is July 13, 2021.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    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 the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 23, 2021.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-13926 Filed 6-29-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 35 (Thursday, February 21, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 5431]
[FR Doc No: 2019-02863]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

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

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP19-653-000.
    Applicants: Southern Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Fuel Retention Rates--Spring
2019 to be effective 4/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 2/12/19.
    Accession Number: 20190212-5012.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/25/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-654-000.
    Applicants: Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: 021219 Negotiated Rates--
Mercuria Energy America, Inc. H-7540-89 to be effective 2/15/2019.
    Filed Date: 2/12/19.
    Accession Number: 20190212-5019.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/25/19.

    Docket Numbers: RP19-655-000.
    Applicants: Bear Creek Storage Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Compliance filing Annual Report on Operational
Transactions 2019.
    Filed Date: 2/12/19.
    Accession Number: 20190212-5026.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/25/19.

    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: February 13, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-02863 Filed 2-20-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 141 (Friday, July 22, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43893-43896]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18483]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[USCG-2011-0648]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulations; Port Huron to Mackinac Island Sail
Race

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will establish a temporary special local
regulation for the annual Port Huron to Mackinac Island Sail Race. This
action is necessary to safely control vessel movements in the vicinity
of the race's starting point and to provide for the safety of the
general boating public and commercial shipping. No person or vessel may
enter the regulated area without the permission of the Ninth District
Commander or the Coast Guard Patrol Commander (PATCOM).

DATES: This temporary final rule is effective from 9 a.m. through 4
p.m. on July 23, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2011-0648 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-0648 in the
Docket ID box, and then clicking ``Search.'' This material is also
available for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility
(M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey, Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions concerning this
temporary rule, call or e-mail Mr. Frank Jennings, Jr., Auxiliary and
Boating Safety Branch, Ninth Coast Guard District, via e-mail at:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you have
questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency, for good cause, finds that
those procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the
public interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) with respect to this rule because doing so is unnecessary and
contrary to the public interest. Publishing an NPRM for this rule is
unnecessary and contrary to the public interest because the event is
well-known, non-controversial, and the impact of the regulation on
navigation and the public is very low. This event is well-known in the
community. This year will be the 87th annual running of this race, and
regulations have been published relating to this event since 1995. From
1995 to 2008, this event was listed in a recurring marine events list
in the Code of Federal Regulations. This event is non-controversial. In
the various regulations and notices published for this event in the
last sixteen years, no negative comments have ever been received and
few, if any Notices of Violation have been issued. This regulation will
have very little impact on the boating public. The regulation is for
less than one day, for a regulated area which remains open to
navigation, though subject to the control of the Patrol Commander.

    The Coast Guard is currently engaged in a revision of the permanent
regulation for this recurring annual event. While this event has taken
place annually for some time, the Special Local Regulation for the
event has undergone significant changes in the last several years.
While these changes are in process, Temporary Final Rules are being
used to protect event participants and the public from the hazards
associated with the event.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. For the same reasons discussed in
the preceding paragraphs, waiting 30 days for this rule to become
effective is unnecessary and contrary to the public interest.

Background and Purpose

    The Port Huron to Mackinac boat race (officially titled the
``Bell's Beer Bayview Mackinac Race'') will set sail on Saturday, July
23, 2011. Over 200 sailboats are expected to take part in this regatta,
which starts in Port Huron. The Ninth District Commander has determined
that the high concentration of participants and spectators at the
race's starting point poses extra and unusual hazards to the boating
public. The likely combination of congested waterways, vessels engaged
in a regatta, and fast currents could result in serious injuries or
fatalities.

Discussion of Rule

    With the aforementioned hazards in mind, the Ninth District
Commander will enforce special local regulations in the vicinity of the
race's starting point from 9 a.m. until 4 p.m. on July 23, 2011. The
special local regulations apply to the waters of the Black River, St.
Clair River and lower Lake Huron bounded by a line starting at:
latitude 042[deg]58'47'' N, longitude 082[deg]26'00'' W; then easterly
to latitude 042[deg]58'24'' N, longitude 082[deg]24'47'' W; thence
northward along the International Boundary to latitude 043[deg]02'48''
N, longitude 082[deg]23'47'' W; then westerly to the shoreline at
approximate location latitude 043[deg]02'48'' N, longitude
082[deg]26'48'' W; thence southward along the U.S. shoreline to
latitude 042[deg]58'54'' N, longitude 082[deg]26'01'' W; then back to
the beginning. All coordinates reference the North American Datum of
1983 (NAD 83).
    In order to ensure the safety of spectators and participating
vessels, this special local regulation will be in effect for the first
day of the event. The Coast Guard will patrol the race area under the
direction of a designated Coast Guard Patrol Commander (PATCOM). Any
vessel desiring to transit the regulated area, including commercial
vessels, may do so only with prior approval of the PATCOM and only when
so directed by the PATCOM. The PATCOM may be contacted on VHF-FM
Channel 16 (156.8 MHZ) by the call sign ``Coast Guard Patrol
Commander.''
    Vessels allowed to enter the regulated area will be operated at a
no wake speed to reduce the wake to a minimum and in a manner that will
not endanger participants in the event or any other craft. The rules
contained in the above two sentences shall not apply to participants in
the event or vessels of the patrol operating in the performance of
their assigned duties.

Regulatory Analyses

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

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Executive Order 12866
or under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management
and Budget has not reviewed it under that those Orders. It is not
``significant'' under the regulatory policies and procedures of the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS). We conclude that this rule is
not a significant regulatory action because we anticipate that during
the short time this zone will be in effect, it will have minimal impact
on the economy, will not interfere with other agencies, will not
adversely alter the budget of any grant or loan recipients, and will
not raise any novel or legal policy issue. These conclusions are based
on this special local regulation's short and temporary nature along
with its application to only those waters in the vicinity of the race's
starting point. Plus, vessels may still pass through the regulated area
with permission from the PATCOM. Finally, the Coast Guard expects the
public to be well aware of this event and thus, able to plan
accordingly.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit
or anchor in a portion of the Black River, St. Clair River, and lower
Lake Huron from 9 a.m. until 4 p.m. July 23, 2011.
    These special local regulations will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the
following reasons: This rule will be enforced for only 7 hours on a
weekend when the majority of vessel traffic transiting the area is
recreational; vessel traffic will be allowed to pass through the
regulated area with the permission of the Coast Guard Patrol Commander;
and before the effective period, the Coast Guard will issue maritime
advisories widely to users of the river.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offered to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they could better evaluate
its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process. Small
businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who
enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to
the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and
the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman
evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency's responsiveness
to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of
the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard
will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain
about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

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

Federalism

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

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

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

Indian Tribal Governments

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

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. This rule does not use technical standards.
Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(h), of
the Instruction. This rule involves a special local regulation issued
in conjunction with a regatta or marine parade, and thus, paragraph
34(h) applies. An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical
exclusion determination are available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR Part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

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

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1233.

0
2. Add Sec.  100.35T09-0648 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.35T09-0648  Special Local Regulations; Port Huron to Mackinac
Island Sail Race.

    (a) Location. The special local regulations apply to the waters of
the Black River, St. Clair River, and lower Lake Huron starting at:
Latitude 042[deg]58'47'' N, longitude 082[deg]26'00'' W; then easterly
to latitude 042[deg]58'24'' N, longitude 082[deg]24'47'' W; thence
northward along the International Boundary to latitude 043[deg]02'48''
N, longitude 082[deg]23'47'' W; then westerly to the shoreline at
approximate location latitude 043[deg]02'48'' N, longitude
082[deg]26'48'' W; thence southward along the U.S. shoreline to
latitude 042[deg]58'54'' N, longitude 082[deg]26'01'' W; then back to
the beginning [DATUM: NAD 83].
    (b) Enforcement period. This rule will be enforced from 9 a.m. to 4
p.m. on July 23, 2011.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  100.35 of this part, the Coast Guard will patrol the regulated
area under the direction of a designated Coast Guard Patrol Commander
(PATCOM). The PATCOM may be contacted on VHF-FM Channel 16 (156.8 MHz)
by the call sign ``Coast Guard Patrol Commander.'' Vessels desiring to
enter or transit the regulated area may do so only with prior approval
of the PATCOM and only when so directed by that officer.
    (2) Vessels allowed to enter the regulated area will be operated at
a no wake speed to reduce the wake to a minimum and in a manner which
will not endanger participants in the event or any other craft. The
rules in this subparagraph shall not apply to participants in the event
or vessels of the patrol operating in the performance of their assigned
duties.
    (3) The Patrol Commander may direct the anchoring, mooring, or
movement of any boat or vessel within the regulated area. A succession
of sharp, short signals by whistle or horn from vessels patrolling the
area under the direction of the U.S. Coast Guard PATCOM shall serve as
a signal to stop. Vessels so signaled shall stop and shall comply with
the orders of the PATCOM. Failure to do so may result in expulsion from

the regulated area, citation for failure to comply, or both.
    (4) The PATCOM may establish vessel size and speed limitations and
operating conditions. The PATCOM may restrict vessel operation within
the regulated area to vessels having particular operating
characteristics. The PATCOM may terminate the marine event or the
operation of vessel at any time it is deemed necessary for the
protection of life and property.

    Dated: July 12, 2011.
J.R. Bingaman,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Commander, Ninth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2011-18483 Filed 7-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 251 (Tuesday, December 31, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 79615-79619]
[FR Doc No: 2013-31121]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[EPA-R01-RCRA-2013-0554; FRL--9904-47-Region 1]

Vermont: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct Final Rule.

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

SUMMARY: The State of Vermont has applied to the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) for Final authorization of changes to its
hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). EPA has determined that these changes satisfy all
requirements needed to qualify for Final authorization, and is
authorizing the State's changes through this direct final action.

DATES: This rule is effective on March 3, 2014 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse written comment by January 30, 2014. If EPA
receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take
effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
RCRA-2013-0554, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, to the attention of Sharon Leitch.
     Mail: Sharon Leitch, RCRA Waste Management and UST
Section, Office of Site Remediation and Restoration (OSRR07-1), US EPA
Region 1, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109-3912.
     Hand Delivery: Sharon Leitch, RCRA Waste Management and
UST Section, Office of Site Remediation and Restoration (OSRR07-1), US
EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office Square, 7th floor, Boston, MA 02109-3912.
Such deliveries are only accepted during normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. Please contact Sharon Leitch at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R01-RCRA-
2013-0554. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA
Region 1 Library, 5 Post Office Square, 1st floor, Boston, MA 02109-
3912; by appointment only; tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sharon Leitch, RCRA Waste Management
and UST Section, Office of Site Remediation and Restoration, (Mail
Code: OSRR07-1), EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston,
MA 02109-3912; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number (617) 918-
0647; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Why are revisions to state programs necessary?

    States which have received final authorization from EPA under RCRA
section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous waste
program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent
than the Federal program. As the Federal program changes, States must
change their programs and ask EPA to authorize the changes. Changes to
State programs may be necessary when Federal or State statutory or
regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur.
Most commonly, States must change their programs because of changes to
EPA's regulations in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
parts 124, 260 through 266, 268, 270, 273 and 279.

 B. What decisions have we made in this Rule?

    We have concluded that Vermont's application to revise its
authorized program meets all of the statutory and regulatory
requirements established by RCRA. Therefore, we grant Vermont Final
authorization to operate its hazardous waste program with the changes
described in the authorization application. Vermont has responsibility
for permitting treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs)
within its borders and for carrying out the aspects of the RCRA program
covered by its revised program application, subject to the limitations
of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). New Federal
requirements and prohibitions imposed by Federal regulations that EPA
promulgates under the authority of HSWA take effect in authorized
States before they are authorized for the requirements. Thus, EPA will
implement any such requirements and prohibitions in Vermont, including
issuing permits, until the State is granted authorization to do so.

C. What is the effect of today's authorization decision?

    The effect of this decision is that a facility in Vermont subject
to RCRA will now have to comply with the authorized State requirements
instead of the equivalent Federal requirements in order to comply with
RCRA. Vermont has enforcement responsibilities under its State
hazardous waste program for violations of such program, but EPA also
retains its full authority under RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and
7003, which includes, among others, authority to:
     Perform inspections, and require monitoring, tests,
analyses or reports
     Enforce RCRA requirements and suspend or revoke permits
     Take enforcement actions
    This action does not impose additional requirements on the
regulated community because the regulations for which Vermont is being
authorized by today's action are already effective under state law, and
are not changed by today's action.

D. Why wasn't there a Proposed Rule before today's Rule?

    EPA did not publish a proposal before today's rule because we view
this as a routine program change and do not expect adverse comments
that oppose this approval. We are providing an opportunity for public
comment now. In addition to this rule, in the ``Proposed Rules''
section of today's Federal Register we are publishing a separate
document that proposes to authorize the State program changes.

E. What happens if the EPA receives comments that oppose this action?

    If EPA receives comments that oppose this authorization, we will
withdraw this rule by publishing a document in the Federal Register
before the rule becomes effective. EPA will base any further decision
on the authorization of the State program changes on the proposal
mentioned in the previous paragraph. We will then address all public
comments in a later final rule based upon this proposed rule that also
appears in today's Federal Register. You may not have another
opportunity to comment. If you want to comment on this authorization,
you should do so at this time.
    If we receive adverse comments that oppose only the authorization
of a particular change to the State hazardous waste program, we will
withdraw that part of this rule but the authorization of the program
changes that the comments do not oppose will become effective on the
date specified in this document. The Federal Register withdrawal
document will specify which part of the authorization will become
effective, and which part is being withdrawn.

F. What has Vermont previously been authorized for?

    The State of Vermont initially received Final authorization on
January 7, 1985, with an effective date of January 21, 1985 (50 FR 775)
to implement the RCRA hazardous waste management program. The Region
published an immediate final rule for certain revisions to Vermont's
program on May 3, 1993 (58 FR 26242) and reopened the comment period
for these revisions on June 7, 1993 (58 FR 31911). This authorization
became effective August 6, 1993 (58 FR 31911). The Region granted
authorization for further revisions to Vermont's program on September
24, 1999 (64 FR 51702), effective November 23, 1999. On October 18,
1999 (64 FR 46174) the Region published a correction to the immediate
final rule that was published on September 24, 1999. The Region granted
authorization for further revisions to Vermont's program on October 26,
2000, effective December 26, 2000 (65 FR 64164). That Federal Register
also made a technical correction. On June 23, 2005 (70 FR 36350) the
Region published an immediate final rule for additional revisions to
Vermont's program. This authorization became effective on August 22,
2005. The most recent authorization was granted to Vermont on March 16,
2007 (72 FR 12568) and became effective on May 15, 2007.

G. What changes are we authorizing with today's action?

    On August 20, 2013, Vermont submitted a final complete program
revision application, seeking authorization for their changes in
accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. In particular, Vermont is seeking
authorization for updated state regulations addressing federal
requirements added from July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2011. Also,
Vermont is seeking authorization for various changes it recently has
made to its base program regulations.
    We are now making an immediate final decision that, subject to
reconsideration only if we receive written comments that oppose this
action, Vermont's hazardous waste program revisions satisfy all of the
requirements necessary to qualify for Final authorization. Therefore,
we grant Vermont Final authorization for the following program changes.
First, we are authorizing state regulations that track federal
regulations adopted since July 1, 2005, as follows (the Federal
Citation is followed by the analog from chapter 7 of the Vermont
Environmental Protection Rules (Hazardous Waste Management
Regulations), effective March 15, 2013): Federal: Methods Innovation
Rule and SW-846 Final Update IIIB [70 FR 34538, June 14, 2005. As
amended August 1, 2005; 70 FR 44150] (Checklist 208)- State: 7-106(a),
7-109(a), 7-109(b)(1), 7-202(a)(9), 7-205(a)(1), 7-206(a)(1) & (a)(2),
7-210, 7-217(c), 7-219, 7-219(c), 7-219(e), 7-504(e)(1), 7-505(c), 7-
510(c)(1), 7-511(a) & (d), 7-805(f), 7-811(b)(5), 7-812(d), 7-813(a);
Federal: Revision of Wastewater Treatment Exemptions for Hazardous
Waste Mixtures (``Headworks exemptions'') [70 FR 57769, October 4,
2005] (Checklist 211)- State: 7-109(a) and 203(k)(3); Federal: Burden
Reduction Initiative; [71 FR 16862, April 4, 2006] (Checklist 213)--
State: 7-106(a), 7-109(a), 7-109(b)(1), 7-204(b)&(c), 7-203(i)(4), 7-
504(e)(1), 7-505(c), 7-507(f)(1), 7-510(c)(1); Federal: Corrections to
Errors in the Code of Federal Regulations [71 FR 40254, July 14, 2006]
(Checklist 214)--State: 7-103, 7-106(a), 7-108(d), 7-109(a), 7-
109(b)(1) & (b)(2), 7-203(i)(4), 7-203(v), 7-203(r), 7-204(f), 7-
204(f)(3), 7-204(g), 7-204(g)(1) & (g)(2), 7-205(a)(3) & (a)(4), 7-
205(a)(4)(A), (B), (C) & (D), 7-208(b), 7-210, 7-215, 7-217(c), 7-
311(h), 7-501, 7-502(d), 7-504, 7-504(e)(1), 7-505, 7-505(c), 7-
507(f)(1), 7-508(e)(2), 7-

510(c)(1), 7-510(d), 7-512, 7-606, 7-608, 7-705(b)(2), 7-705(d), 7-
706(c), 7-708(c), 7-802, 7-803, 7-805(f)(2), 7-806(e), 7-811(b)(3), 7-
811(b)(5)(A), 7-811(b)(6)(A), 7-811(i)(1), 7-811(i)(3)(A), 7-812(c), 7-
812(d), 7-813, 7-902(d), 7-911, 7-912(d)(2), Appendix I, II, III, IV &
IX; Federal: Academic Laboratories Generator Standards and Technical
Corrections [73 FR 72912, December 1, 2008 and 75 FR 79304, December
20, 2010] (Checklists 220 and 226)--State: 7-103, 7-109(b)(4), 7-
305(a)(7), 7-306(c)(1)(A), 7-306(d), 7-307(c)(1) and (6), 7-307(d), 7-
308(b)(1) and (6), 7-308(c); OECD Requirements; Export Shipments of
Spent Lead-Acid Batteries [75 FR 1236, January 8, 2010] (Checklist
222)--State: 7-109(a), 7-204(f)(3), 7-307(c)(8 & 9), 7-308(b)(8 & 9),
7-402(b), 7-504(e), 7-510(c), 7-704(c) & (e), 7-705(c) & (d), 7-706(c),
7-707(c) (but note that EPA directly administers the export and import
requirements in 40 CFR part 262, subpart H referenced by the State
regulations); Hazardous Waste Technical Corrections and Clarifications
[75 FR 12989, March 18, 2010 and 75 FR 31716, June 4, 2010] (Checklist
223)--State: 7-103, 7-106(a), 7-109(a) & (a)(7), 7-202(e), 7-203(j)(1),
7-203(j)(3), 7-204(f), 7-204(g), 7-207(a)(8), 7-209(b), 7-210, 7-306,
7-306(a)(2) & (a)(3), 7-306(b) & (c), 7-307(c)(4), 7-308(a) & (b) and
``Note'' in (b), 7-310(a), 7-311(c), 7-504(e)(1), 7-510(c)(1), 7-512,
7-607, 7-608, 7-702(b)(12), 7-706(b), 7-707(a), (b) & (d), 7-708(a),
Appendix I, III, & IV; Removal of Saccharin and Its Salts from the
Lists of Hazardous Constituents [75 FR 78918, December 17, 2010]
(Checklist 225) --State: Appendix II & III; Revision of the Land
Disposal Treatment Standards for Carbamate Wastes [76 FR 34147, June
13, 2011] (Checklist 227)--State: IBR, 7-106(a).
    In addition to the regulations listed above, there are various
previously authorized state program regulations to which the state has
made changes. The EPA is also authorizing these changes. These changes
are as follows: Regarding Subchapter 1 of the State Regulations,
Federal: definitions in 40 CFR 260.10--State: added definitions of
elementary neutralization unit, tank system and wastewater treatment
unit (instead of citing federal definitions), revised definitions of
pesticidal waste, registration, and used oil, and removed the
definition for ``performance track member facility'' in 7-103; Federal:
40 CFR 262.12 (i.d. numbers)--State: provisions for temporary i.d.
numbers added to 7-104; Federal: 40 CFR part 260-279--State: general
update to incorporation by reference of federal regulations, 7-109(a);
Regarding Subchapter 2 of the State Regulations, Federal: 40 CFR 262.11
(waste determinations)--State: 7-202(d) revised to clarify
recordkeeping requirements; Federal: 40 CFR 261.4(a)(13) and (14)
(scrap metal and shredded circuit board exemptions. Note: EPA
interprets the scrap metal exemption to cover intact circuit boards
that meet certain conditions.)--State: Revision to 7-204(h) allowing
intact as well as shredded circuit boards, meeting the required
conditions, to qualify for the exemption; Federal: 40 CFR
261.2(c)(2)(ii), exemption for certain commercial chemical products
burned as fuels--State: clarified container and tank marking
requirements and added requirements for aggregation facilities, 7-
204(1)(4) and (6); Federal: 40 CFR 261.33(c), regarding commercial
chemical products listings--State: 7-214(d) and 7-215(d) revised to
track the federal language; Regarding Subchapter 3 of the State
Regulations, Federal: 40 CFR 262.12 (i.d. nos.)--State: 7-304(a),
revision clarifying that temporary i.d. numbers are only issued for
hazardous wastes that are episodically generated; Federal: 40 CFR
265.111, 265.114 and 265.197 (generator closure)--State: revisions to
generator closure requirements at 7-304(d) and 7-309(c)(2), being
authorized as applied to tank closures and is broader in scope as
applied to closure of other units; Federal: 40 CFR 262.34(d), small
quantity generators--State: clarification of small quantity generator
requirements in 7-307; Federal: 40 CFR 262.34(a), large quantity
generators--State: clarification of large quantity generator
requirements in 7-308; Federal: 40 CFR 262.34(d)(5)(iv), regulation of
small quantity generator emergency response requirements--State:
revised, 7-307(c)(14) by revising subsection (A) and adding subsection
(D) making it equivalent to the federal requirements; Federal: 40 CFR
265.32(b), preparedness and prevention requirements for large quantity
generators and small quantity generators as referenced in 40 CFR
262.34(a)(4) and 40 CFR 262.34(d)(4), respectively--State: revised to
make the requirements more up-to-date with current practices (e.g.,
substituted reference to cell phone for reference to two-way radios),
7-307(c)(14)(B), 7-308(b)(14)(A)(iv), 7-309(a)(1)(B), and 7-
309(a)(3)(B); Federal: 40 CFR 261.5, requirements for CESQGs--State: 7-
306, except for 7-306(c)(1)(G) (fees). Note: 7-306 previously was
authorized in 1999 with respect to Checklist 153, we are now confirming
that this provision is authorized for all purposes, not just with
respect to Checklist 153; Federal: 40 CFR 270.1(c), prohibition of
unpermitted disposal of hazardous waste--State: 7-302(a), prohibiting
disposal of hazardous waste by evaporation. Note: this provision was
adopted by the State in 1998 but was inadvertently not previously
authorized and is being authorized now; Regarding Subchapter 4 of the
State Regulations, Federal: 40 CFR 263.12, transfer facility
requirements--State: clarifying requirements for the management of off-
loaded containers of hazardous waste from transport vehicles, 7-404(b)
(formerly 7-404(c)); Federal: 40 CFR part 263--State: clarification
when transporter requirements apply, 7-401(b)(1)(A) and 7-405(d);
Regarding Subchapter 5 of the State Regulations, Federal: 40 CFR
264.1(g)(6), 265.1(c)(10) and 270.1(c)(2)(v), elementary neutralization
and wastewater treatment unit exemptions--State: revised exemption
(changed cross-reference) at 7-502(c); Federal: 40 CFR 262.34, as
interpreted at 51 FR 10168--State: 7-502(o) revisions to generator
treatment in containers and tanks standards, except for 7-502(o)(8) and
revision to the note following 7-502(o)(10) (not yet submitted for
authorization), and addition of 7-502(k)(1)(C); Federal: 40 CFR 270.50,
duration of permits--State: 7-504(g), changing from 5 year permits to
10 year permits, as federally allowed; Regarding Subchapter 6 of the
State Regulations, Federal: 40 CFR 260.30, variances--State: 7-608(d),
(e) & (f) setting time limits on variances, as applied to any federally
regulated wastes; Regarding Subchapter 8 of the State Regulations,
Federal: 40 CFR 279.11, specification used oil burned for energy
recovery--State: revised 7-801 and 7-802, and 7-812(c)(3) and added 7-
804(g) (being authorized except for (g)(3) which is broader in scope);
Federal: 40 CFR 279.20--279.24, generator standards--State: 7-807(h),
added record-keeping requirement; Regarding Subchapter 9 of the State
Regulations, Federal: 40 CFR 273.11 and 40 CFR 273.31, prohibitions of
treatment by universal waste handlers--State: added Notes clarifying
that drum top crushing is regulated as treatment rather than being
considered an exempt recycling activity (this is equivalent to the
federal approach with respect to universal waste handlers); Federal: 40
CFR part 273, Standards for Universal Waste Management--State: 10
V.S.A. sec. 6680 designating postconsumer paint as universal waste and
setting management standards, 7-901, 7-910, 7-911, 7-912(a)&(b), 7-
912(c)(1)&(c)(2)(A), 7-912(c)(2)Note, 7-

912(c)(3), 7-912(f)-(k), 7-913, 7-914, 7-915, 7-916.
    The final authorization of new state regulations and regulation
changes is in addition to the previous authorization of state
regulations, which remain part of the authorized program. Vermont
initially received authorization for its base program requirements in
1985 and again in 1993. Vermont subsequently reformatted and renumbered
various base program regulations, and submitted revised base program
Checklists in connection with the EPA's 1999 authorization. The
renumbered and reformatted provisions, as referenced in those
Checklists, are part of the authorized program. See 64 FR 51706 (Sept.
24, 1999). The current authorized program consists of the base program
requirements together with the additional requirements and changes
authorized by the EPA in the 1993, 1999, 2000, 2005 and 2007
authorizations. Added to this will be the requirements being authorized
through this rulemaking today.

H. Where are the revised state rules different from the federal rules?

    The most significant differences between the State rules being
authorized and the Federal rules are summarized below. It should be
noted that this summary does not describe every difference, or every
detail regarding the differences that are described. Members of the
regulated community are advised to read the complete regulations to
ensure that they understand all of the requirements with which they
will need to comply.

1. More Stringent Provisions

    There are aspects of the Vermont program which are more stringent
than the Federal program. All of these more stringent requirements are,
or will become, part of the federally enforceable RCRA program when
authorized by the EPA and must be complied with in addition to the
State requirements which track the minimum Federal requirements. These
more stringent requirements include the following: (a) the state has
adopted the federal Academic Labs rule but has also added requirements
for Laboratory Management Plans that are more stringent, 7-109(b)(4)(B)
to (D); (b) the State has revised its exemption for commercial chemical
product fuels in 7-204(l)(6) by more stringently specifying the
management requirements for aggregation facilities. As noted in our
2007 authorization, the underlying State exemption is equivalent to the
combination of the federal exemption for commercial chemical product
fuels being burned for energy recovery and the federal exemption for
commercial chemical products being reclaimed, in 40 CFR 261.2(c)(2)(ii)
and (c)(3), respectively.

2. Broader in Scope Provisions

    There are also aspects of the Vermont program which are broader in
scope than the Federal program. The portion of the State requirements
which are broader in scope are not considered to be part of the
Federally enforceable RCRA program. However, they are fully enforceable
under State law and must be complied with by sources in Vermont. These
broader in scope requirements include the following: (a) the state has
revised its Used Oil regulations by adding management standards in 7-
804(g) for used oil that has been shown to meet fuel burning
specifications (``used oil fuel''). The broader in scope provisions are
found in 7-804(g)(3); (b) With respect to point source discharges of
wastewaters that are hazardous wastes, the State has amended state
regulation 7-203(q) to only exempt from its hazardous waste regulations
those discharges that are ``in compliance with'' State water act
requirements rather than exempting from hazardous waste requirements
all discharges that are ``subject to'' the State water act
requirements. The comparable federal exemption at 40 CFR 261.4(a)(2)
exempts discharges that are ``subject to'' section 402 of the Clean
Water Act. Thus the State is exempting fewer sources from hazardous
waste regulation than does the federal exemption and is, therefore,
regulating more broadly in scope.

3. Different but Equivalent Provisions

    Vermont also has added a provision to its state statute which
differs from the Federal regulations but has been determined to be
equivalent to them. These State revisions will become part of the
federally enforceable RCRA program when authorized by the EPA. These
different but equivalent provisions are as follows. Vermont has added
postconsumer paint to its Universal Waste rules through a state
statutory provision found at 10 V.S.A. sec. 6680. We are authorizing
this as being equivalent to the requirements of 40 CFR part 273 Subpart
G since we have determined that it is an appropriate universal waste to
approve and that the rules allow the States the flexibility to add
additional wastes to their list of universal wastes. In particular, we
are authorizing the specific management requirements for these paint
wastes as they are identified in the statute under sec. 6680(b) and
(c). The statute also specifies that the existing state universal waste
regulation requirements apply to the handling of postconsumer paint. In
addition, EPA is reauthorizing the existing universal waste regulations
as they are applied to the paint wastes.

I. Who handles permits after the authorization takes effect?

    Vermont will issue permits for all the provisions for which it is
authorized and will administer the permits it issues. EPA will
implement and issue permits for any HSWA requirements for which Vermont
is not yet authorized in the future.

J. What is codification and is EPA codifying Vermont's hazardous waste
program as authorized in this rule?

    Codification is the process of placing the State's statutes and
regulations that comprise the State's authorized hazardous waste
program into the Code of Federal Regulations. We do this by referencing
the authorized State rules in 40 CFR Part 272. We reserve the amendment
of 40 CFR Part 272, Subpart UU for this authorization of Vermont's
program until a later date.

K. Administrative Requirements

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this action
(RCRA State Authorization) from the requirements of Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011), therefore, this action is not subject to review by OMB. This
action authorizes State requirements for the purpose of RCRA 3006 and
imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law.
Accordingly, I certify that this action 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 action
authorizes 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). For the same reason, this
action also does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities
of Tribal governments, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000). This action will 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),
because it merely authorizes State requirements as part of the State
RCRA hazardous waste program without altering the relationship or the
distribution of power and responsibilities established by RCRA. This
action also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997), because it is not economically significant and it does not
make decisions based on environmental health or safety risks. This rule
is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' as defined under Executive Order 12866.
    Under RCRA 3006(b), EPA grants a State's application for
authorization as long as the State meets the criteria required by RCRA.
It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it
reviews a State authorization application, to require the use of any
particular voluntary consensus standard in place of another standard
that otherwise satisfies the requirements of RCRA. 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. As required
by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 F.R. 4729, February 7, 1996),
in issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate
drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and
provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied
with Executive Order 12630 (53 F.R. 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining
the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order.
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.). Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States. Because this rule authorizes pre-
existing State rules which are equivalent to, and no less stringent
than existing federal requirements, and imposes no additional
requirements beyond those imposed by State law and there are no
anticipated significant adverse human health or environmental effects,
the rule is not subject to Executive Order 12898.
    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 document 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 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). This
action nevertheless will be effective 60 days after it is published,
because it is an immediate final rule.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste
transportation, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Authority: This action is issued under the authority of sections
2002(a), 3006 and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended
42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).

    Dated: November 5, 2013.
H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2013-31121 Filed 12-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Bryan Hubbell/RTP/USEPA/US

03/06/2008 10:00 AM

To

Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

cc

Subject

For inclusion in the both the Ozone NAAQS and Ozone NAAQS RIA dockets

Thanks!

Dr. Bryan J. Hubbell

Senior Advisor for Science and Policy Analysis

Health and Environmental Impacts Division

U.S. EPA/OAQPS (C504-02)

RTP, NC 27711

(919) 541-0621

----- Forwarded by Bryan Hubbell/RTP/USEPA/US on 03/06/2008 09:57 AM -----

Bryan Hubbell/RTP/USEPA/US

03/05/2008 01:11 PM

To

"Schwab, Margo"<EMAIL_ADDRESS> cc

Harvey Richmond/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Karen Martin/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Lydia Wegman@EPA

Subject

Paragraph on ozone averaging times in the RIA vs Risk analysis

Margo-

As I indicated in my voice mail, here is the paragraph that I have drafted for inclusion in the ozone NAAQS RIA.  Let me know if you have any edits.  I will also make sure that we have conforming language on the overall issue based on the Locomotive Marine RIA writeup.  As I mentioned in my voice mail, we are not planning on including this writeup as part of the preamble or other rule documents, only as part of the RIA.  Thanks,

Bryan

"In EPA's risk analysis for the ozone NAAQS rule, mortality risks were estimated for 8 urban areas based on application of city-specific effect estimates derived from single city studies and from the Bell et al (2004) and Huang et al (2005) multi-city studies.  These effect estimates were based on 24-hour average daily ozone concentrations.  While it may have been preferable to use shorter averaging times, conversions from daily averages to shorter averaging times was not appropriate due to the lack of city-specific conversion factors.  In our benefits analysis for the ozone NAAQS, we applied national effect estimates based on the pooled multi-city results reported in Bell et al (2004) and the three meta-analysis studies.  Bell et al (2004), Bell et al (2005), Levy et al (2005), and Ito et al (2005) all provide national conversion ratios between daily average and 8-hour and 1-hour maxima, based on national data.  However, these conversions were not specific to the ozone "warm" season which was the period used in the health risk assessment.    As such we were able to convert the national C-R function parameters from daily average to 8-hour average, albeit with the introduction of additional uncertainty due to the use of effect estimates based on a mixture of warm season and all year data in the epidemiological studies.  Given the heterogeneity in ratios of daily average to 8-hour and 1-hour maxima that exists between cities, it would be inappropriate to use national conversion ratios to adjust C-R functions for individual cities.  However, it should be noted that the mortality risks estimated in the ozone NAAQS risk analysis will be insensitive to the specification of the averaging time, because unlike the air quality modeling of specific emissions reductions scenarios used in the RIA,  the air quality rollback technique used to simulate attainment with alternative NAAQS in the risk analysis does not result in increases in ozone during nighttime hours.  As such, specification of the effect estimate in terms of 24-hour averages rather than 8-hour maximum is simply a scale translation, and will not result in large differences in risk estimates."

Dr. Bryan J. Hubbell

Senior Advisor for Science and Policy Analysis

Health and Environmental Impacts Division

U.S. EPA/OAQPS (C504-02)

RTP, NC 27711

(919) 541-0621


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 113 (Friday, June 12, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33582-33583]
[FR Doc No: 2015-14202]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Environmental Impact Statement: Norfolk International Airport,
Norfolk, VA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public that an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared for proposed
improvements to the Norfolk International Airport (ORF).
    In October 2008, the Norfolk Airport Authority (NAA), owner and
operator of ORF, prepared a Master Plan Update (MPU) to document
changes occurring ``in Airport facilities and activity that have taken
place since the 1995 Master Plan Update,'' to ``provide the Authority
with a development plan for the Airport through 2024,'' and to address
compliance shortfalls with published safety standards. Following the
MPU, NAA prepared technical documents that focused on the potential
construction of a replacement secondary runway. The first was the
December 2008 Supplemental Technical Analyses for the Proposed
Secondary Runway at Norfolk International Airport and the second was
the December 2009 Justification for Proposed Runway 5R/23L. In 2008 NAA
also developed an Airport Layout Plan (ALP) that evaluated and noted
future development needs at ORF. The ALP included a Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) for the Airport to address Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) design standards for the Airport's existing
crosswind Runway 14/32. During its planning process, NAA explored a
number of alternatives to meet FAA design standards while also
providing the flexibility needed to operate without interruption during
various conditions. These alternatives included the potential
construction of a replacement secondary runway as well as improvements
to the existing crosswind Runway 14/32. The FAA will evaluate and
consider the Airport's MPU, ALP, and associated planning efforts when
considering reasonable and feasible alternatives for the ORF EIS.
    Based on these previous planning efforts, the primary components of
NAA's proposed project at ORF include:
     Decommissioning and demolition of Runway 14/32
     Constructing a relocated secondary runway parallel to and
separated by 876 feet from the existing Runway 5/23. The proposed
Runway 5R/23L would be 6,500 feet long by 150 feet wide.
    The purpose of the proposed project is:
     To meet relevant FAA airfield safety standards and enhance
airfield safety without reducing runway availability. Relevant airfield
safety standards include:
    [cir] Runway Safety Area, which is designed to provide additional
safety in the event an aircraft leaves the runway;
    [cir] Runway Protection Zone, which is area at ground level prior
to the threshold or beyond the runway end to enhance the safety and
protection of people and property on the ground; and
    [cir] Runway Object Free Area, which is designed to provide an area
clear of objects surrounding a runway.
     To enhance operational efficiency and maintain airfield
utility while considering surrounding airspace and ORF's critical
design aircraft.
     To provide a safe, efficient southern vehicular access, on
Airport property, to the Airport's terminal area.
    The proposed project is needed to address the following four
primary areas of deficiency at ORF:
     Runway 14/32 does not meet the FAA design standards
discussed above for several reasons, including, but not limited to, the
location of Robin Hood Road and Lake Whitehurst near the Runway 14 end.
     The current airfield configuration limits operational
efficiency, safety and flexibility due to secondary runway length and
challenges in taxiing from the airfield layout.
     Provide a flexible two-runway airfield system for aircraft
operators and air traffic controllers. Incremental changes over time
have severely decreased ORF's ability to remain flexible with
increasing airspace conflicts from surrounding military facilities.
     Robin Hood Road, the secondary (southern) access to the
Airport, has safety and functional deficiencies. Specifically, several
curves in the on-airport section of Robin Hood Road can be improved
through a redesign of the roadway.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marcus Brundage, Project Manager,
Federal Aviation Administration, Washington Airports District Office,
23723 Air Freight Lane, Suite 210, Dulles, Virginia 20166.
    Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA, in consultation with the NAA, will
prepare an EIS for the proposed project. The EIS will evaluate a range
of alternatives to address FAA design standards for the secondary
Runway 14/32. The alternatives to be considered will include the No
Build Alternative and a variety of build alternatives, including NAA's
proposed alternative as detailed in the 2008 Master Plan Update. The
EIS would also evaluate any alternatives identified during the Scoping
process to address the project need.
    The FAA intends to use the preparation of this EIS to comply with
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as
amended, Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, and Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act, and any other applicable laws that include public
involvement requirements.
    The FAA intends to conduct a Scoping process to gather input from
all interested parties to help identify any issues of concern
associated with the proposed project. In addition to this notice,
Federal, state, and local agencies, that have legal jurisdiction and/or
special expertise with respect to any potential environmental impacts
associated with the proposed project, will be notified by letter of an
Agency Scoping Meeting to be held on July 22, 2015 in Norfolk,
Virginia.
    The general public will be notified of the Scoping process through
a legal notice, describing the proposed project. The Notice will be
placed in

newspapers that have general circulation in the project area. The
newspaper notice will notify members of the public that open house
style Scoping Meetings will be held to provide the opportunity for the
public to offer its input concerning the proposed project. The Public
Scoping Meetings are scheduled for the evenings of July 22 & 23, 2015
from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. at the following locations in Southside Hampton
Roads:
     July 22, 2015, 5 p.m.-8 p.m.: Bayside High School, 4960
Haygood Road, Virginia Beach, VA
     July 23, 2015, 5 p.m.-8 p.m.: Holiday Inn Norfolk Airport,
1570 N. Military Highway, Norfolk, Virginia
    The Public Scoping Meetings will be open house format with project
information displayed and representatives from the FAA and the Airport
available to answer questions. Written and oral comments will be
accepted at each of the meetings. The public comment period on this
Scoping phase of the EIS will end on August 3, 2015.
    The purpose of the Scoping Process, as stated above, is to receive
input from the public, as well as from Federal, state, and local
agencies, that have legal jurisdiction and/or special expertise with
respect to any potential environmental impacts associated with the
proposed project. During this process, questions regarding the scope
and process related to the EIS will be answered. More information about
the sponsor's proposed project and the scoping meetings can be found
at: www.orf-eis.com.
    Comments should be addressed to the listed contact person, or by
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>The Scoping comment period is from June 12,
2015 through August 3, 2015.

    Issued in Jamaica, New York, June 4, 2015.
Eleanor Scorcia,
Acting Manager, Planning and Programming Branch, Airports Division,
Eastern Region.
[FR Doc. 2015-14202 Filed 6-11-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 132 (Tuesday, July 12, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41307-41308]
[FR Doc No: 2022-14788]

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

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: ER18-1489-002; ER13-1101-027; ER13-1541-026; ER14-
661-017; ER14-787-020; ER15-54-011; ER15-55-011; ER15-1475-012; ER15-
2593-011; ER16-452-010; ER16-705-008; ER16-706-008; ER16-1154-009;
ER16-1882-004; ER17-252-005; ER17-2508-003; ER21-1988-003; ER21-2867-
001.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association,
Inc., SP

Garland Solar Storage, LLC, RE Gaskell West 1 LLC, 2016 ESA Project
Company, LLC, Boulder Solar Power, LLC, Parrey, LLC, RE Garland A LLC,
RE Garland LLC, RE Tranquillity LLC, Desert Stateline LLC, North Star
Solar, LLC, Blackwell Solar, LLC, Lost Hills Solar, LLC, Macho Springs
Solar, LLC, SG2 Imperial Valley LLC, Campo Verde Solar, LLC, Spectrum
Nevada Solar, LLC, SP Cimarron I, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Analysis for Southwest Region
of SP Cimarron I, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 6/30/22.
    Accession Number: 20220630-5372.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 8/29/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER18-2370-005.
    Applicants: Lackawanna Energy Center LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing: Supplement to Informational Filing
Regarding Upstream Change in Ownership to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 7/6/22.
    Accession Number: 20220706-5055.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1884-000.
    Applicants: Sanford ESS, LLC.
    Description: Report Filing: Sanford ESS Supplemental MBR Filing to
be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 7/5/22.
    Accession Number: 20220705-5099.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1885-000.
    Applicants: South Portland ESS, LLC.
    Description: Report Filing: South Portland ESS Supplemental MBR
Filing to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 7/5/22.
    Accession Number: 20220705-5104.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-1888-000.
    Applicants: AE-ESS NWS 1, LLC.
    Description: Report Filing: AE-ESS NWS 1 Supplemental MBR Filing to
be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 7/5/22.
    Accession Number: 20220705-5103.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/15/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2287-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2nd Revised WAPA NITSA/NOA
to be effective 7/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 7/5/22.
    Accession Number: 20220705-5173.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/26/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2288-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of Colorado.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Parent Record ID
Reassignment to be effective 7/7/2022.
    Filed Date: 7/6/22.
    Accession Number: 20220706-5071.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2289-000.
    Applicants: Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Initial Filing of Service
Agreement No. 907 to be effective 6/23/2022.
    Filed Date: 7/6/22.
    Accession Number: 20220706-5072.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2290-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to ISA, SA No.
5619; Queue No. AC1-221/AD1-058 to be effective 4/2/2020.
    Filed Date: 7/6/22.
    Accession Number: 20220706-5085.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/22.

    Docket Numbers: ER22-2291-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 3977 Salt Branch Solar GIA
to be effective 6/10/2022.
    Filed Date: 7/6/22.
    Accession Number: 20220706-5094.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 7/27/22.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by 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: July 6, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-14788 Filed 7-11-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Note:  Weblinks to publicly accessible abstracts for the four copyright protected articles submitted by Syngenta as part of their written comments

Syngenta submitted four copyright protected journal articles as part of their written comments related to charge questions under Topic B. These are: 1) Baxter et. al., 2011, 2) Knauert et. al., 2010, 3) Brain et al., 2012a and 4) Brain et al., 2012b.  EPA does not post any materials subject to the provisions of the copyright protection law, Title 17 U.S. Code, which governs the making and distribution of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted materials.  This means that only the meta-data for each article is provided in the public e-docket  accessible by going to http://www.Regulations.gov and entering the FIFRA SAP meeting docket, EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0230. A copy of each article is kept in the EPA public docket for public viewing.

Subsequent to their submissions to the SAP meeting docket, Dan Campbell (Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC) sent an e-mail to Sharlene Matten, DFO, which provided the weblinks to the publicly accessible abstracts for each of the four copyright protected articles shown in the table below.  The weblinks provide a means of easy access to the publicly available information concerning these journal articles.  These are shown in the table below.

Table 1. Weblinks to publicly available abstracts for the four copyright protected articles
Journal Article
Electronic Link to Publicly Available Abstract
Baxter, L.R. et. al., "Atrazine Does Not Affect Algal Biomass of Snail Populations in Microcosm Communities at Environmentally Relevant Concentrations", Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 30, No. 7, pp. 1689 - 1696, 2011
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/etc.552/abstract

Knauert S, et. al.,"Phytotoxicity of atrazine, isoproturon, and diuron to submersed macrophytes in outdoor mesocosms". Environ Pollut 158:167-174, 2010:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2009.07.023

Brain RA, Hoberg J, Hosmer AJ, and Wall SB. 2012a. Influence of light intensity on the toxicity of atrazine to the submerged freshwater macrophyte Elodea canadensis. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 79:55 - 61.:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147651311004581

Brain, R.A., et. al., "Recovery of Duckweed from the Time-Varying Exposure to Atrazine", Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 31, No. 5, pp. 1121 - 1128, 2012b:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/etc.1806/abstract

For additional information, contact the FIFRA SAP Designated Federal Official, Sharlene R. Matten, Ph.D. tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>