[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 189 (Tuesday, September 30, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 58772]
[FR Doc No: 2014-23211]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AD14-19-000]

Commissioner Philip D. Moeller's Inquiry Into the Trading of
Natural Gas, and the Proposal To Establish an Electronic Information
and Trading Platform; Post-Meeting Notice

    On September 18, 2014, Commissioner Philip D. Moeller convened a
meeting to discuss ideas to facilitate and improve the way in which
natural gas is traded, and explore the concept of establishing a
centralized information and trading platform for natural gas.
    As announced at the meeting, the above-captioned docket was created
to allow interested parties to file written comments on any issue that
was discussed at the meeting. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings of comments in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling''
link at www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 5 copies of the comment to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
Additionally, comments are strictly limited to no more than five (5)
pages and due by October 1, 2014.

    Dated: September 19, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-23211 Filed 9-29-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 193 (Monday, October 5, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62724-62726]
[FR Doc No: 2020-21931]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ- OAR-2020-0427; FRL 10015-29-OAR]

Alternative Method for Calculating Off-Cycle Credits Under the
Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Program: Applications From
North American Subaru, Inc.

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is requesting comment on applications from North American
Subaru, Inc., (Subaru) for off-cycle carbon dioxide (CO2)
credits under EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas emissions
standards. ``Off-cycle'' emission reductions can be achieved by
employing technologies that result in real-world benefits, but where
that

benefit is not adequately or entirely captured on the test procedures
used by manufacturers to demonstrate compliance with emission
standards. EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas program acknowledges
these benefits by giving automobile manufacturers several options for
generating ``off-cycle'' carbon dioxide (CO2) credits. Under
the regulations, a manufacturer may apply for CO2 credits
for technologies that result in off-cycle benefits. In these cases, a
manufacturer must provide EPA with a proposed methodology for
determining the real-world off-cycle benefit. Subaru has submitted
applications that describe methodologies for determining off-cycle
credits from high efficiency alternator and brushless motor
technologies. Subaru's application is limited to 2017 and later model
year vehicles for the high efficiency alternator and 2019 model year
and later as the brushless motor technology is adopted across Subaru's
product line. Pursuant to applicable regulations, EPA is making
descriptions of the manufacturers' off-cycle credit calculation
methodologies available for public comment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 4, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2020-0427, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Wright, Environmental Protection
Specialist, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Compliance
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive,
Ann Arbor, MI 48105. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    EPA's light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas (GHG) program provides
three pathways by which a manufacturer may accrue off-cycle carbon
dioxide (CO2) credits for those technologies that achieve
CO2 reductions in the real world but where those reductions
are not adequately or entirely captured on the test used to determine
compliance with the CO2 standards, and which are not
otherwise reflected in the standards' stringency. The first pathway is
a predetermined list of credit values for specific off-cycle
technologies that may be used beginning in model year 2014.\1\ This
pathway allows manufacturers to use conservative credit values
established by EPA for a wide range of technologies, with minimal data
submittal or testing requirements. In cases where additional laboratory
testing can demonstrate emission benefits, a second pathway allows
manufacturers to use a broader array of emission tests (known as ``5-
cycle'' testing because the methodology uses five different testing
procedures) to demonstrate and justify off-cycle CO2
credits.\2\ The additional emission tests allow emission benefits to be
demonstrated over some elements of real-world driving not captured by
the GHG compliance tests, including high speeds, hard accelerations,
and cold temperatures. Credits determined according to either of these
methodologies do not undergo additional public review. The third and
last pathway allows manufacturers to seek EPA approval to use an
alternative methodology for determining the off-cycle CO2
credits.\3\ This option is only available if the benefit of the
technology cannot be adequately demonstrated using the 5-cycle
methodology. Manufacturers may also use this option for model years
prior to 2014 to demonstrate off-cycle CO2 reductions for
technologies that are on the predetermined list, or to demonstrate
reductions that exceed those available via use of the predetermined
list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(b).
    \2\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(c).
    \3\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the regulations, a manufacturer seeking to demonstrate off-
cycle credits with an alternative methodology (i.e., under the third
pathway described above) must describe a methodology that meets the
following criteria:
     Use modeling, on-road testing, on-road data collection, or
other approved analytical or engineering methods;
     Be robust, verifiable, and capable of demonstrating the
real-world emissions benefit with strong statistical significance;
     Result in a demonstration of baseline and controlled
emissions over a wide range of driving conditions and number of
vehicles such that issues of data uncertainty are minimized;
     Result in data on a model type basis unless the
manufacturer demonstrates that another basis is appropriate and
adequate.
    Further, the regulations specify the following requirements
regarding an application for off-cycle CO2 credits:
     A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must develop a
methodology for demonstrating and determining the benefit of the off-
cycle technology, and carry out any necessary testing and analysis
required to support that methodology.
     A manufacturer requesting off-cycle credits must conduct
testing and/or prepare engineering analyses that demonstrate the in-use
durability of the technology for the full useful life of the vehicle.
     The application must contain a detailed description of the
off-cycle technology and how it functions to reduce CO2
emissions under conditions not represented on the compliance tests.
     The application must contain a list of the vehicle
model(s) which will be equipped with the technology.
     The application must contain a detailed description of the
test vehicles selected and an engineering analysis that supports the
selection of those vehicles for testing.
     The application must contain all testing and/or simulation
data required under the regulations, plus any other data the
manufacturer has considered in the analysis.
    Finally, the alternative methodology must be approved by EPA prior
to the manufacturer using it to generate credits. As part of the review
process defined by regulation, the alternative methodology submitted to
EPA for consideration must be made available for public comment.\4\ EPA
will consider public comments as part of its final decision to approve
or deny the request for off-cycle credits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 40 CFR 86.1869-12(d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Off-Cycle Credit Applications

    Using the alternative methodology approach discussed above, Subaru
is applying for credits for model years 2017 and later. Subaru has
applied for

off-cycle credits using the alternative demonstration methodology
pathway for the following technologies: high efficiency alternator and
brushless motor. The application covers 2017 model year and later
vehicles. The methodologies described by Subaru are generally
consistent with those used by other manufacturers to determine similar
credit values.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Total credit   A/C on  (g CO2/   A/C off  (g
                     Brushless motor credits                        (g CO2/mi)          mi)           CO2/mi)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manual A/C......................................................             0.4             0.2             0.2
Automatic A/C...................................................             0.4             0.3             0.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            High efficiency alternator on % of baseline level
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Credit  (g/
                   VDA efficiency  (%)                         mile)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
67......................................................             0.0
68......................................................             0.2
69......................................................             0.3
70......................................................             0.5
71......................................................             0.6
72......................................................             0.8
73......................................................             1.0
74......................................................             1.1
75......................................................             1.3
76......................................................             1.4
77......................................................             1.6
78......................................................             1.8
79......................................................             1.9
80......................................................             2.1
81......................................................             2.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. EPA Decision Process

    EPA has reviewed the applications for completeness and is now
making the applications available for public review and comment as
required by the regulations. The off-cycle credit applications
submitted by Subaru (with confidential business information redacted)
have been placed in the public docket (see ADDRESSES section above) and
on EPA's website at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/ld-hwy/greenhouse/ld-ghg.htm. EPA is providing a 30-day comment period on the applications
for off-cycle credits described in this notice, as specified by the
regulations. The manufacturers may submit a written rebuttal of
comments for EPA's consideration, or may revise an application in
response to comments. After reviewing any public comments and any
rebuttal of comments submitted by manufacturers, EPA will make a final
decision regarding the credit requests. An EPA decision regarding these
off-cycle credit requests will only apply to the vehicles and model
years specified in the applications submitted by each manufacturer. EPA
will make its decision available to the public by placing a decision
document (or multiple decision documents) in the docket and on EPA's
website at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/ld-hwy/greenhouse/ld-ghg.htm.
An EPA decision to approve off-cycle credit requests would only apply
to the manufacturers, model years, vehicles, and technologies specified
in the credit applications. Such decision would not apply to other
vehicles or vehicles from other manufacturers. While the broad
methodologies used by these manufacturers could potentially be used for
other vehicles and by other manufacturers, the vehicle specific data
needed to demonstrate the off-cycle emissions reductions would likely
be different. In such cases, a new application would be required,
including an opportunity for public comment.

    Dated: September 29, 2020.
Byron Bunker,
Director, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2020-21931 Filed 10-2-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 2, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26016-26017]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10516]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-E-0663]

Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent
Extension; Alair Bronchial Thermoplasty System

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined the
regulatory review period for Alair Bronchial Thermoplasty System and is
publishing this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA
has made the determination because of the submission of an application
to the Director of Patents and Trademarks, Department of Commerce, for
the extension of a patent which claims that medical device.

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments to http://www.regulations.gov.
Submit written petitions along with three copies and written comments
to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Beverly Friedman, Office of
Regulatory Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 51, rm. 6284, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term
Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug
and Patent Term Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide
that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as
the patented item (human drug product, animal drug product, medical
device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory
review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a
product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the
amount of extension an applicant may receive.
    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A
testing phase and an approval phase. For medical devices, the testing
phase begins with a clinical investigation of the device and runs until
the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial
submission of an application to market the device and continues until
permission to market the device is granted. Although only a portion of
a regulatory review period may count toward the actual amount of
extension that the Director of Patents and Trademarks may award (half
the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any time that may have
occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's determination of the
length of a regulatory review period for a medical device will include
all of the testing phase and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C.
156(g)(3)(B).
    FDA recently approved for marketing the medical device Alair
Bronchial Thermoplasty System. Alair Bronchial Thermoplasty System is
indicated for the treatment of severe persistent asthma in patients 18
years and older whose asthma is not well controlled

with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta agonists. Subsequent
to this approval, the Patent and Trademark Office received a patent
term restoration application for Alair Bronchial Thermoplasty System
(U.S. Patent No. 6,411,852) from Asthmatx, Inc., and the Patent and
Trademark Office requested FDA's assistance in determining this
patent's eligibility for patent term restoration. In a letter dated
February 17, 2011, FDA advised the Patent and Trademark Office that
this medical device had undergone a regulatory review period and that
the approval of Alair Bronchial Thermoplasty System represented the
first permitted commercial marketing or use of the product. Thereafter,
the Patent and Trademark Office requested that FDA determine the
product's regulatory review period.
    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for
Alair Bronchial Thermoplasty System is 1,743 days. Of this time, 1,259
days occurred during the testing phase of the regulatory review period,
while 484 days occurred during the approval phase. These periods of
time were derived from the following dates:
    1. The date an exemption under section 520(g) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360j(g)) involving
this device became effective: July 21, 2005. FDA has verified the
applicant's claim that the date the investigational device exemption
(IDE) required under section 520(g) of the FD&C Act for human tests to
begin became effective July 21, 2005.
    2. The date an application was initially submitted with respect to
the device under section 515 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360e): December
30, 2008. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that the premarket
approval application (PMA) for Alair Bronchial Thermoplasty System (PMA
P080032) was initially submitted December 30, 2008.
    3. The date the application was approved: April 27, 2010. FDA has
verified the applicant's claim that PMA P080032 was approved on April
27, 2010.
    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the
maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office applies several statutory limitations in
its calculations of the actual period for patent extension. In its
application for patent extension, this applicant seeks 1,114 days of
patent term extension.
    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are
incorrect may submit to the Division of Dockets Management (see
ADDRESSES) either electronic or written comments and ask for a
redetermination by July 2, 2012. Furthermore, any interested person may
petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for
extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period
by October 24, 2012. To meet its burden, the petition must contain
sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation. (See H. Rept. 857, part
1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42, 1984.) Petitions should be in the
format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.
    Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management
(see ADDRESSES) electronic or written comments and written petitions.
It is only necessary to send one set of comments. However, if you
submit a written petition, you must submit three copies of the
petition. Identify comments with the docket number found in brackets in
the heading of this document.
    Comments and petitions that have not been made publicly available
on http://www.regulations.gov may be viewed in the Division of Dockets
Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

    Dated: April 16, 2012.
Jane A. Axelrad,
Associate Director for Policy, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
[FR Doc. 2012-10516 Filed 5-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 249 (Tuesday, December 29, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 81186-81189]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32616]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2013-0849]
RIN 1625-AA11

Regulated Navigation Area; Reporting Requirements for Barges
Loaded With Certain Dangerous Cargoes, Illinois Waterway System Located
Within the Ninth Coast Guard District; Expiration of Stay (Suspension)
and Administrative Changes

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Interim rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: Through this interim rule, the Coast Guard is providing
administrative changes to the existing reporting requirements under the
Regulated Navigation Area (RNA) applicable to barges loaded with
certain dangerous cargoes on the Illinois Waterway System in the Ninth
District area of responsibility. The current stay of reporting
requirements under the RNA is scheduled to expire on December 31, 2015.
This interim rule limits the reporting requirements in that rule for an
interim period while also requesting comments before proposing or
finalizing any long term or permanent revisions to the existing
reporting requirements.

DATES: This interim rule is effective beginning January 1, 2016.
Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or
before June 27, 2016. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for details on
enforcement and compliance.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this interim rule and request for comments,
[USCG-2013-0849], is available at http://www.regulations.gov. You may
submit comments identified by docket number USCG-2013-0849 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 CDR Dan Somma at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or CDR Anthony
Maffia at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call the Coast Guard at 216-
902-6064.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CDC Certain Dangerous Cargo
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
E.O. Executive order
FR Federal Register
IRVMC Inland River Vessel Movement Center
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Pub. L. Public Law
RNA Regulated navigation area
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The reporting requirements under 33 CFR 165.921 ``Regulated
Navigation Area; Reporting Requirements for Barges Loaded with Certain
Dangerous Cargoes, Illinois Waterway System located within the Ninth
Coast Guard District'' were initially suspended (``stayed'') in January
2011 due to the expiration of the contract for the Inland River Vessel
Movement Center (IRVMC). The IRVMC was the Coast Guard office
responsible for collecting the information required by the regulated
navigation area (RNA) at Sec.  165.921. Upon expiration of the contract
for the IRVMC, the Coast Guard was not able to receive and process
reports. Therefore, the suspension of reporting requirements was
published in the Federal Register on January 10, 2011 and was due to
expire on January 15, 2013 (76 FR 2829). On January 3, 2013, the Coast
Guard extended the suspension through September 30, 2013 (78 FR 4788)
and on October 1, 2013, the Coast Guard extended the suspension once
again through December 31, 2015 (78 FR 61183).
    In January 2015 the Coast Guard published a final rule, titled
Vessel Requirements for Notices of Arrival and Departure, and Automatic
Identification System (80 FR 5282). This rule implemented new and
updated Notices of Arrival reporting requirements under 33 CFR 160
Subpart C by providing an exemption, at 33 CFR 160.204(a)(3) for any
vessel required to report movements, its cargo, or the cargo in barges
it is towing under 33 CFR 165.921 after December 31, 2015. This rule,
which was initially proposed in 2008 before the RNA reporting
requirements were suspended, relied on the existing reporting
requirements at 33 CFR 165.921 to support the exemption. Starting on
January 1, 2016, a vessel would only be eligible for the exemption if
it is required to report its movements or cargo as specified in Sec.
160.204(a)(3). This rule makes changes to limit the suspended reporting
requirements, which would otherwise come into effect in full on January
1, 2016.
    Also relevant to this interim rule and request for comments is the
portion of 80 FR 5282 requiring that all vessels engaged in the
movement of Certain Dangerous Cargos (CDC) have Class A Automatic
Information System beginning in March 2016, pending Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval of a collection of information
associated with that regulatory requirement. These AIS requirements
provided under 33 CFR 164.46, if enforced, may provide an alternative
method of reporting that could potentially satisfy the requirements
under 33 CFR 165.921 and qualify these vessels for the 33 CFR
160.204(a)(3) exemption. As indicated in the Federal Register
publications establishing and extending the RNA suspension, during the
suspension periods, the Coast Guard assessed whether to modify the
reporting required under the RNA and potential suitable alternative
Coast Guard offices and programs to receive and disseminate the
reported information. The new Automatic Information System requirement,
once in full effect, will still be assessed as a potential alternative
reporting method. At this time, the Coast Guard has determined that
using already-established Coast Guard offices and units centralized at
the Ninth District level to receive required reports is the appropriate
interim solution to resume the reporting requirements necessary for
both maritime domain awareness and to satisfy the exemption in 33 CFR
160.204(a)(3). This interim rule provides the necessary administrative
changes to the existing reporting requirements, requiring reporting in
a limited form while also requesting comments to better assess a
potential permanent reporting system.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this interim rule to limit the RNA
reporting requirements that will come into effect after December 31
when the stay of Sec.  165.921 expires. This rule is necessary to stay
compliance with certain provisions of the existing rule, and to make
administrative changes replacing the references to IRVMC, which is no

longer operational. The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under
authority in 33 U.S.C. 1231, the same authority providing for the
initial establishment of the RNA.
    The Coast Guard is issuing this interim rule without prior
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 for several reasons. It is unnecessary to
publish an NPRM because this interim rule makes only administrative
changes to the existing RNA regulation under 33 CFR 165.921, and does
not propose or establish new restrictions or requirements. This interim
rule merely stays compliance with portions of an existing requirement,
allowing select existing provisions to resume upon expiration of a stay
in effect through December 31, 2015, and makes the administrative
changes necessary to redirect reporting from the IRVMC to the District.
Additionally, publishing an NPRM was impracticable because of the
relatively short time between the publication of the Notices of Arrival
final rule and the expiration of the stay, as well as the uncertain
enforcement date of certain provisions of the Automatic Information
System portion of that rule. These circumstances did not allow adequate
time to develop an NPRM, solicit and consider public comment, and
develop and publish a final rule before the expiration of the stay.
Instead, the Coast Guard is soliciting public comment with this interim
rule while it is in effect and while the AIS requirement will be in
effect, if that information collection is approved by OMB, so that the
public's experience with this interim rule and the AIS requirement can
be reflected in public comments.
    This interim rule is effective January 1, 2016. We are making this
rule effective in less than 30 days from the date of publication under
the authority of 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) to the extent it relieves the
reporting obligations that would otherwise come into effect upon the
December 31, 2015 expiration of the stay, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)
because the Coast Guard finds that the imminent expiration of the stay
constitutes good cause for forgoing the 30-day delay of effective date.
Delaying the effective date of this interim rule to provide a 30 day
notice would be impracticable and contrary to public interest because a
January 1, 2016, effective date is necessary to avoid submission of
reports to the IRVMC which is no longer in operation.

IV. Discussion of the Interim Rule

    The Coast Guard's suspension of reporting requirements under 33 CFR
165.921 will expire as scheduled, in part, on December 31, 2015. On
January 1, 2016, reporting requirements under 33 CFR 165.921 will
become effective in a limited form. The Coast Guard is not reinstating
reporting, 24 hours per day, 365 days per year, at 90-plus reporting
points under the existing RNA currently published in the CFR. Under
revisions made by this interim rule, reporting requirements will be
enforced only when directed by the District Commander or a designated
representative. This rule does not change the type of information to be
reported.
    This interim rule makes administrative changes that remove or
revise references to the IRVMC, as it is no longer operational, and
replace them with the new Coast Guard office, the Ninth District CDC
Reporting Unit (D9 CDCRU), which when activated will be responsible for
collecting reported information. The entities required to report, and
the information required, remain the same. However, reporting is
required only as directed by the District Commander or a designated
representative, based on assessment of prevailing safety and security
conditions to ensure and enhance maritime domain awareness. In effect,
the Coast Guard is allowing existing paragraphs (d)(1)(ix), (d)(2)(iv),
(f)(9), and (g)(4) to come into effect, with administrative changes to
accommodate the closure of IRVMC. We will continue to use the reporting
points listed in paragraph (e) to describe where reporting is required.
This rule ``stays'' (suspends) compliance with the other existing
reporting requirements.
    The District Commander or designated representative will inform
vessel operators and fleeting facilities when and where reporting is
required, by using established coordination and communication
mechanisms already in place and which are used to alert these same
vessel operators and fleeting facilities of an increase in Maritime
Security level. These notice mechanisms include, but are not limited
to, coordination with industry trade organizations, Notices of
Enforcement, Marine Safety Information Bulletins, and email
notifications.
    Reports required under this RNA may be provided via email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Alternative reporting contact methods, including
telephone and fax numbers, will be provided in the notification from
the District Commander or designated representative. Additionally,
paragraph (h) allows for alternative methods to be submitted for
approval by the District Commander. These are the same type of
reporting methods listed in the current RNA at 33 CFR 165.921(d)(4),
however there will not be a dedicated web link. The information
required to be reported is not changed by this interim rule.
    The Coast Guard chose to suspend, rather than remove, several
paragraphs of the existing rule in order to evaluate their necessity
and to retain the ability to reinstate them (using appropriate
administrative processes) if necessary. All public comments are
welcome, but we specifically solicit comment on the following: The
appropriate type and frequency of reporting related to CDC barges in
D9; the potential to use AIS to satisfy reporting goals; and the extent
to which complying with the AIS rule would render this rule
unnecessary.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders (E.O.s) related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes and E.O.s, and we discuss
First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    E.O.s 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits.
E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under E.O. 12866. Accordingly, it has not been
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
    No new requirements are established or imposed by this rule. This
interim rule suspends compliance with certain provisions of an existing
regulation that will come into effect when the current stay expires on
December 31, 2015 thereby continuing to relieve a reporting obligation
while the Coast Guard solicits public comment regarding appropriate
reporting. As a result, the currently-stayed requirement will resume
only in a limited form. The rule also makes administrative changes
affecting which Coast Guard entity directs and receives

reporting. None of these changes will have a significant impact on
regulated entities.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. While some owners or operators of vessels intending to
transit the RNA may be small entities, for the reasons stated in
section V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    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.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule does not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The existing
collection is approved by the Office of Management and Budget under OMB
control number 1625-0105.

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under E.O. 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in E.O. 13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under E.O. 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. If you believe this rule has
implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. 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 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule involves administrative changes to resuming reporting requirements
in a limited form under an established RNA. It is categorically
excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the
Commandant Instruction. This interim rule limits the existing,
suspended, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year reporting
requirement throughout the entire RNA to require reporting only when
and where directed by the District Commander, reducing the time frame
and area that the reporting requirements are enforced. An environmental
analysis checklist and categorical exclusion determination are not
required. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.

G. Protest Activities

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

VI. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential, and will consider all
comments and material received during the comment period. If you submit
a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking,
indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, 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).
    Documents mentioned in this interim rule as being available in the
docket, and all public comments, will be 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
additional publications or supplemental information is provided.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1,
6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. In Sec.  165.921:
0
a. Revise paragraph (b);
0
b. In paragraph (c), remove the words ``Inland River Vessel Movement
Center or (IRVMC)'' and add in their place the words ``Ninth District
CDC Reporting Unit or (D9 CDCRU)'';
0
c. In paragraph (d) introductory text, remove the words ``Inland River
Vessel Movement Center (IRVMC)'' and add in their place the words
``Ninth District CDC Reporting Unit Eighth District (D9 CDCRU)'';
0
d. In paragraph (d)(1) introductory text and in paragraph (d)(1)(ii),
remove the text ``IRVMC'' and add, in its place, the text ``D9 CDCRU'';
0
e. In paragraph (d)(1)(ix), remove the text ``IRVMC'' and add in its
place the text ``District Commander or designated representative'';
0
f. In paragraph (d)(2) introductory text, remove the text ``IRVMC'' and
add in its place the text ``D9 CDCRU'';
0
g. In paragraph (d)(2)(iv), remove the text ``IRVMC'' and add in its
place the text ``District Commander or designated representative'';
0
h. Revise paragraph (d)(4).
0
i. In the introductory text to paragraph (e), remove the text ``the
Inland River Vessel Movement Center'' and add in its place the text
``D9 CDCRU'';
0
j. In paragraph (e), the introductory text to paragraphs (f) and (g),
and the headings of Tables 165.921(f) and (g), remove the text
``IRVMC'' and add in its place the text ``D9 CDCRU'';
0
k. In paragraphs (f)(9) and (g)(4), remove the text ``IRVMC'' and add
in its place the text ``District Commander or designated
representative'';
0
l. In paragraph (i), remove the text ``the IRVMC'' and add in its place
the text ``designated representative''.
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  165.921  Regulated Navigation Area; Reporting Requirements for
Barges Loaded with Certain Dangerous Cargoes, Illinois Waterway System
located within the Ninth Coast Guard District.

* * * * *
    (b) Enforcement and applicability. (1) Beginning January 1, 2016,
reporting requirements under this RNA will be enforced only when
directed by the District Commander or designated representative under
paragraphs (d)(1)(ix), (d)(2)(iv), (f)(9), and (g)(4) of this section.
Reporting points as listed in paragraph (e) of this section may be used
to determine and inform where reporting is required. Compliance under
other parts of this section is stayed until a future date published in
the Federal Register, if determined necessary.
    (2) This section applies to towing vessel operators and fleeting
area managers responsible for CDC barges in the RNA. This section does
not apply to:
    (i) Towing vessel operators responsible for barges not carrying
CDCs barges, or
    (ii) Fleet tow boats moving one or more CDC barges within a
fleeting area.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (4) When required, reports under this section must be made either
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or via phone or fax as provided in
the notification as directed by the District Commander or designated
representative through the D9 CDCRU. Notification of when and where
reporting is required may be made through Marine Safety Information
Bulletins, Notices of Enforcement, email and/or through industry
outreach. At all other times, reporting under this section is not
required and communications should be directed to the Captain of the
Port.
* * * * *

    Dated: December 22, 2015.
J.E. Ryan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2015-32616 Filed 12-28-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: March 22, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 54)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 13453-13454]
[DOCID:fr22mr10-8]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0089; Airspace Docket No. 10-ASW-1]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Corpus Christi, TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace in the Corpus
Christi, TX area. Additional controlled airspace is necessary to
accommodate new Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) at
Aransas County Airport, Rockport, TX. The FAA is taking this action to
enhance the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR)
operations at the airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 6, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. You
must identify the docket number FAA-2010-0089/Airspace Docket No. 10-
ASW-1, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments
through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the
public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any
final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office
(telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the building at
the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone: 817-321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2010-0089/
Airspace Docket No. 10-ASW-1.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://
www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_
amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. An
informal docket may also be examined during normal business hours at
the office of the Central Service Center, 2601 Meacham Blvd, Fort
Worth, TX 76137.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), Part 71 by adding additional Class E airspace extending
upward from 700 feet above the surface in the Corpus Christi, TX
airspace area, adding controlled airspace for SIAPs at Aransas County
Airport, Rockport, TX. The addition of the RNAV (GPS) RWY 18 SIAP at
Aransas County Airport has created the need to extend Class E airspace
to the north of the current airspace. Controlled airspace is needed for
the safety and management of IFR operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9T, dated August 27, 2009, and effective September 15, 2009, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document would be published subsequently in
the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,

Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would add additional controlled airspace in the Corpus Christi,
TX area.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

    1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.9T, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 27,
2009, and effective September 15, 2009, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ASW TX E5 Corpus Christi, TX [Amended]

Corpus Christi International Airport, TX
    (Lat. 27[deg]46'13'' N., long. 97[deg]30'04'' W.)
Corpus Christi NAS/Truax Field, TX
    (Lat. 27[deg]41'34'' N., long. 97[deg]17'25'' W.)
Port Aransas, Mustang Beach Airport, TX
    (Lat. 27[deg]48'43'' N., long. 97[deg]05'20'' W.)
Rockport, San Jose Island Airport, TX
    (Lat. 27[deg]56'40'' N., long. 96[deg]59'06'' W.)
Rockport, Aransas County Airport, TX
    (Lat. 28[deg]05'12'' N., long. 97[deg]02'41'' W.)
Ingleside, T.P. McCampbell Airport, TX
    (Lat. 27[deg]54'47'' N., long. 97[deg]12'41'' W.)
Robstown, Nueces County Airport, TX
    (Lat. 27[deg]46'43'' N., long. 97[deg]41'26'' W.)
Corpus Christi VORTAC, TX
    (Lat. 27[deg]54'14'' N., long. 97[deg]26'42'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7.5 mile radius of Corpus Christi International Airport and
within 1.4 miles each side of the 200[deg] radial of the Corpus
Christi VORTAC extending from the 7.5 mile radius to 8.5 miles north
of the airport, and within 1.5 miles each side of the 316[deg]
bearing from the airport extending from the 7.5 mile radius to 10.1
miles northwest of the airport, and within an 8.8-mile radius of
Corpus Christi NAS/Truax Field, and within a 6.3-mile radius of
Mustang Beach Airport, and within a 6.4-mile radius of T.P.
McCampbell Airport, and within a 6.3-mile radius of Nueces County
Airport, and within a 7.6-mile radius of Aransas County Airport, and
within 2 miles each side of the 010[deg] bearing from the Aransas
County Airport extending from the 7.6 mile radius to 9.9 miles north
of the airport, and within a 6.5-mile radius of San Jose Island
Airport, and within 8 miles west and 4 miles east of the 327[deg]
bearing from the San Jose Island Airport extending from the airport
to 20 miles northwest of the airport, and within 8 miles east and 4
miles west of the 147[deg] bearing from the airport extending from
the airport to 16 miles southeast of the airport, excluding that
portion more than 12 miles from and parallel to the shoreline.

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on March 11, 2010.
Roger M. Trevino,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2010-6156 Filed 3-19-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4901-13-P