[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 74 (Monday, April 18, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23013-23017]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08151]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2021-0016]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Notice and Request for
Comment; Countermeasures That Work

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice and request for public comment on a reinstatement with
modification of a previously approved collection of information.

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

SUMMARY: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
invites public comments about our intention to request approval from
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for a reinstatement with
modification of a previously approved collection of information. Before
a Federal agency can collect certain information from the public, it
must receive approval from OMB. Under procedures established by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, before seeking OMB approval, Federal
agencies must solicit public comment on proposed collections of
information, including extensions and reinstatements of previously
approved collections. This document describes an Information Collection
Request (ICR) for which NHTSA intends to seek OMB approval to conduct a
survey that will inform the development of the 12th edition of
Countermeasures That Work and structured interviews to populate and
update the 2nd edition of Countermeasures At Work.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 17, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket ID Number
NHTSA-2021-0016 using any of the following methods:
     Electronic submissions: Go to http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. To be sure someone is
there to help you, please call<PHONE_NUMBER> before coming.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
Docket number for this Notice. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading
below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78) or you may visit https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the street
address listed above. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets via internet.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information or access
to background documents, contact Kristie Johnson, Ph.D., Office of
Behavioral Safety Research (NPD-310), National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, W46-498, Washington, DC
20590. Dr. Johnson's phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and her email
address is [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), before an agency submits a proposed
collection of information to OMB for approval, it must first publish a
document in the Federal Register providing a 60-day comment period and
otherwise consult with members of the public and affected agencies
concerning each proposed collection of information. The OMB has
promulgated regulations describing what must be included in such a
document. Under OMB's regulations (at 5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must
ask for public comment on the following: (i) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (ii) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (iii) how to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;
and (iv) how to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In compliance with these requirements, NHTSA
asks for public comment on the following proposed collection of
information:
    Title: Countermeasures That Work.
    OMB Control Number: 2127-0727.
    Form Numbers: NHTSA Form 1343, NHTSA Form 1344.
    Type of Information Collection Request: Reinstatement with
modification of a previously approved information collection.
    Type of Review Requested: Regular.
    Requested Expiration Date of Approval: 3 years from date of
approval.

Summary of the Collection of Information

    NHTSA is seeking approval to (1) collect user feedback on the
Countermeasures That Work \1\ and Countermeasures At Work (1st edition
to be published later in early 2022) guides, and (2) collect program
information from program administrators to develop countermeasure case
studies for Countermeasures At Work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Venkatraman, V., Richard, C.M., Magee, K., & Johnson, K.
(2021, July). Countermeasures that work: A highway safety
countermeasure guide for State Highway Safety Offices, 10th edition
(Report No. DOT HS 813 097). National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration. www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2021-09/15100_Countermeasures10th_080621_v5_tag.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

End-User Feedback Survey

    NHTSA proposes to conduct a web-based feedback survey of up to 120
users of Countermeasures That Work and/or Countermeasures At Work
representing State Highway Safety Offices (SHSOs) and/or local
jurisdictions, the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA), State
Coordinators from across the United States, and other important
stakeholders with the intent to reach regular users of the documents to
help improve the documents. Survey topics will include how the guides
are used, weaknesses/drawbacks to the current guides, perceived
usefulness of the ratings, and other suggestions for improvement.
    While previous feedback surveys were conducted via phone, the
proposed survey would be administered using an online platform to
reduce participant burden, improve data capture, and reduce coding
needs. Participation by respondents would be voluntary. There are no
record-keeping costs to the respondents. Responses will not be publicly
reported, but NHTSA will internally use the aggregated information to
revise and improve the Countermeasures That Work and Countermeasures At
Work guides. Specifically, feedback will be used to determine which
aspects of the guides should be improved and if there are features or
topics that the guides do not currently have that they would like to
have included.

Structured Interviews

    NHTSA also proposes to conduct up to 60 structured in-person or
phone interviews with representatives from jurisdictions that currently
administer effective countermeasures. The respondents for the
interviews will be selected based on their job position, knowledge of
domain, management of effective countermeasure implementations as noted
in the literature, and recommendation from NHTSA or GHSA subject matter
experts with the intent to reach program administrators of effective
countermeasures with the goal of populating and enriching
countermeasure descriptions. The findings of interviews conducted for
Countermeasures At Work will be reported separately for each individual
locality so that the reader can get an idea about the size and type of
the featured locality and issues specific to that locality. The
Countermeasures At Work guide will include general contact information
about the locality (i.e., State DOT or SHSO office) or the contact
information of key individuals (if permission is granted by the
interview participant), so that readers of the document can follow-up,
if desired, with the locality to obtain more information about the
countermeasure.
    The Countermeasures That Work and Countermeasures At Work reports
will be shared with SHSOs, local governments, and those who develop
traffic safety programs that aim to change behaviors with the goal of
reducing crashes and the resulting injuries and fatalities.

Description of the Need for the Information and Proposed Use of the
Information

    NHTSA was established by the Highway Safety Act of 1970 and its
mission is to reduce deaths, injuries, and economic losses resulting
from motor vehicle crashes on the Nation's highways. To further this
mission, NHTSA is authorized to conduct research for the development of
traffic safety programs. Title 23, United States Code, Section 403
authorizes the Secretary of Transportation (NHTSA by delegation) to use
funds appropriated to conduct research and development activities,
including demonstration projects and the collection and analysis of
highway and motor vehicle safety data and related information, with
respect to (a) all aspects of highway and traffic safety systems and
conditions relating to vehicle, highway, driver, passenger,
motorcyclist, bicyclist, and pedestrian characteristics; accident
causation and investigations; and (b) human behavioral factors and
their effect on highway and traffic safety.
    In 2019, 36,096 people were killed in motor vehicle traffic crashes
on U.S. roadways.\2\ While the number of people killed has increased
slightly since the U.S. hit its lowest number of fatalities

in 2014, over the past 40 years there has been a general downward
trend. Effective behavioral safety countermeasures such as those
described in Countermeasures That Work and detailed in the upcoming
Countermeasures At Work have contributed to these reductions. This
project addresses the issue of providing information to traffic safety
professionals about countermeasures that have been demonstrated to be
effective in addressing certain traffic safety problems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ National Center for Statistics and Analysis. (2020,
December). Overview of motor vehicle crashes in 2019 (Traffic Safety
Facts Research Note. Report No. DOT HS 813 060). National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration. https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813060.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The public health approach to traffic safety which establishes
injuries and fatalities as preventable has resulted in a mix of
countermeasures, and the choices among them are driven by research on
their effectiveness. Generally, this approach includes some combination
of countermeasures aimed at improving safety in terms of improved
vehicles, education, improved roads, enhanced road user perception, and
behavior and better enforcement of traffic safety laws.
    In 2005, the Governors Highway Safety Association and the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration developed a guide,
Countermeasures That Work, for the State Highway Safety Offices that
provides a basic reference to assist in selecting effective, evidence-
based countermeasures to address traffic safety problem areas. Given
that SHSO's and other State practitioners responsible for implementing
these countermeasures use Countermeasures That Work as an aid to make
decisions, it is important to solicit their opinions about the document
and its content. Specifically, it is important to know which aspects of
the guide should be improved and if there are features or topics that
the guide does not currently have that they would like to have
included. The Countermeasures At Work guide expands on the most
effective countermeasures contained in the Countermeasures That Work
guide by providing real world examples and details on localities where
specific countermeasures were put into place. The descriptions of the
effective countermeasures include details about locality size,
implementation issues, cost, stakeholders involved, challenges,
evaluation, and outcomes to help officials determine which
countermeasures may be effective in their own jurisdictions.
    Per Section 1300.11 of the Uniform Procedures for State Highway
Safety Grant Programs, each fiscal year, as part of the highway safety
planning process for a State's Highway Safety Plan, a list of
information and data sources consulted must be included in the plan.
Countermeasures That Work is commonly referenced as a consulted source.
    The data from this proposed information collection will provide
NHTSA with information that will guide updates to the Countermeasures
That Work and Countermeasures At Work documents. Data collected from
the survey and structured interviews will be used primarily to (1)
update the content, format, and structure of information provided in
Countermeasures That Work and Countermeasures At Work, and (2) identify
the localities/implementation of countermeasures that should be
presented as case studies in Countermeasures At Work.
    Frequency of Collection: This study is part a biennial update of
effective countermeasures. Each of the surveys will be collected one
time during the three-year period for which NHTSA is requesting
approval. The last survey of stakeholders was in 2020.
    Affected Public: Participants will be U.S. adults (18 years old and
older) who are members of State Highway Safety Offices (SHSOs) and/or
local jurisdictions, the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA),
State Coordinators from across the United States, or other important
stakeholders. Businesses are ineligible for the survey and would not be
interviewed.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 180.
    Participation in the end user feedback survey will be voluntary
with up to 120 participants surveyed from SHSOs and/or local
jurisdictions, GHSA, State Coordinators from across the United States,
and other important stakeholders. In addition, up to 60 participants
will be interviewed about effective countermeasure programs based on
their job position, knowledge of domain, management of effective
countermeasure implementations as noted in the literature, and
recommendation from NHTSA regional specialists or GHSA Office subject
matter experts.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 129.

End User Feedback Survey

    NHTSA estimates the total burden of this information collection by
estimating the burden to those who NHTSA contacts who do not respond
and those who are contacted and participate. The estimated time to
contact 120 potential participants for the end user feedback survey is
one minute per person to read the invitation email. For recruited
participants, it is estimated that the survey will take thirty minutes
to complete. For recruited participants, participation is estimated to
take thirty-one minutes which includes time to read the email
invitation (survey introduction) and complete the survey. While up to
three email invites (or waves) are included in this estimate, potential
respondents would be comprised of a sample hand-selected by the
research team thus potentially reducing the number of subsequent
contacts as well as the number of non-responders.

Structured Interviews

    NHTSA estimates the total burden of this information collection by
estimating the burden to those who NHTSA contacts who do not respond
and those who are contacted and participate. The estimated time to
contact 60 potential traffic safety representative participants for the
structured countermeasure program interviews is two minutes per person
to read the invitation email. For recruited participants, participation
is estimated to take ninety-two minutes per person. The ninety-two
minutes estimate includes time to read the email invitation (interview
introduction), schedule an interview time, and complete the interview.
Again, while up to four email invites are included in this estimate,
potential respondents would be comprised of a sample hand-selected by
the research team thus potentially reducing the number of subsequent
contacts as well as the number of non-responders.

Total Burden Hours for the End User Feedback Survey and the Structured
Interviews

    The total estimated burden for contacting 120 traffic safety
representatives for the end user feedback survey, if 75% of solicited
participants respond, is approximately 50 hours, rounded up (((assuming
90 completed surveys out of 120 contacted potential participants: 45
hours for completed surveys (90 survey participants x 30 minutes to
complete the survey) + ~4.5 hours for reading invitations ((Wave 1-120
contacts x 1 minute) + (Wave 2-90 contacts x 1 minute) + (Wave 3-60
contacts x 1 minute))). The total estimated burden for contacting 60
traffic safety representatives for the program case study structured
interviews, if 75% of solicited participants respond, is approximately
79 hours, rounded up each wave (((assuming 48 completed interviews out
of 60 contacted potential participants: 72 hours (48 completed
interviews x 90 minutes for each interview) + ~5.6 hours ((Wave 1-60

contacts x 2 minutes) + (Wave 2-48 contacts x 2 minutes) + (Wave 3-36
contacts x 2 minutes) + (Wave 4-24 contacts x 2 minutes))). Overall,
the total estimated burden for the feedback surveys and program case
study interviews is 129 hours. This information is presented in the
tables below.

                                              Table 1--Estimated Total Burden for End User Feedback Survey
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Estimated time
                                   Number of                           burden per     Frequency     Number of      Burden       Burden    Average annual
              Wave                  contacts     Participant type   participant (in   of burden   participants    hours *     hours per    total burden
                                                                        minutes)                                                wave *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wave 1 (Initial Email                     120  Contacted potential                1            1           120            2           17
 Invitation--NHTSA Form 1343R).                 participant (read
                                                email).
                                               Recruited                         30            1            30           15
                                                participant
                                                (completed survey).
Wave 2 (Reminder Email #1--NHTSA           90  Contacted potential                1            1            90            2           17
 Form 1343R).                                   participant (read
                                                email).
                                               Recruited                         30            1            30           15
                                                participant
                                                (completed survey).
Wave 3 (Reminder Email #2--NHTSA           60  Contacted potential                1            1            60            1           16
 Form 1343R).                                   participant (read
                                                email).
                                               Recruited                         30            1            30           15
                                                participant
                                                (completed survey).
                                 -------------                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ...........  ...................  ...............  ...........  ............  ...........           50           16.67
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Rounded up to the nearest hour.

                                                Table 2--Estimated Total Burden for Structured Interviews
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Estimated time
                                   Number of                           burden per     Frequency     Number of      Burden       Burden    Average annual
              Wave                  contacts     Participant type   participant (in   of burden   participants    hours *     hours per    total burden
                                                                        minutes)                                                wave *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wave 1 (Initial Email                      60  Contacted potential                2            1            60            2           20
 Invitation--NHTSA Form 1344R).                 participant (read
                                                email).
                                               Recruited                         90            1            12           18
                                                participant
                                                (completed
                                                interview).
Wave 2 (Reminder Email #1--NHTSA           48  Contacted potential                2            1            48            2           20
 Form 1344R).                                   participant (read
                                                email).
                                               Recruited                         90            1            12           18
                                                participant
                                                (completed
                                                interview).
Wave 3 (Reminder Email #2--NHTSA           36  Contacted potential                2            1            36            2           20
 Form 1344R).                                   participant (read
                                                email).
                                               Recruited                         90            1            12           18
                                                participant
                                                (completed
                                                interview).
Wave 4 (Reminder Email #3--NHTSA           24  Contacted potential                2            1            24            1           19
 Form 1344R).                                   participant (read
                                                email).
                                               Recruited                         90            1            12           18
                                                participant
                                                (completed
                                                interview).
                                 -------------                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................  ...........  ...................  ...............  ...........  ............  ...........           79           26.33
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Rounded up to the nearest hour.

                                     Table 3--Overall Estimated Total Burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Number of
      Information collection component           Frequency     respondents per    Burden hours    Average annual
                                                                  assessment     per collection   total (hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
End User Feedback Survey....................                1              120               50            16.67
Structured Interviews.......................                1               60               79            26.33
                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...................................  ...............              180              129               43
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimated Total Annual Burden Cost: Participation in this study is
voluntary, and there are no costs to respondents beyond the time spent
completing the end user feedback survey or structured interviews.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspects of
this information collection, including (i) whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Department, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (ii) the accuracy of the Department's estimate
of the burden of the proposed information collection; (iii) ways to
enhance the quality, utility and clarity

of the information to be collected; and (iv) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the
use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology.
    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter
35, as amended; 49 CFR 1.49; and DOT Order 1351.29.

Nanda Narayanan Srinivasan,
Associate Administrator, Research and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2022-08151 Filed 4-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


MemoTo:	Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2021-0208
From:	Michael Shelby, U.S. EPA-OTAQ-TCD
CC:	Michael Olechiw, U.S. EPA-OTAQ-ASD
Date:	June 22[nd], 2021
Re:	Docket of Reference Materials (that are Copyrighted) for VMT Rebound (Chapter 3.1 in DRIA NPRM LDV)
Hello Michael

      Here are the copyrighted Reference materials used for the VMT Rebound section of Chapter 3.1 of the DRIA of the NPRM for the LDV rule.

The following Reference Materials are for the docket (see attachments in accompanying file).
 Winebrake, J., Green, E., Comer, B., Corbett, J., Froman, S. 2012. "Estimating the direct rebound effect for on-road freight transportation," Energy Policy 48, 252-259.
 Greene, D., Kahn, J., Gibson, R. 1999. "Fuel economy rebound effect for U.S. household vehicles," The Energy Journal, 20.
 Greening, L., Greene, D., Difiglio, C. 2000. "Energy efficiency and consumption  -  the rebound effect  -  a survey," Energy Policy, 28, 389-401.
 Sorrell, S. and Dimitropoulos, J. 2007. "UKERC Review of Evidence of the Rebound Effect, Technical Report 2: Econometric Studies," Sussex Energy Group, Working Paper.
 Pickrell, D. and Schimek, P., 1999. "Growth in Motor Vehicle Ownership and Use: Evidence from the Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey," Journal of Transportation and Statistics, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1-17.
 Hymel, K., Small, K., and Van Dender, K. 2010. "Induced demand and rebound effects in road transport," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Volume 44, Issue 10, December, Pages 1220-1241, ISSN 0191-2615, DOI: 10.1016/j.trb.2010.02.007. [EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-2010-0799-0758].
 Barla, P., Lamonde, B., Miranda-Morano, L. and Boucher, N. 2009. Travel distance, stock and fuel efficiency of private vehicles in Canada; price elasticities and rebound effect. Transportation, 36: 389-402.
 Bento, A., Goulder, L., Jacobsen, M. and Haefen, R. 2009. "Distributional and Efficiency Impacts of Increased U.S. Gasoline Taxes, American Economic Review, 99:3 667-699.
 Gately, D. 1993. The Imperfect Price-Reversability of World Oil Demand. The Energy Journal. Volume 14. No.4.
  Dargay, J. and Gately, D. 1997. "The demand for transportation fuels: imperfect price-reversibility?", Transportation Research Board B 31(1).
  Sentenac-Chemin, E. 2012, "Is the price effect on fuel consumption symmetric: Some evidence from an empirical study," Energy Policy, Volume 41, pp. 59-65.
  Greene, D. 2012. "Rebound 2007: Analysis of U.S. light-duty vehicle travel statistics," Energy Policy, vol. 41, pp. 14-28.
  Su, Q. 2012. A quantile regression analysis of the rebound effect: Evidence from the 2009 National Household Transportation Survey in the United States, Energy Policy, 45, pp. 368 - 377.
  Frondel, M. and Vance, C. 2013. Re-Identifying the Rebound: What about Asymmetry? The Energy Journal, 34 (4):43-54.
  Lui, Y., Tremblay, J. and Cirillo, C. 2014. "An integrated model for discrete and continuous decisions with application to vehicle ownership, type and usage," Transportation Research Part A, pp. 315-328.
  Linn, J. 2016. "The Rebound Effect of Passenger Vehicles," The Energy Journal, Volume 37, Issue Number Two.
  Gillingham, K., 2014. "Identifying the elasticity of driving: Evidence from a gasoline price shock in California". Regional Science and Urban Economics, 47: pp.13-24.
  Gillingham, K. 2020. The Rebound Effect and the Proposed Rollback of U.S. Fuel Economy Standards, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy. University of Chicago Press Journal. Volume Number 14, Number 1, Winter.
  Wang, T. and Chen, C. 2014. "Impact of fuel price on vehicle miles traveled (VMT): do the poor respond in the same way as the rich?" Transportation 41(1): 91-105.
  Small, K. and Hymel, K. Fuel Efficiency and Motor Vehicle Travel: The Declining Rebound Effect. The Energy Journal, January 2007.
  Hymel, K. and Small, K. 2015. "The rebound effect for automobile travel: Asymmetric response to price changes and novel features of the 2000s," Energy Economics, 49 (2015) 93-103.
  West, J., Hoekstra, M., Meer, J., Puller, S. 2017. "Vehicle Miles (Not) Traveled: Why Fuel Economy Requirements Don't Increase Household Driving", Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, Volume 145(c), pp. 65-81.
  Gillingham, K., Jenn, A. and Azevedo, I. 2015. "Heterogeneity in the response to gasoline prices: Evidence from Pennsylvania and implications for the rebound effect," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(S1), pages 41-52.
  Langer, A., Maheshri, V. and Winston, C. 2017. "From gallons to miles: A disaggregate analysis of automobile travel and externality taxes". Journal of Public Economics, 152, pp. 34-46.
  Knittel, C. and Sandler, R. 2018. The Welfare Impact of Second-Best Uniform-Pigouvian Taxation: Evidence from Transportation, American Economic Journal: Economic Policy 2018, 10(4): 211 - 242 https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20160508 211.
  De Borger, B. Mulalic, I., and Rouwendal, J. 2016. Measuring the rebound effect with micro data: A first difference approach, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 79, 117.
  Gillingham, K., Rapson, D., Wagner, G. 2016. "The Rebound Effect and Energy Efficiency Policy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 10 (1), pp. 68 - 88.
  Gillingham, K. and Munk-Nielsen, A. 2019. A tale of two tails: Commuting and the fuel price response in driving, Journal of Public Economics, 109, pp. 27-41.
  Gillingham, K. 2020. The Rebound Effect and the Proposed Rollback of U.S. Fuel Economy Standards, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, University of Chicago Press Journal, Volume Number 14, Number 1, Winter.
  Dimitropoulos, A., Questali, W. and Sintek, C. 2018. The rebound effect in road transport: A meta-analysis of empirical studies, Energy Economics, Volume 75, September, pp. 163  -  179.


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 149 (Friday, August 2, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 37919]
[FR Doc No: 2019-16532]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

Extension:
    Rule 155, SEC File No. 270-492, OMB Control No. 3235-0549

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    Rule 155 (17 CFR 230.155) under the Securities Act of 1933 (15
U.S.C. 77a et seq.) provides safe harbors for a registered offering of
securities from integration in two circumstances: (1) A registered
offering that follows an abandoned private offering; and (2) a private
offering that follows a withdrawn registered offering. Each of the
rule's safe harbors imposes conditions designed to assure that there is
a clean break between the abandoned offering and the later offering. In
each safe harbor, these conditions include specified disclosure
designed to assure that investors understand this break as they
consider an investment decision in the later offering. We estimate Rule
155 takes approximately 4 hours per response to prepare and is filed by
approximately 600 respondents annually. We estimate that 50% of the 4
hours per response (2 hours per response) is prepared by the filer for
a total annual reporting burden of 1,200 hours (2 hours per response x
600 responses).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether this proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden imposed by the collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected;
and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number.
    Please direct your written comments to Charles Riddle, Acting
Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission,
c/o Candace Kenner, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 or send an
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: July 30, 2019.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-16532 Filed 8-1-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: June 3, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 106)]
[Notices]
[Page 31499-31500]
[DOCID:fr03jn10-103]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-62179; File No. SR-Phlx-2010-77]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Relating
to Reformatting the Fee Schedule

 May 26, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\, and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on May 25, 2010, NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc. (``Phlx'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III, below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend its existing NASDAQ OMX PHLX, Inc.
Fee Schedule (``fee schedule'') solely to create a more user-friendly
Fee Schedule.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqtrader.com/micro.aspx?id=PHLXfilings, at the
principal office of the Exchange, at the Commission's Public Reference
Room, and on the Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to reformat the Fee
Schedule to make it more user-friendly. The newly proposed Fee Schedule
includes the current fees, which remain unchanged. In the process of
reformatting the Fee Schedule, additional connecting language was added
where appropriate to provide clarity to the end-user. The proposal
eliminates the current endnotes. The Exchange believes that by placing
the language that is currently contained in endnotes into the text of
the fees better displays any exceptions or exclusions referenced in
those endnotes by more prominently displaying them in the text.
Table of Contents
    The Exchange proposes to replace the descriptive term ``Category''
with a new term, ``Sections'', in the table of contents. This is being
done solely to eliminate confusion in the use of the word ``category''
which is utilized in different ways by the Exchange in its fee
proposals. The Exchange is also combining the Sector Index Options Fees
and the U.S. Dollar-Settled Foreign Currency (``WCO'') Options Fees
into one section on the Fee Schedule.
Equity Options Fees
    The Exchange converted the current equity options fees into a table
format for ease of reference.\3\ Currently, the Exchange does not
separately display an options transaction charge for penny pilot
program options (``Penny Pilot'') \4\ and Non-Penny Pilot options for
customers, professionals and firms. The Exchange is proposing to
display the separate categories in this revised Fee Schedule although
the fees remain unchanged. The Exchange's proposal displays a similar
fee for Penny Pilot and non-Penny Pilot options transactions charges
for customer, professionals and firms to make clear that there is no
price distinction for those market participants between Penny and non-
Penny options. The Exchange is not proposing any amendments to its
fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Exchange also proposes removing all references to ``per
contract'' after each fee in the table.
    \4\ The Penny Pilot was established in January 2007; and in
October 2009, it was expanded and extended through December 31,
2010. See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 55153 (January 23,
2007), 72 FR 4553 (January 31, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2006-74) (approval
order establishing Penny Pilot); 60873 (October 23, 2009), 74 FR
56675 (November 2, 2009) (SR-Phlx-2009-91) (expanding and extending
Penny Pilot); 60966 (November 9, 2009), 74 FR 59331 (November 17,
2009) (SR-Phlx-2009-94) (adding seventy-five classes to Penny
Pilot); and 61454 (February 1, 2010), 75 FR 6233 (February 8, 2010)
(SR-Phlx-2010-12) (adding seventy-five options classes to the Penny
Pilot). See also SR-Phlx-2010-65 (adding additional seventy-five
option classes to the Penny Pilot). See also Exchange Rule 1034.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Exchange proposes to transplant endnotes (C) and
(5) from the endnote section of the Fee Schedule, which the Exchange
proposes to eliminate, into the Equity Options Fees section to clarify
which notes apply to the displayed fees. The Exchange also proposes a
similar change in the Payment for Order Flow Fees section of the Equity
Option Fees with respect to endnotes (30) and (32). Additional non-
substantive language has been added where appropriate to indicate what
section of the Fee Schedule the transplanted endnote refers to in the
Fee Schedule. For example, the words ``Payment for Order Flow Fees will
be'' was added to the beginning of endnote (30) to clarify the context
of that transplanted endnote with respect to the Payment for Order Flow
Fees. The Exchange added similar language to the beginning of endnotes
throughout the Fee Schedule when transplanting that text to add
reference for the reader and for purposes of clarity.
Sector Index Options Fees and U.S. Dollar-Settled Foreign Currency
Options Fees
    The Exchange similarly converted the current fees into a table for
ease of reference and combined the sector index and U.S. dollar-settled
foreign currency option fees into the same section of the Fee Schedule.
Access Service, Cancellation, Membership, Regulatory and Other Fees
    The Exchange reformatted this section of the Fee Schedule to
reorder these fees for ease of reference. The Options Regulatory Fee
was relocated after the Real-Time Risk Management Fee with no changes.
Next, all permit related fees were grouped together with the endnotes
weaved into this section with the clarifying language added to each
endnote as described herein. The Streaming Quote Trader and Remote
Streaming Quote Trader Fees were

organized into tables with no changes to the text. The remainder of the
fees in this section are rearranged in order to present the fees by
topic. The endnotes were transplanted and words were added to indicate
which fee the note references within the Fee Schedule. The Examinations
Fee and FINRA fees remain the same.
Market Access Provider Subsidy, Options Floor Broker Subsidy, Routing
Fees, Proprietary Data Feed Fees, NASDAQ OMX PSX
    The Exchange did not amend the following sections of the Fee
Schedule: Market Access Provider Subsidy, Options Floor Broker Subsidy,
Routing Fees, Proprietary Data Feed Fees and NASDAQ OMX PSX. As
previously stated the Exchange eliminated the endnotes section and
incorporated those endnotes into the Fee Schedule instead by
transplanting them into the corresponding pages of the Fee Schedule. In
addition, the Exchange also proposes to amend language in endnote 55
which refers to the monthly charges for the fees for Trading Floor
Personnel Registration Fee and the Fees for Certain Stock Exchange
Clerks by removing the dollar amounts from that text.
    These proposed changes, as previously mentioned, are non-
substantive amendments and are added for the sole purpose of creating a
simplified, easily readable format for displaying the various fees.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule
is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act \5\ in general, and furthers
the objectives of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act \6\ in particular, in that
it is an equitable allocation of reasonable fees and other charges
among Exchange members. The Exchange believes that this proposal is
both reasonable and equitable because providing the members with a more
user-friendly Fee Schedule will better display the allocation of fees
among Exchange members. The Exchange believes that this proposed format
will provide additional transparency of Exchange fees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \7\ and paragraph (f)(3) of Rule 19b-4 \8\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed
rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if
it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://
www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2010-77 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2010-77. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,
all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site
viewing and printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between
the hours of 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the
Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the
Commission does not edit personal identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
publicly available. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
Phlx-2010-77 and should be submitted on or before June 24, 2010.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-13337 Filed 6-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: January 24, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 15)]
[Notices]
[Page 4097]
[DOCID:fr24ja11-38]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12611-005]

Verdant Power, LLC (Verdant); Notice of Application Tendered for
Filing With the Commission and Establishing Procedural Schedule for
Licensing and Deadline for Submission of Final Amendments

January 13, 2011.
    Take notice that the following hydrokinetic pilot project license
application has been filed with the Commission and is available for
public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Pilot License.
    b. Project No.: 12611-005.
    c. Date Filed: December 29, 2010.
    d. Applicant: Verdant Power, LLC (Verdant).
    e. Name of Project: Roosevelt Island Tidal Energy (RITE) Project.
    f. Location: The proposed project would be located on the East
River in New York City, New York. The project does not affect Federal
lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-828(c).
    h. Applicant Contact: Ronald F. Smith, Verdant Power, LLC, The
Octagon, 888 Main Street, New York, NY 10044; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>
(extension 601).
    i. FERC Contact: Timothy Konnert,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. This application is not ready for environmental analysis at this
time.
    k. The Project Description: The primary project facilities would
include: (1) Three 35-kilowatt (kW), 5-meter-diameter axial flow
Kinetic System turbine generator units mounted on a single triframe
mount, with a total installed capacity of 105 kW, in Phase 1; (2) nine
additional 5-meter-diameter axial flow Kinetic System turbine generator
units mounted on three triframe mounts, with a total installed capacity
of 420 kW, in Phase 2; (3) eighteen additional 5-meter-diameter axial
flow Kinetic System turbine generator units mounted on six triframe
mounts, with a total installed capacity of 1,050 kW, in Phase 3; (4)
480-volt underwater cables from each turbine to five shoreline
switchgear vaults that would interconnect to a control room and
interconnection points; and (5) appurtenant facilities for navigation
safety and operation. The project is estimated to have an annual
generation of between 1,680 and 2,400 megawatt-hours.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or
may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
esubscription.asp to be notified via e-mail of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    n. Procedural Schedule:
    The application will be processed according to the following
preliminary Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to the schedule may be
made as appropriate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Milestone                           Target date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Filing of requested additional        January 28, 2011.
 information.
Commission issues REA notice........  February 2, 2011.
Filing of recommendations,            March 4, 2011.
 preliminary terms and conditions,
 and preliminary fishway
 prescriptions.
 Commission issues Single EA........  May 3, 2011.
Comments on EA......................  June 2, 2011.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    o. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice
of ready for environmental analysis.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-1286 Filed 1-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 214)]
[Notices]
[Page 57495-57496]
[DOCID:fr06no09-58]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0506]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Bar Code Label Requirement for Human Drug and
Biological Products

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an
opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain
information by the agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(the PRA), Federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information,
including each proposed extension of an existing collection of
information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the
notice. This notice solicits comments on the bar code label
requirements for human drug and biological products.

DATES: Submit written or electronic comments on the collection of
information by January 5, 2010.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Berbakos, Office of
Information Management (HFA-710), Food and Drug Administration, 5600
Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857<EMAIL_ADDRESS>301-
796-3792.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information,
before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with
this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection
of information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA' s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Bar Code Label Requirement for Human Drug and Biological Products (21
CFR Part 314) (OMB Control Number 0910-0537) Extension

    In the Federal Register of February 26, 2004 (69 FR 9120), we
issued new regulations that required human drug product and biological
product labels to have bar codes. The rule required bar codes on most
human prescription drug products and on over-the-counter (OTC) drug
products that are dispensed pursuant to an order and commonly used in
health care facilities. The rule also required machine-readable
information on blood and blood components. For human prescription drug
products and OTC drug products that are dispensed pursuant to an order
and commonly used in health care facilities, the bar code must contain
the National Drug Code number for the product. For blood and blood
components, the rule specifies the minimum contents of the machine-
readable information in a format approved by the Director, Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research as blood centers have generally
agreed upon the information to be encoded on the label. The rule is
intended to help reduce the number of medication errors in hospitals
and other health care settings by allowing health care professionals to
use bar code scanning equipment to verify that the right drug (in the
right dose and right route of administration) is being given to the
right patient at the right time.
    Most of the information collection burden resulting from the final
rule, as calculated in table 1 of the final rule (69 FR 9120 at 9149),
was a one-time burden that does not occur after the rule's compliance
date of April 26, 2006. In addition, some of the information collection
burden estimated in the final rule is now covered in other OMB-approved
information collection packages for FDA. However, parties may continue
to seek an exemption from the bar code requirement under certain,
limited circumstances. Section 201.25(d) (21 CFR 201.25(d)) requires
submission of a written request for an exemption and describes the
contents of such requests. Based on the number of exemption requests we
have received, we estimate that approximately two exemption requests
may be submitted annually, and that each exemption request will require
24 hours to complete. This would result in an annual reporting burden
of 48 hours.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                  Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         No. of        No. of Responses     Total Annual        Hours per
  21 CFR Section      Respondents       per Respodent        Responses           Response         Total Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
201.25(d)                          2                  1                  2                 24                 48
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

    Dated: November 2, 2009.
David Horowitz,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-26850 Filed 11-5-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 169 (Friday, August 30, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45783-45784]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18804]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2019-0353]

Collection of Information Under Review by Office of Management
and Budget; OMB; Control Number: 1625-0049

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Thirty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the
U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding an Information Collection Request (ICR),
abstracted below, to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting an extension
of its approval for the following collection of information: 1625-0049,
Waterfront Facilities Handling Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) and
Liquefied Hazardous Gas (LHG); without change. Our ICR describe the
information we seek to collect from the public. Review and comments by
OIRA ensure we only impose paperwork burdens commensurate with our
performance of duties.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard and OIRA on or before
September 30, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2019-0353] to the Coast Guard using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. Alternatively, you
may submit comments to OIRA using one of the following means:
    (1) Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Mail: OIRA, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503, attention
Desk Officer for the Coast Guard.
    (3) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. To ensure your comments are received in a
timely manner, mark the fax, attention Desk Officer for the Coast
Guard.
    A copy of the ICR is Copies of the ICRs are available through the
docket on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Additionally,
copies are available from: COMMANDANT (CG-612), ATTN: PAPERWORK
REDUCTION ACT MANAGER, U.S. COAST GUARD, 2703 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.
AVE SE, STOP 7710, WASHINGTON, DC 20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of
Information Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for questions on these documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to
OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard
collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information
describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on
the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection,
and other important information describing the Collection. There is one
ICR for each Collection. The Coast Guard invites comments on whether
this ICR should be granted based on the Collection being necessary for
the proper performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the
Coast Guard would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical
utility of the Collection; (2) the accuracy

of the estimated burden of the Collection; (3) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of information subject to the Collection;
and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the Collection on respondents,
including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology. Consistent with the requirements of Executive
Order 13771, Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs, and
Executive Order 13777, Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda, the
Coast Guard is also requesting comments on the extent to which this
request for information could be modified to reduce the burden on
respondents. These comments will help OIRA determine whether to approve
the ICR referred to in this notice.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments to Coast Guard or OIRA must contain the
OMB Control Number of the ICR. They must also contain the docket number
of this request, [USCG-2019-0353], and must be received by September
30, 2019.

Submitting Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://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 https://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that website's instructions. Additionally,
if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will
be notified when comments are posted.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://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).
    OIRA posts its decisions on ICRs online at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain after the comment period for each ICR. An OMB notice
of Action on each ICR will become available via a hyperlink in the OMB
Control Number: 1625-0049.

Previous Request for Comments

    This request provides a 30-day comment period required by OIRA. The
Coast Guard has published the 60-day notice (84 FR 27341, June 12,
2019) required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That notice elicited no
comment. Accordingly, no changes have been made to the Collections.

Information Collection Request

    Title: Waterfront Facilities Handling Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)
and Liquefied Hazardous Gas (LHG).
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0049.
    Summary: Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) and other Liquefied Hazardous
Gases (LHG) present a risk to the public when handled at waterfront
facilities. These rules should either prevent accidental releases at
waterfront facilities or mitigate their results. They are necessary to
promote and verify compliance with safety standards.
    Need: Title 33 CFR part 127 prescribe safety standards for the
design, construction, equipment, operations, maintenance, personnel
training, and fire protection at waterfront facilities handling LNG or
LHG.
    Forms: None.
    Respondents: Owners and operators of waterfront facilities that
transfer LNG or LHG.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has decreased from 9,734
hours to 5,029 hours a year, due to a decrease in the estimated annual
number of responses.

    Authority:  The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
chapter 35, as amended.

    Dated: August 27, 2019.
James D. Roppel,
U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Office of Information Management.
[FR Doc. 2019-18804 Filed 8-29-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 207 (Friday, October 25, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63858-63860]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24961]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0500; Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-45-AD;
Amendment 39-17624; AD 2013-20-18]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (Bell)
Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2009-05-09 for
Bell Model 412, 412CF, and 412EP helicopters. AD 2009-05-09 required
reidentifying each affected part-numbered main rotor yoke (yoke) on its
data plate, reducing the retirement life of the reidentified yoke, and
revising the Airworthiness Limitations section of the maintenance
manual or the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICAs)
accordingly. This new AD retains the requirements of AD 2009-05-09 with
the exception of the P/N marking location. This AD was prompted by
fatigue analysis that shows the retirement life should be reduced on
certain yokes. We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition
on these helicopters.

DATES: This AD is effective November 29, 2013.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact Bell
Helicopter Textron, Inc., P.O. Box 482, Fort Worth, TX 76101; telephone
(817) 280-3391; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may review a copy of the referenced service information at
the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham
Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth Texas 76137.
    Examining the AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the Docket
Operations Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the economic
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Operations Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations Office, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Kohner, ASW-170, Aviation
Safety Engineer, Rotorcraft Directorate, Rotorcraft Certification
Office, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone (817)
222-5170, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede AD 2009-05-09, Amendment 39-15833 (74 FR 11001,
March 16, 2009). AD 2009-05-09 applied to Bell Model 412, 412CF, and

412EP helicopters. The NPRM published in the Federal Register on June
11, 2013 (78 FR 34958). The NPRM proposed to retain the requirements of
AD 2009-05-09 to reidentify each affected part-numbered yoke based on
whether it was ever installed on a Model 412CF helicopter or on a Model
412 or 412EP helicopter with a slope landing kit, reduce the retirement
life of each reidentified yoke, revise the Airworthiness Limitations
section of the maintenance manual or ICAs accordingly, and record each
reidentified yoke P/N and the reduced retirement life on the component
history card or equivalent record. However, the NPRM proposed to change
the requirement to reidentify the yoke by etching the new P/N on the
side of the yoke instead of on the data plate.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM (78 FR 34958, June 11,
2013) or on the determination of the cost to the public.

FAA's Determination

    We have reviewed the relevant information and determined that an
unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other
products of these same type designs and that air safety and the public
interest require adopting the AD requirements as proposed except for
minor editorial changes in paragraphs (f)(2) and (f)(3) to clarify the
intent of paragraph (f)(2) and to remove an unnecessary reference.
These minor editorial changes are consistent with the intent of the
proposals in the NPRM (78 FR 34958, June 11, 2013) and will not
increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of
the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 115 helicopters of U.S.
Registry. We estimate that operators may incur the following costs in
order to comply with this AD. It will take about 3 work hours to review
and revise the records to reflect the new retirement life and
reidentify the P/N at an average labor rate of $85 per work hour. Based
on these estimates, the cost will be $255 per helicopter and $29,325
for the U.S. operator fleet. Replacing a yoke will take about 20 work
hours and $50,196 for the required parts for a cost of $51,896 per
helicopter.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (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);
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2009-05-09, Amendment 39-15833 (74 FR 11001, March 16, 2009), and
adding the following new AD:

2013-20-18 Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc.: Amendment 39-17624; Docket
No. FAA-2013-0500; Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-45-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Model 412 and 412EP helicopters with a main
rotor yoke assembly (yoke), part number (P/N) 412-010-101-123, -127,
-129, or -133, installed; and Model 412CF helicopters with a yoke,
P/N 412-010-101-127 or -129, installed; certificated in any
category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as fatigue cracking of a
yoke, failure of the yoke, and subsequent loss of control of the
helicopter.

(c) Affected ADs

    This AD supersedes AD 2009-05-09, Amendment 39-15833 (74 FR
11001, March 16, 2009).

 (d) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective November 29, 2013.

(e) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time, unless it has been
accomplished previously.

(f) Required Actions

    Within 10 hours time-in-service (TIS):
    (1) Review the helicopter records to determine all of the
helicopter models on which an affected yoke has been installed since
its production and the hours TIS of each affected yoke.
    (2) If an affected part-numbered yoke has ever been installed on
a Model 412CF helicopter or on a Model 412 or 412EP helicopter with
a slope landing kit, P/N 412-704-012-101, installed, do the
following:
    (i) Reidentify the P/N on the side of the yoke by using a
vibrating stylus and etching two lines through the last three digits
of the existing P/N and etching ``137FM'' adjacent to where you
etched through the last three digits of the original P/N. This
converts each affected yoke P/N to a new yoke P/N 412-010-101-137FM.
The serial number remains the same.

    Note 1 to paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this AD:  The ``FM'' P/N suffix
denotes a field-modified part.

    (ii) Treat the etched surface with chemical film, and apply
primer and paint.
    (iii) Record the reidentified P/N on the applicable component
history card or equivalent record.
    (3) If you cannot determine all the model helicopters on which
an affected yoke has been installed since its production or whether
it has ever been installed on a Model 412 or 412EP helicopter with a
slope landing kit, P/N 412-704-012-101, installed, perform the
actions required by paragraphs (f)(2)(i) through (f)(2)(iii) of this
AD.
    (4) For each reidentified yoke, P/N 412-010-101-137FM, reduce
the retirement life

from 5,000 hours TIS to 4,500 hours TIS. Record the revised life
limit on the applicable component history card or equivalent record.
    (5) Revise the Airworthiness Limitations section of the
applicable maintenance manual or the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness by reducing the retirement life from 5,000 hours TIS
to 4,500 hours TIS for each reidentified yoke, P/N 412-010-101-
137FM.

(g) Special Flight Permit

    Special flight permits will not be issued.

(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Rotorcraft Certification Office, FAA, may
approve AMOCs for this AD. Send your proposal to: Michael Kohner,
ASW-170, Aviation Safety Engineer, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth,
Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(i) Additional Information

    Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. Alert Service Bulletins No. 412-
08-128 and No. 412CF-08-35, both Revision A and both dated April 14,
2009, which are not incorporated by reference, contain additional
information about the subject of this AD. For service information
identified in this AD, contact Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., P.O.
Box 482, Fort Worth, TX 76101; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (817)
280-6466; or at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may review
service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas
76137.

(j) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System/Component (JASC) Code: 6220 Main Rotor
Head.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on September 27, 2013.
Lance T. Gant,
Acting Directorate Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-24961 Filed 10-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 109 (Thursday, June 8, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26676-26677]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11921]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2615-044]

Madison Paper Industries, Brookfield White Pine Hydro LLC,
Merimil Limited Partnership, Brassua Hydroelectric Limited Partnership,
Eagle Creek Kennebec Hydro, LLC; Notice of Application for Partial
Transfer of License, Substitution of Relicense Applicant, and
Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    On May 8, 2017, Madison Paper Industries (MPI), Brookfield White
Pine Hydro LLC (Brookfield), Merimil Limited Partnership (Merimil),
Brassua Hydroelectric Limited Partnership (Brassua Partnership)
(transferors/co-licensees) and Eagle Creek Kennebec Hydro, LLC
(transferee/Eagle Creek) filed a joint application for: (1) Partial
transfer of license for the Brassua Storage Project, FERC No. 2615,
located on the Moose River in Somerset County, Maine and (2)
substitution of Eagle Creek for MPI as the applicant in the pending
application for a new license

filed by the transferors for Project No. 2615-037.
    Applicant Contact: For Transferors: For MPI: Mr. Matthew D.
Manahan, Esq., Pierce Atwood LLP, Merrill's Wharf, 254 Commercial
Street, Portland, ME 04101, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For Brookfield, Merimil and Brassua
Partnership: Mr. John A. Whittaker IV, Winston & Strawn LLP, 1700 K
Street NW., Washington, DC 20006-5100, Phone<PHONE_NUMBER>, Email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and Mr. Alexander M. Wilson, Brookfield
Renewable, 41 Victoria Street, Gatineau, QC J8X2A1, Phone: 819-561-
8679, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For Transferee: For Eagle Creek: Mr. Donald H. Clark and Mr. Joshua
E. Adrian, Duncan, Weinberg, Genzer & Pembroke, P.C., 1615 M Street
NW., Washington, DC 20036, Emails<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    FERC Contact: Patricia W. Gillis, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests:
30 days from the issuance date of this notice, by the Commission. The
Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file motions
to intervene, comments, and protests using the Commission's eFiling
system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or
(202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper
copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should
include docket number P-2615-044.

    Dated: June 2, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-11921 Filed 6-7-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 208 (Friday, October 26, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53982-53983]
[FR Doc No: 2018-23402]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2016-9442; Airspace Docket No. 16-ASO-15]
RIN 2120-AA66

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Crystal Springs, MS

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface at Copiah County Airport, Crystal Springs,
MS, to accommodate new area navigation (RNAV) global positioning system
(GPS) standard instrument approach procedures serving the airport.
Controlled airspace is necessary for the safety and management of
instrument flight rules (IFR) operations at this airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, January 3, 2019. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11C at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go
to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Fornito, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, 1701
Columbia Avenue, College Park, GA 30337; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, 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 establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface at Copiah County Airport, Crystal Springs, MS, to

support standard instrument approach procedures for IFR operations at
this airport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM in the
Federal Register (83 FR 36482, July 30, 2018) for Docket No. FAA-2016-
9442 to establish Class E surface area airspace at Copiah County
Airport, Crystal Springs, MS.
    Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No
comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005, of
FAA Order 7400.11C dated August 13, 2018, and effective September 15,
2018, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class
E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11C, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 13, 2018, and effective
September 15, 2018. FAA Order 7400.11C is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11C lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by establishing Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface within a 7-mile radius of Copiah County Airport,
Crystal Springs, MS, providing the controlled airspace required to
support the new RNAV (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures for
IFR operations at the airport.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (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 only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5a. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 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

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.11C, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 13, 2018, effective September 15, 2018, is amended
as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ASO MS E5 Crystal Springs, MS [New]

Copiah County Airport, MS
    (Lat. 31[deg]54'09'' N, long. 90[deg]22'00'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7-mile radius of Copiah County Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on October 18, 2018.
Debra L. Hogan,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air
Traffic Organization.
[FR Doc. 2018-23402 Filed 10-25-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 1 (Monday, January 4, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 87-88]
[FR Doc No: 2020-29065]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OGC-2020-0717; FRL-10019-15-OGC]

Proposed Settlement Agreement, Challenge to Clean Air Act

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed settlement agreement; request for public
comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Clean Air Act, as amended (``CAA'' or
the ``Act''), notice is hereby given of a proposed Settlement Agreement
to resolve petitions for review filed by the State of Wyoming
(``Wyoming'') and PacifiCorp with respect to PacifiCorp's Wyodak
electric generating unit (EGU). In 2014, Wyoming and PacifiCorp filed
petitions for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Tenth Circuit, challenging EPA's final rule, in which the Agency
partially approved and partially disapproved elements of Wyoming's
Regional Haze State Implementation Plan (SIP), and promulgated a
Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the disapproved elements.
In the Final rule, EPA, inter alia, disapproved Wyoming's determination
concerning nitrogen oxide (NOX) best available retrofit
technology (BART) for Wyodak and promulgated a FIP addressing
NOX BART requirements for Wyodak. The Settlement Agreement
would resolve Wyoming's and PacifiCorp's challenges to the final rule.
Under the proposed Settlement Agreement, the parties agree to take
certain specified actions.

DATES: Written comments on the proposed settlement agreement must be
received by February 3, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OGC-2020-0717, online at https://www.regulations.gov (EPA's preferred
method). Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID
number for this action. Comments received may be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal information
provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Additional Information
about Commenting on the Proposed Settlement Agreement'' heading under
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. Out of an
abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, the EPA
Docket Center and Reading Room are closed to the public, with limited
exceptions, to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19. Our Docket
Center staff will continue to provide remote customer service via
email, phone, and webform. We encourage the public to submit comments
via https://www.regulations.gov, as there may be a delay in processing
mail and faxes. Hand deliveries and couriers may be received by
scheduled appointment only. For further information on EPA Docket
Center services and the current status, please visit us online at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    The EPA continues to carefully and continuously monitor information
from the CDC, local area health departments, and our Federal partners
so that we can respond rapidly as conditions change regarding COVID-19.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie L. Hogan, Air and Radiation
Law Office (2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Obtaining a Copy of the Proposed Settlement Agreement

    The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2020-0717) contains a copy of the proposed Settlement
Agreement.
    The electronic version of the public docket for this action
contains a copy of the proposed Settlement Agreement, and is available
through https://www.regulations.gov. You may use https://www.regulations.gov to submit or view public comments, access the index
listing of the contents of the official public docket, and access those
documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once
in the system, key in the appropriate docket

identification number then select ``search.''

II. Additional Information About the Proposed Settlement Agreement

    The proposed Settlement Agreement would resolve Wyoming's and
PacifiCorp's challenges to the following action: Approval, Disapproval
and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Wyoming; Regional
Haze State Implementation Plan; Federal Implementation Plan for
Regional Haze; final rule, 79 FR 5032 (January 30, 2014). See Wyoming
v. EPA, No. 14-9529 (10th Cir. filed March 28, 2014) and PacifiCorp v.
EPA, No. 14-9534 (10th Cir. filed March 31, 2014).
    The proposed Settlement Agreement establishes deadlines by which
Wyoming and EPA will take certain specified actions with respect to
development of and action on a SIP revision addressing NOX
BART requirements for Wyodak. The proposed Settlement Agreement further
provides that, if certain conditions are met, Wyoming, PacifiCorp, and
EPA agree to move for dismissal of Wyoming's and PacifiCorp's
challenges to the Final rule. See the proposed Settlement Agreement for
specific details.
    In accordance with section 113(g) of the CAA, for a period of
thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this notice, the
Agency will accept written comments relating to the proposed Settlement
Agreement. EPA or the Department of Justice may withdraw or withhold
consent to the proposed Settlement Agreement if the comments disclose
facts or considerations that indicate that such consent is
inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent with the
requirements of the Act.

III. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Settlement
Agreement

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2020-
0717, via https://www.regulations.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from this docket. The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit to EPA's docket at https://www.regulations.gov 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 https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. For additional information about submitting information
identified as CBI, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. Note that written
comments containing CBI and submitted by mail may be delayed and
deliveries or couriers will be received by scheduled appointment only.
    If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other
contact information in the body of your comment. This ensures that you
can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to
contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your
comment. Any identifying or contact information provided in the body of
a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the
official public docket and made available in EPA's electronic public
docket. 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.
    Use of the https://www.regulations.gov website to submit comments
to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments.
The electronic public docket system is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity, email address, or other
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
    Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.

Gautam Srinivasan,
Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2020-29065 Filed 12-31-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P