[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 218 (Monday, November 14, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68057-68060]
[FR Doc No: 2022-23345]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0131; FRL-9739-02-R9]

Clean Air Plans; Base Year Emissions Inventories for the 2015
Ozone Standards; Nevada; Clark County, Las Vegas Valley

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving, under
the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act''), revisions to the Nevada state
implementation plan (SIP) concerning the base year emissions inventory
requirements for the Las Vegas Valley ozone nonattainment area for the
2015 ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or
``standards'').

DATES: This rule is effective December 15, 2022.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0131. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available through https://www.regulations.gov, or please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section for additional availability information. If you need assistance
in a language other than English or if you are a person with
disabilities who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you,
please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lindsay Wickersham, Air Planning
Office (AIR-2), EPA Region IX,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Proposed Action
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
    A. Comment Summary
    B. EPA Response
III. EPA Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Proposed Action

    On October 15, 2020, the Nevada Department of Environmental
Protection (NDEP) submitted a revision to the Nevada SIP titled,
``Revision to the Nevada State Implementation Plan for the 2015 Ozone
NAAQS: Emissions Inventory and Emissions Statement Requirements''
(``2020 Clark County EI''). The 2020 Clark County EI submittal includes
a 2017 base year emissions inventory for the Las Vegas Valley
nonattainment area and supporting documentation regarding the
development of the inventory, developed by the Clark County Department
of Environment and Sustainability (CCDES). CCDES provided supplementary
information to the 2020 Clark County EI on February 10, 2022, February
14, 2022, and March 30, 2022, to address comments and questions raised
by the EPA on receipt of CCDES's prior submittal. Together these three
supplementary exchanges are known as the ``2020 Clark County SI.''
    On June 13, 2022, the EPA proposed to approve the 2020 Clark County
EI and the 2020 Clark County SI as meeting the ozone-related base year
emissions inventory requirement for the Las Vegas Valley ozone
nonattainment area for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.\1\ Our June 13, 2022
proposed rule also discussed the following: background on the 2015
ozone NAAQS; an overview of the base year emissions inventory
requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS under sections 172(c)(3) and
182(a)(1) of the CAA and under the EPA's implementing regulations for
the 2015 ozone NAAQS at 40 CFR 51.1315; an overview of NDEP's SIP
revisions submitted to meet the ozone base year emissions inventory
requirement for the Las Vegas Valley nonattainment area; a discussion
of the

public notice and hearing procedures conducted by NDEP to meet the
requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(l) and 40 CFR 51.102;
and our evaluation of NDEP's SIP submittals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 87 FR 35705.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    The EPA's proposed action provided a 30-day public comment period
that ended on July 13, 2022. During this period, we received one
comment on our proposed rulemaking submitted from a private
individual.\2\ This comment is available in the docket for this
rulemaking.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Comment dated June 13, 2022, from Richard Spotts.
    \3\ Comments are publicly available at https://www.regulations.gov/docket/EPA-R09-OAR-2022-0131/comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Comment Summary

    The comment letter from a private individual expresses concern that
increased combustion of fossil fuels in Clark County is largely
responsible for the area's worsening air quality in recent years. The
commentor also expresses concern that Congressional legislation may
result in the sale of federal lands in Clark County, promoting urban
sprawl, and thus increased combustion of fossil fuels. The commentor
emphasizes a need for this additional sprawl to be factored into
Nevada's calculations of a ``safe level of ozone emissions'' and
``believe(s) that the likelihood of continued urban sprawl in the
county should be relevant to the accuracy and credibility of these
calculations.'' \4\ Finally, the commenter states their belief that
this urban sprawl will slow the transition away from fossil fuels and
towards clean renewable energy sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. EPA Response

    The EPA appreciates the commenter's concern about how potential
changes in the Las Vegas Valley nonattainment area (NAA) may lead to
increased combustion of fossil fuels in the NAA. As discussed in the
proposed notice, emissions inventories are an estimation of actual
emissions of air pollutants within the NAA that are currently typical
of an ozone season day.\5\ Base year emissions inventories, such as the
2020 Clark County EI are, ``the starting point from which other SIP-
related inventories are derived'' and ``provides a way for decision
makers to consider the sources of emissions that contribute to relevant
pollutants and consider emission reduction strategies needed for the
SIP.'' \6\ As such, emissions inventories provide emissions data that
inform a variety of a state's air quality planning tasks, and represent
a required element under the CAA for areas that are not attaining the
NAAQS established by the EPA. The 2020 Clark County EI was submitted to
comply with the emissions inventory requirements for ``Marginal''
nonattainment areas for the 2015 ozone standard.\7\ Thus this emissions
inventory is not intended for use in developing a ``safe level of
emissions'' but rather to characterize emissions in the base year as
required under the CAA.\8\ The base year emissions inventory is for a
year in the recent past; it does not include the effects of future
growth. Instead, it represents emissions at a snapshot in time. The
emissions inventory in the 2020 Clark County EI represents the typical
ozone season day emissions from 2017 within the existing nonattainment
area boundary and does not consider future urban growth nor future
emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ EPA, Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of
Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations, May 2017, Section 2.5.2,
Section 3.3.
    \6\ Id. Section 3.3.
    \7\ 80 FR 65292.
    \8\ CAA Section 182(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The commentor seems to suggest that air quality in the Las Vegas
Valley NAA has worsened in recent years. Although not directly relevant
to whether it is appropriate for EPA to approve the SIP revision at
issue in this action, we note that although the 2018 design value (DV)
was higher than the 2017 DV, the 2019, 2020, and 2021 DVs remained at
or below the 2017 DV of 0.074 ppm.\9\ While some fluctuations in DVs
have occurred, the last 5 years of DVs do not indicate a trend of
worsening ozone air quality in the NAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Las Vegas Valley 8-hour ozone DVs for 2017, 2018, 2019,
2020, and 2021 were 0.074 parts per million (ppm), 0.076 ppm, 0.073
ppm, 0.074 ppm, and 0.073 ppm respectively. EPA, Ozone Design Value
Reports, https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted, this action only concerns approval of the emissions
inventory submitted for the Las Vegas Valley NAA for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. Although not directly relevant to whether such a SIP revision is
appropriately approved by the EPA, the Agency notes that on July 22,
2022, the EPA proposed to reclassify the Las Vegas Valley NAA as
``Moderate'' for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.\10\ If finalized, Clark County
will be required to submit a Moderate plan which provides for, ``such
specific annual reductions in emissions . . . . as necessary to attain
the primary NAAQS by the attainment date applicable under this act.''
\11\ Future growth within the NAA and potential growth of emissions
will be projected and accounted for in this demonstration of
attainment. The demonstration of attainment will include motor vehicle
emissions budgets (``budgets''), which represent the levels of nitrogen
oxides (NOX) and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions
from motor vehicles in the 2023 attainment year that are consistent
with attaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS. After the budgets are either found
adequate or are approved by the EPA, they will be used by the
metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the Las Vegas Valley NAA
in future transportation conformity determinations. When the MPO makes
transportation conformity determinations, it must project on-road
emissions of NOX and VOCs through the last year of the MPO's
transportation plan, which is at least 20 years into the future, and
demonstrate that the projected emissions are less than or equal to the
budgets.\12\ This will show that even if there is increased travel
within the Las Vegas Valley NAA in the future, emissions of
NOX and VOCs will not increase above levels that are
consistent with attaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 87 FR 43764 (July 22, 2022).
    \11\ CAA Section 182(b)(1).
    \12\ 40 CFR 93.106(a)(1)(iv) and 40 CFR 93.118(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on our review of the 2020 Clark County EI, we have determined
that the submitted emissions inventory adequately addresses all
emission sources within the Las Vegas Valley NAA as of the submission
date of October 15, 2020. Any future new or expanded emissions source
within the NAA will be subject to control mandates as outlined in the
CAA.\13\ For example, as a Marginal nonattainment area, the New Source
Review Program will ensure all new and modified major sources in the
NAA will offset emissions at a ratio of 1 to 1.1.\14\ Additionally, all
major sources within the NAA will be required to report annual
emissions, and these emissions will be included in future modeling and
attainment calculations related to the Las Vegas Valley NAA.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ CAA Section 182(a)(2)(C), 182(a)(3)(B).
    \14\ CAA Section 182(a)(4).
    \15\ CAA Section 182(a)(3)(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For these reasons, we have determined that the 2020 Clark County EI
meets the statutory and regulatory requirements for emission
inventories. Control mandates and planning requirements for Marginal
areas are adequate to ensure that any new sources within the NAA are
accounted for in

future emissions estimates and modeling.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ CAA Section 182(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. EPA Action

    For the reasons described in our June 13, 2022 proposed action, we
are taking final action to approve the 2020 Clark County EI as meeting
the base year emissions inventory requirement for the Las Vegas Valley
ozone nonattainment areas for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The emissions
inventory in the 2020 Clark County EI submittal and additional
information collected in the 2020 Clark County SI contains
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventories of actual emissions
for all relevant sources in accordance with CAA sections 172(c)(3) and
182(a).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act.
    The state did not evaluate environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal. There is no information in the record
inconsistent with the stated goals of Executive Order 12898 of
achieving environmental justice for people of color, low-income
populations, and indigenous peoples.
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. The Las Vegas Tribe of
Paiute Indians of the Las Vegas Indian Colony have areas of Indian
country located within the Las Vegas Valley nonattainment area for the
2015 ozone NAAQS. In those areas of Indian country, this final rule
does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 13, 2023. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: October 19, 2022.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA amends chapter I,
title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart DD--Nevada

0
2. In Sec.  52.1470(e), amend the table under the heading ``AIR QUALITY
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE STATE OF NEVADA,'' by adding an entry for
``Revision to 2015 Eight-Hour Ozone Plan, Emissions Inventory
Requirement for the Las Vegas Valley Nonattainment Area, Clark County,
NV (October 15, 2020)'' before the entry for ``PM-10 State
Implementation Plan for Clark County, June 2001'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1470   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                       EPA-Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Applicable
     Name of SIP provision          geographic or         State       EPA approval date        Explanation
                                 nonattainment area  submittal date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           AIR QUALITY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE STATE OF NEVADA \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Revision to Nevada 2015 Eight-   Las Vegas Valley,       10/15/2020  11/14/2022,         Adopted by the Clark
 Hour Ozone Plan, Emissions       Clark County.                       [INSERT FEDERAL     County Board of County
 Inventory Requirement for the                                        REGISTER            Commissioners on
 Las Vegas Valley Nonattainment                                       CITATION].          September 1, 2020.
 Area, Clark County, NV                                                                   Submitted by NDEP
 (October 15, 2020).                                                                      electronically on
                                                                                October 15, 2020, as
                                                                                an attachment to a
                                                                                letter dated October
                                                                                8, 2020. Approval of
                                                                                the Base-Year
                                                                                Emissions Inventory
                                                                                for the 2015 Eight
                                                                                Hour ozone NAAQS.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The organization of this table generally follows from the organization of the State of Nevada's original
  1972 SIP, which was divided into 12 sections. Nonattainment and maintenance plans, among other types of plans,
  are listed under Section 5 (Control Strategy). Lead SIPs and Small Business Stationary Source Technical and
  Environmental Compliance Assistance SIPs are listed after Section 12 followed by nonregulatory or quasi-
  regulatory statutory provisions approved into the SIP. Regulatory statutory provisions are listed in 40 CFR
  52.1470(c).

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2022-23345 Filed 11-10-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 76 (Monday, April 21, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22275-22276]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07131]

Vol. 79

Monday,

No. 76

April 21, 2014

Part III

Department of Defense

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

Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers

Environmental Protection Agency

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

 Notice of Availability Regarding the Exemption From Permitting Under
Section 404(f)(1)(A) of the Clean Water Act to Certain Agricultural
Conservation Practices; Notice

Federal Register / Vol. 79 , No. 76 / Monday, April 21, 2014 /
Notices

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OW-2013-0820; 9908-97-OW]

Notice of Availability Regarding the Exemption From Permitting
Under Section 404(f)(1)(A) of the Clean Water Act to Certain
Agricultural Conservation Practices

AGENCIES: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Department of the Army,
Department of Defense, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability and public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) are announcing the availability of an
interpretive rule to address the exemption from permitting provided
under section 404(f)(1)(A) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) for discharges
of dredged or fill material associated with certain agricultural
conservation practices based on the Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) conservation practice standards that are designed and
implemented to protect and enhance water quality. While the
interpretive rule is already in effect, the agencies recognize the
importance and value of receiving public input on the implementation of
this interpretive rule and welcome comments in response to this notice
within the next 45 days.

DATES: Submit comments on or before June 5, 2014.

ADDRESSES: The interpretive rule, as well as a list of NRCS practices
that meet the exemption, are available via the Internet on the EPA Web
site: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/wetlands/agriculture.cfm.
EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OW-2013-0820. Publicly available docket materials are available
either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Water Docket, EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC, Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone
number for the Water Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Damaris Christensen, Office of
Water (4502-T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>; email
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Mr. Chip Smith, Office of the Deputy
Assistant Secretary of the Army (Policy and Legislation), 108 Army
Pentagon, Washington, DC 22310; telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Ms. Stacey Jensen, Regulatory Community of
Practice (CECW-CO-R), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 441 G Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20314; telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Information About the Document

    Section 404(f)(1)(A) of the CWA exempts from section 404 permit
requirements certain discharges associated with normal farming,
silviculture, and ranching activities in ``waters of the United
States,'' including wetlands. To provide additional clarity to farmers
and to promote practices under the Agriculture Act of 2014 designed to
improve water quality, the EPA and the Corps have signed an
interpretive rule, ``Interpretive Rule Regarding Applicability of the
Exemption from Permitting under Section 404(f)(1)(A) of the Clean Water
Act to Certain Agricultural Conservation Practices.'' The interpretive
rule was developed in coordination with the U.S. Department of
Agriculture.
    The agencies believe working together to improve the consistency
and integration of these programs is fully consistent with the law,
promotes the mutual objectives of our regulations and statutes, and
increases clarity and predictability for the agriculture community. The
result is good for the nation's waters and for farmers and foresters
who want to protect the resources on their lands.
    The agencies have identified specific NRCS agricultural
conservation practices that are appropriately considered ``normal
farming'' activities and exempt from permitting under section
404(f)(1)(A). The agencies and NRCS have also entered into a Memorandum
of Understanding to guide their future coordination on the exemption.
The list of practices, the Memorandum of Understanding, and the
interpretive rule are available on the EPA Web site at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/wetlands/agriculture.cfm and in the
docket for this notice. The agencies seek comment on these documents
within the next 45 days. The agencies and NRCS intend to periodically
revisit and revise, if necessary, the list of exempt NRCS conservation
practice standards. The agencies are particularly interested in
receiving comments on how they might most effectively and efficiently
conduct this periodic review and how best to revise the list of exempt
NRCS practice standards. The agencies also request comment on how they
can best work together and with NRCS to provide clarity to the
regulated community and the public on the exemption.

    Dated: March 25, 2014.
Nancy K. Stoner,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Water, Environmental Protection
Agency.
    Dated: March 25, 2014.
Jo-Ellen Darcy,
Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works), Department of the Army.
[FR Doc. 2014-07131 Filed 4-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Computer Risk Models and Input Files used in the Preliminary Cumulative Risk Assessment of N methyl Carbamate Pesticides Computer Models Three models were used in the preliminary N methyl Carbamate Cumulative Assessment: DEEM/ Calendex, CARES and LifeLine. You will need a copy of these models to use the input files. DEEM/ Calendex was used to estimate risk from food, water and residential exposures. CARES and LifeLine were used to do parallel risk estimates from food and water. For information about how to obtain a copy of these models, please go to the following EPA web page:

http:// www. epa. gov/ pesticides/ cumulative/ nmc_ files. htm Input Files Below is a list of the input files used in the NMC Cumulative Preliminary Assessment. To download copies of these files, please go to the following EPA web page:

http:// www. epa. gov/ pesticides/ cumulative/ nmc_ files. htm DEEM Calendex Input files   deem calendex_ input_ 1. zip ( 1 MB ZIP file of input data for DEEM FCID and Calendex)   deem calendex_ input_ 2. zip ( 218 KB ZIP file of input data for DEEM FCID and Calendex)   deem calendex_ input_ 3. zip ( 42 KB ZIP file of input data for DEEM FCID and Calendex)

CARES Input files   cares_ input. zip ( 14.1 MB ZIP file of input data for CARES)

LifeLine Input files   lifeline_ input. zip ( 5 MB ZIP file of input data for LifeLine)


Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US

05/02/2008 01:26 PM

To

"King, Heidi R."<EMAIL_ADDRESS> cc

Lydia Wegman, Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

chs 2 and 7

Heidi, here are 2 more chapters, 2 more e-mails to follow


[Federal Register: May 7, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 87)]
[Notices]
[Page 25799-25802]
[DOCID:fr07my07-90]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 27815; 812-13312]

Hercules Technology Growth Capital, Inc.; Notice of Application

May 2, 2007.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of an application for an order under section 6(c) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an exemption from
sections 23(a), 23(b) and 63 of the Act, and under sections 57(a)(4)
and 57(i) of the Act and rule 17d-1 under the Act authorizing certain
joint transactions otherwise prohibited by section 57(a)(4) of the Act.

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

Summary of the Application: Applicant, Hercules Technology Growth
Capital, Inc. (``HTGC'') requests an order to permit it to issue shares
of its restricted common stock as part of the compensation packages for
certain of its employees and directors, and certain employees of its
wholly-owned consolidated subsidiaries.

Filing Dates: The application was filed on July 7, 2006 and amended on
April 4, 2007 and May 1, 2007.

Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the application
will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary
and serving HTGC with a copy of the request, personally or by mail.
Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on
May 22, 2007, and should be accompanied by proof of service on HTGC, in
the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service.
Hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, the
reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to
be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the
Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. HTGC, c/o Manuel A. Henriquez,
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, HTGC, 400 Hamilton
Avenue, Suite 310, Palo Alto, California 94301.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura J. Riegel, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-6873, or Nadya B. Roytblat, Assistant Director, at (202) 551-
6821, (Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company
Regulation).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained for a fee at the
Commission's Public Reference Desk, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549-0102 (tel.<PHONE_NUMBER>).

Applicant's Representations

    1. HTGC, a Maryland corporation, is an internally managed, non-
diversified, closed-end investment company that has elected to be
regulated as a business development company (``BDC'') under the Act.\1\
HTGC is a specialty finance company that provides debt and equity
growth capital to technology-related and life-science companies at all
stages of development. Shares of HTGC's common stock are traded on The
NASDAQ Global Market under the symbol ``HTGC.'' As of December 31,
2006, there were 21,927,034 shares of HTGC's common stock outstanding.
As of that date, HTGC had 26 employees, including the employees of its
wholly-owned consolidated subsidiaries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ HTGC was organized on December 18, 2003. On February 22,
2005, HTGC filed with the Commission its registration statement on
Form N-2 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, in connection
with its initial public offering of common stock (the ``IPO'') and
elected to be regulated as a BDC on the same date. Section 2(a)(48)
defines a BDC to be any closed-end investment company that operates
for the purpose of making investments in securities described in
sections 55(a)(1) through 55(a)(3) of the Act and makes available
significant managerial assistance with respect to the issuers of
such securities. On June 11, 2005, HTGC completed its IPO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. HTGC currently has a four member board of directors (``Board'')
of whom one is considered to be an ``interested person'' of HTGC within
the meaning of section 2(a)(19) of the Act and three are not-interested
persons (``Non-interested Directors''). HTGC has three directors who
are not officers of employees of HTGC (the ``Non-employee Directors'').
Currently, HTGC's Non-employee Directors are all Non-interested
Directors, but it is possible that HTGC may have Non-employee Directors
in the future who are interested persons of HTGC.
    3. In May, 2006, HTGC adopted the 2006 Non-employee Director Plan
(the ``2006 Plan'') for the purpose of advancing the interests of HTGC
by providing for the grant of awards under the 2006 Plan to eligible
directors of HTGC who are Non-employee Directors.\2\ HTGC proposes to
amend

and restate the 2006 Plan to permit the issuance of restricted stock
that, at the time of issuance, is subject to certain forfeiture
restrictions, and thus is restricted as to its transferability until
such forfeiture restrictions have lapsed (the ``Restricted Stock'') to
its Non-employee Directors (the ``Amended and Restated 2006 Plan'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission has issued an order under Section 61(a)(3)(B)
of the Act approving the 2006 Plan and the grant of options to Non-
employee Directors under the 2006 Plan. Hercules Technology Growth
Capital, Inc., Investment Company Act Release Nos. 27668 (Jan. 19,
2007) (notice) and 27669 (Feb. 15, 2007) (order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. In May, 2006, HTGC adopted the Amended and Restated 2004 Equity
Incentive Plan (the ``2004 Plan'') for the purpose of attracting and
retaining the services of executive officers, employee directors, and
other key employees. HTGC proposes to amend and restate the 2004 Plan
to permit the issuance of shares of Restricted Stock to its employees
and the employees of its wholly-owned consolidated subsidiaries (the
``Amended and Restated 2004 Plan''; each of the Amended and Restated
2004 Plan and the Amended and Restated 2006 Plan is an ``Amended and
Restated Plan'' and together, the ``Amended and Restated Plans'').
    5. HTGC requests an order to permit it to issue shares of
Restricted Stock to its Non-employee Directors and employees, and the
employees of its wholly-owned consolidated subsidiaries (collectively,
the ``Restricted Stock Participants'' and each, a ``Restricted Stock
Participant'').\3\ HTGC believes that the Amended and Restated Plans
would enable HTGC to offer the Restricted Stock Participants
compensation packages that are competitive with those offered by its
competitors and other investment management businesses, which would
enhance the ability of HTGC to hire and retain key senior management
and other key personnel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ HTGC requests that the order also permit the issuance of
Restricted Stock to its future Non-employee Directors under the
Amended and Restated 2006 Plan and to its future employees and the
future employees of its wholly-owned consolidated subsidiaries under
the Amended and Restated 2004 Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. The Amended and Restated Plans will authorize the issuance of
shares of Restricted Stock subject to certain forfeiture restrictions.
These restrictions may relate to continued employment or service on the
Board, as the case may be (lapsing either on an annual or other
periodic basis or on a ``cliff'' basis, i.e., at the end of a stated
period of time), the performance of HTGC, or other restrictions deemed
by the Board from time to time to be appropriate and in the best
interests of HTGC and its stockholders. The Restricted Stock will not
be transferable except for disposition by gift, will or intestacy.
Except to the extent restricted under the terms of an Amended and
Restated Plan, a Restricted Stock Participant granted Restricted Stock
will have all the rights of any other stockholder, including the right
to vote the Restricted Stock and the right to receive dividends. During
the restriction period (i.e., prior to the lapse of applicable
forfeiture restrictions), the Restricted Stock generally may not be
sold, transferred, pledged, hypothecated, margined, or otherwise
encumbered by the Restricted Stock Participant. Except as the Board
otherwise determines, upon termination of a Restricted Stock
Participant's employment or service on the Board during the applicable
restriction period, Restricted Stock for which forfeiture restrictions
have not lapsed at the time of such termination shall be forfeited.
    7. The maximum amount of shares that may be issued under the
Amended and Restated Plan will be 10% of the outstanding shares of
common stock of HTGC on the effective date of the Amended and Restated
Plans plus 10% of the outstanding number of shares of HTGC's common
stock issued or delivered by HTGC (other than pursuant to compensation
plans) during the term of the Amended and Restated Plans.\4\ In
addition, no Restricted Stock Participant may be granted more than 25%
of the shares of common stock reserved for issuance under the Amended
and Restated Plans. The Board would award shares of Restricted Stock to
the Restricted Stock Participants from time to time as part of the
Restricted Stock Participant's compensation based on a Restricted Stock
Participant's actual or expected performance and value to HTGC. The
Board would have the responsibility to ensure that the Amended and
Restated Plans are operated in a manner that best serves the interests
of HTGC and its stockholders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For purposes of calculating compliance with this limit, HTGC
will count as Restricted Stock all shares of HTGC's common stock
that are issued pursuant to the Amended and Restated Plans less any
shares that are forfeited back to HTGC and cancelled as a result of
forfeiture restrictions not lapsing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. Subject to HTGC's stockholders' approval of the Amended and
Restated 2006 Plan and issuance of the order, the Amended and Restated
2006 Plan will provide for the grant of 3,333 shares of Restricted
Stock to Non-employee Directors upon their initial election to the
Board, for which forfeiture restrictions would lapse as to one-half of
such shares on the anniversary of the grant for each of the first two
years of service, and an additional grant of 5,000 shares of Restricted
Stock at the time of such Non-employee Directors' re-election to the
Board, for which forfeiture restrictions would lapse as to one-third of
such shares on the anniversary of such grant over three years. Subject
to HTGC's stockholders' approval of the Amended and Restated 2006 Plan,
Non-employee Directors who hold office on the date of the order will
receive a grant at the 2007 annual meeting of HTGC's stockholders equal
to the pro rata portion of such grant of 5,000 shares of Restricted
Stock based on the length of the Non-employee Directors' remaining
current term, for which forfeiture restrictions would lapse as to one-
third of such shares on the anniversary of the grant over three years.
The grants of Restricted Stock to Non-employee Directors under the
Amended and Restated 2006 Plan will be automatic and will not be
changed without Commission approval.
    9. Each issuance of Restricted Stock under the Amended and Restated
2004 Plan will be approved by the required majority, as defined in
Section 57(o) of the Act,\5\ of HTGC's directors on the basis that the
issuance is in the best interests of HTGC and its stockholders. The
date on which the required majority approves an issuance of Restricted
Stock will be deemed the date on which the subject Restricted Stock is
granted. The Amended and Restated Plans will be submitted for approval
to HTGC's stockholders, and will become effective upon such approval,
subject to the issuance of the order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The term ``required majority,'' when used with respect to
the approval of a proposed transaction, plan, or arrangement, means
both a majority of a BDC's directors or general partners who have no
financial interest in such transaction, plan, or arrangement and a
majority of such directors or general partners who are not
interested persons of such company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Applicant's Legal Analysis

Sections 23(a) and (b), Section 63

    1. Under section 63 of the Act, the provisions of section 23(a) of
the Act generally prohibiting a registered closed-end investment
company from issuing securities for services or for property other than
cash or securities are made applicable to BDCs. This provision would
prohibit the issuance of Restricted Stock as a part of the Amended and
Restated Plans.
    2. Section 23(b) generally prohibits a closed-end management
investment company from selling its common stock at a price below its
current net asset value (``NAV''). Section 63(2) makes section 23(b)
applicable to BDCs unless certain conditions are met. Because
Restricted Stock that would be granted under the Amended and Restated
Plans would not meet the terms of section 63(2), sections 23(b) and 63
prohibit the issuance of the Restricted Stock.

    3. Section 6(c) provides, in part, that the Commission may, by
order upon application, conditionally or unconditionally exempt any
person, security, or transaction, or any class or classes thereof, from
any provision of the Act, if and to the extent that the exemption is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the
protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy
and provisions of the Act.
    4. HTGC requests an order pursuant to section 6(c) of the Act
granting an exemption from the provisions of sections 23(a) and (b) and
section 63 of the Act. HTGC states that the concerns underlying those
sections include: (i) Preferential treatment of investment company
insiders and the use of options and other rights by insiders to obtain
control of the investment company; (ii) complication of the investment
company's structure that makes it difficult to determine the value of
the company's shares; and (iii) dilution of stockholders' equity in the
investment company. HTGC states that the Amended and Restated Plans do
not raise the concern about preferential treatment of HTGC's insiders
because the Amended and Restated Plans are bona fide compensation plans
of the type that are common among corporations generally. In addition,
section 61(a)(3) of the Act permits a BDC to issue to its officers,
directors and employees, pursuant to an executive compensation plan,
warrants, options and rights to purchase the BDC's voting securities,
subject to certain requirements. HTGC states that, for reasons that are
unclear, section 61 and its legislative history do not address the
issuance by a BDC of restricted stock as incentive compensation. HTGC
states, however, that the issuance of Restricted Stock is substantially
similar, for purposes of investor protection under the Act, to the
issuance of warrants, options, and rights as contemplated by section
61. HTGC also asserts that the Amended and Restated Plans would not
become a means for insiders to obtain control of HTGC because the
maximum number of HTGC's voting securities that are represented by
shares of Restricted Stock and that may be issued to an individual
Restricted Stock Participant will be limited as set forth in the
conditions to the order.
    5. HTGC further states that the Amended and Restated Plans will not
unduly complicate HTGC's structure because equity-based employee
compensation arrangements are widely used among corporations and
commonly known to investors. HTGC notes that the Amended and Restated
Plans will be submitted to HTGC's stockholders for their approval. HTGC
represents that a concise, ``plain English'' description of the Amended
and Restated Plans, including their potential dilutive effect, will be
provided in the proxy materials that will be submitted to HTGC's
stockholders. HTGC also states that it will comply with the proxy
disclosure requirements in Item 10 of Schedule 14A under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. HTGC further notes that the Amended and Restated
Plans will be disclosed to investors in accordance with the
requirements of the Form N-2 registration statements for closed-end
investment companies, and pursuant to the standards and guidelines
adopted by the Financial Accounting Standards Board for operating
companies. In addition, HTGC is subject to the same executive
disclosure requirements that the Commission has adopted for operating
companies.\6\ HTGC thus concludes that the Amended and Restated Plans
will be adequately disclosed to investors and appropriately reflected
in the market value of HTGC's shares.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Executive Compensation and Related Person Disclosure,
Release No. 33-8732A (Aug. 29, 2006), as amended by, Executive
Compensation Disclosure, Release No. 33-8765 (Dec. 22, 2006)
(adopted as interim final rules).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. HTGC acknowledges that, while awards granted under the Amended
and Restated Plans would have a dilutive effect on the stockholders'
equity in HTGC, that effect would be outweighed by the anticipated
benefits of the Amended and Restated Plans to HTGC and its
stockholders. HTGC asserts that it needs the flexibility to provide the
requested equity-based employee compensation in order to be able to
compete effectively with other financial services firms for talented
professionals. These professionals, HTGC suggests, in turn are likely
to increase HTGC's performance and stockholder value. HTGC also asserts
that equity-based compensation would more closely align the interests
of the Non-employee Directors and HTGC's employees with those of HTGC's
stockholders. HTGC believes that the granting of shares of Restricted
Stock to Non-employee Directors under the Amended and Restated 2006
Plan is fair and reasonable because of the skills and experience that
such directors provide to HTGC. Such skills and experience are
necessary for the management and oversight of HTGC's investments and
operations. HTGC believes that granting the shares of Restricted Stock
will provide significant incentives for Non-employee Directors to
remain on the Board and to devote their best efforts to the success of
HTGC's business in the future, as they have done in the past. The
issuance of shares of Restricted Stock will also provide a means for
HTGC's Non-employee Directors to increase their ownership interest in
HTGC, thereby helping to ensure a close identification of their
interests with those of HTGC and its stockholders.

Section 57(a)(4), Rule 17d-1

    7. Section 57(a) proscribes certain transactions between a BDC and
persons related to the BDC in the manner described in section 57(b)
(``57(b) persons''), absent a Commission order. Section 57(a)(4)
generally prohibits a 57(b) person from effecting a transaction in
which the BDC is a joint participant absent such an order. Rule 17d-1,
made applicable to BDCs by section 57(i), proscribes participation in a
``joint enterprise or other joint arrangement or profit-sharing plan,''
which includes a stock option or purchase plan. Employees and directors
of a BDC are 57(b) persons. Thus, the issuance of shares of Restricted
Stock could be deemed to involve a joint transaction involving a BDC
and a 57(b) person in contravention of section 57(a)(4). Rule 17d-1(b)
provides that, in considering relief pursuant to the rule, the
Commission will consider (i) whether the participation of the company
in a joint enterprise is consistent with the Act's policies and
purposes and (ii) the extent to which that participation is on a basis
different from or less advantageous than that of other participants.
    8. HTGC requests an order pursuant to section 57(a)(4) and rule
17d-1 to permit the Amended and Restated Plans. HTGC states that the
Amended and Restated Plans, although benefiting the Restricted Stock
Participants and HTGC in different ways, are in the interests of HTGC's
stockholders because the Amended and Restated Plans will help HTGC
attract and retain talented professionals, help align the interests of
HTGC's employees with those of its stockholders, and in turn help
produce a better return to HTGC's stockholders.

Applicant's Conditions

    HTGC agrees that the order granting the requested relief will be
subject to the following conditions:
    1. The Amended and Restated Plans will be authorized by HTGC's
stockholders.
    2. Each issuance of Restricted Stock to an employee will be
approved by the required majority, as defined in Section

57(o) of the Act, of HTGC's directors on the basis that such issuance
is in the best interests of HTGC and its stockholders.
    3. The amount of voting securities that would result from the
exercise of all of HTGC's outstanding warrants, options, and rights,
together with any Restricted Stock issued pursuant to the Amended and
Restated Plans, at the time of issuance shall not exceed 25% of the
outstanding voting securities of HTGC, except that if the amount of
voting securities that would result from the exercise of all of HTGC's
outstanding warrants, options, and rights issued to HTGC's directors,
officers, and employees, together with any Restricted Stock issued
pursuant to the Amended and Restated Plans, would exceed 15% of the
outstanding voting securities of HTGC, then the total amount of voting
securities that would result from the exercise of all outstanding
warrants, options, and rights, together with any Restricted Stock
issued pursuant to the Amended and Restated Plans, at the time of
issuance shall not exceed 20% of the outstanding voting securities of
HTGC.
    4. The maximum amount of shares of Restricted Stock that may be
issued under the Amended and Restated Plans will be 10% of the
outstanding shares of common stock of HTGC on the effective date of the
Amended and Restated Plans plus 10% of the number of shares of HTGC's
common stock issued or delivered by HTGC (other than pursuant to
compensation plans) during the term of the Amended and Restated Plans.
    5. The Board will review the Amended and Restated Plans at least
annually. In addition, the Board will review periodically the potential
impact that the issuance of Restricted Stock under the Amended and
Restated Plans could have on HTGC's earnings and NAV per share, such
review to take place prior to any decisions to grant Restricted Stock
under the Amended and Restated Plans, but in no event less frequently
than annually. Adequate procedures and records will be maintained to
permit such review. The Board will be authorized to take appropriate
steps to ensure that the grant of Restricted Stock under the Amended
and Restated Plans would not have an effect contrary to the interests
of HTGC's stockholders. This authority will include the authority to
prevent or limit the granting of additional Restricted Stock under the
Amended and Restated Plans. All records maintained pursuant to this
condition will be subject to examination by the Commission and its
staff.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-8683 Filed 5-4-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 227 (Friday, November 26, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72778-72779]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29689]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 195

[Docket No. PHMSA-2009-0203]

Pipeline Safety: Technical Pipeline Safety Advisory Committee
Meeting

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a public meeting of the Technical
Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Standards Committee (THLPSSC). The
committee will meet to consider and vote on a rulemaking to apply the
Federal pipeline safety regulations to the remaining unregulated rural
onshore hazardous liquid low-stress pipelines in accordance with
current law.

DATES: The meeting will be on Monday, December 13, 2010, 1 p.m. to 4
p.m. EST. The THLPSSC will take part in the meeting by telephone
conference call. Attendees should register in advance at http://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/meetings/MtgHome.mtg?mtg=68. PHMSA will post any
new information including meeting presentations on the PHMSA/Office of
Pipeline Safety Web page (http://PHMSA.dot.gov) about 15 days before
the meeting takes place.

ADDRESSES: The public may attend the meeting at the U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590, Room E27-302. For any questions, please contact the individual
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by December 1, 2010.
    Comments on the meeting may be submitted to the docket in the
following ways:
     E-Gov Web Site: http://www.regulations.gov. This site
allows the public to enter comments on any Federal Register notice
issued by any agency.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, DOT, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., West Building, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-001.
     Hand Delivery: Room W12-140 on the ground level of the DOT
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Identify the docket numbers, PHMSA-2009-0203 and
PHMSA-2008-0186 at the beginning of your comments. Note that all
comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. You
should know that 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.). Therefore, you may
want to review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477) or view the Privacy
Notice at http://www.regulations.gov before submitting any such
comments.
    Docket: For access to the docket or to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to Room W12-
140 on the ground level of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
    If you wish to receive confirmation of receipt of your written
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped postcard with the
following statement: ``Comments on PHMSA-2009-0230 and PHMSA-2008-
0186.'' The Docket Clerk will date-stamp the postcard prior to
returning it to you via the U.S. mail. Please note that due to delays
in the delivery of U.S. mail to Federal offices in Washington, DC, we
recommend that persons consider an alternative method (internet, fax,
or professional delivery service) of submitting comments to the docket
and ensuring their timely receipt at DOT.

Privacy Act Statement

    Anyone may search the electronic form of comments received in
response to any of our dockets by the name of the individual who
submitted the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy
Act Statement was published in the Federal Register on April 11, 2000
(65 FR 19477).

Information on Services for Individuals With Disabilities

    For information on facilities or services for individuals with
disabilities, or to seek special assistance at the meeting, please
contact Cheryl Whetsel at<PHONE_NUMBER> by December 1, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about the meetings,
contact Cheryl Whetsel by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or for technical contents about the proposed
rule contact Mike Israni by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or by e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Meeting Details

    Members of the public may attend and make a statement during the
advisory committee meetings. For a better chance to speak at the
meetings, please contact the individual listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT by December 1, 2010.

II. Committee Background

    The THLPSSC advises PHMSA on proposed safety standards, risks
assessments, and safety policies for hazardous liquid pipelines. The
committee falls under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, 5 U.S.C. App. 1) and is authorized

by the Federal pipeline safety law (49 U.S.C. 60115). The committee
consists of 15 members--with one-third of the membership selected from
each of three groups: Federal and state government, the regulated
industry, and the public. The committee advises PHMSA on technical
feasibility, practicability, and cost-effectiveness of each proposed
pipeline safety standard. PHMSA staff may also provide an update on
several regulatory and policy initiatives if time allows.

III. Preliminary Agenda

    Pursuant to Section 4 of the Pipeline Inspection, Protection,
Enforcement, and Safety Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109-468), PHMSA published
a proposed rule titled: ``Pipeline Safety: Applying Safety Regulation
to All Rural Onshore Hazardous Liquid Low-Stress Lines'' on June 22,
2010 (75 FR 35366). The meeting agenda will include the committee's
discussion and vote on the proposed rule, and on the associated
regulatory analysis and environmental assessment.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 19, 2010.
Linda Daugherty,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Policy and Programs.
[FR Doc. 2010-29689 Filed 11-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 4, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20016-20017]
[FR Doc No: 2023-06991]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2011-0074]

Petition for Extension of Waiver of Compliance

    Under part 211 of title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this
document provides the public notice that by letters dated November 18,
2022; February 2, 2023; and March 17, 2023, BNSF Railway Company (BNSF)
petitioned the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for an extension
of a waiver of compliance from certain provisions of the Federal
railroad safety regulations contained at 49 CFR part 232 (Brake System
Safety Standards for Freight and Other Non-Passenger Trains and
Equipment; End-of-Train Devices). The relevant Docket Number is FRA-
2011-0074.
    Specifically, BNSF requests to continue using its software
technology, Air Brake System Virtual Training Environment (ABSVTE), to
implement a virtual three-dimensional simulation as an alternative to
satisfy the ``hands-on'' portion of periodic refresher training
required by Sec.  232.203(b)(8).\1\ Refresher training is required at
intervals not to exceed 3 years and must consist of classroom and
hands-on training, as well as testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ BNSF's November 18, 2022, petition requested both an
extension of the current relief and a modification to apply the
relief in a self-directed, wholly virtual environment. However,
BNSF's February 2, 2023, petition withdrew the request for
modification of the relief but reaffirmed its request for an
extension of the existing relief.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In support of its petition, BNSF explains that the ABSVTE
``provides a more comprehensive environment for knowledge transfer and
assessment than traditional hands-on brake inspection training.'' BNSF
asserts that the virtual training: (1) can ``provide training on every
railcar type;'' (2) can ``simulate the presence of a broad spectrum of
mechanical defects;'' (3) ``ensure[s] accuracy of employee
observations'' and ``provide feedback to the employee;'' and (4) allows
training to be conducted ``without exposing employees to walking
hazards or other potential injury exposures.'' BNSF notes that the
``rate of [rail equipment incidents] caused by car mechanical defects
per one million car-miles has continued on a downward trajectory since
BNSF began providing training under the waiver.''
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov.

    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment and a public hearing, they
should notify FRA, in writing, before the end of the comment period and
specify the basis for their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
    Communications received by June 5, 2023 will be considered by FRA
before final action is taken. Comments received after that date will be
considered if practicable.
    Anyone can search the electronic form of any written communications
and comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or signing the document, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) solicits
comments from the public to better inform its processes. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See also https://www.regulations.gov/privacy-notice for the privacy notice of regulations.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
John Karl Alexy,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety, Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2023-06991 Filed 4-3-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register: July 16, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 135)]
[Notices]
[Page 34601-34602]
[DOCID:fr16jy09-81]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

Federal Register Citation of Previous Announcement: [tba]

Status: Closed meeting.

Place: 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC.

Date and Time of Previously Announced Meeting: Tuesday, July 21, 2009
at 2 p.m.

Change in the Meeting: Additional item.

    The following item has been added to the Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Closed Meeting agenda:

Opinion

    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(c)(10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(10) permit
consideration of the scheduled matter at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Aguilar, as duty officer, determined that Commission
business required the above change.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the

scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to ascertain
what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, please
contact the Office of the Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: July 14, 2009.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-17091 Filed 7-14-09; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: August 11, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 154)]
[Notices]
[Page 48720]
[DOCID:fr11au10-81]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1922-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2010-0002]

Montana; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Montana (FEMA-1922-DR), dated July 10, 2010, and
related determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: July 30, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Miller, Recovery Directorate,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the incident
period for this disaster is closed effective July 30, 2010.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2010-19846 Filed 8-10-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:a 75 day period time to review the proposed regulations is insufficient. We are requesting that the review period be extended to 180 days. As a 20+ year pack a day smoker, ecigs have saved my life!!

-Matthew Broome


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 87 (Monday, May 8, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21451-21452]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09262]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2017-0031]

Notice of Application for Approval of Discontinuance or
Modification of a Railroad Signal System

    Under part 235 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations and
49 U.S.C. 20502(a), this document provides the public notice that on
April 11, 2017, National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
petitioned the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) seeking approval
for the discontinuance or modification of a signal system. FRA assigned
the petition Docket Number FRA-2017-0031.
    Applicant: National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Mr. Nicholas J.
Croce III, PE, Deputy Chief Engineer C&S, Acting, 2995 Market Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19104.
    Amtrak is the owner and operator of this signal system, and the
Connecticut Southern Railroad, CSX Transportation, and Pan Am Railways
operate on portions of this line as tenants with trackage rights.
    The project is located on Amtrak's New Haven to Springfield
Corridor from milepost (MP) 1.5 to MP 46.3 on the New England Division.
The tracks involved are existing main Track No. 1 and new Track No. 2.
The project includes the following additions and modifications to the
rail infrastructure:
     A second mainline track between Cedar and Wood
interlockings which

allows retirement of two end of siding interlockings, Quarry
Interlocking at MP 20.6 and New Interlocking at MP 31.1;
     A second mainline track between Hart and Hayden
interlockings which allows for the retirement of Windsor Interlocking,
an end of siding interlocking at MP 43.0;
     A new siding track between Hart and Midland interlockings;
     Cedar Interlocking will be relocated from MP 7.0 to MP 7.4
and upgraded from an end of siding to a universal crossover;
     Holt Interlocking will be relocated from MP 17.1 to MP
16.6 and upgraded from an end of siding to a universal crossover;
     A new interlocking ``Willow'' will be added at MP 26.6;
     A new interlocking ``Midland'' will be added at MP 39.1;
and
     A complete replacement of the automatic block signal
system with Northeast Operating Rules Advisory Committee Rule 562
territory from Mill River to Wood and from Hart to Hayden.
    All interlockings in each section will be equipped with Clear to
Next Interlocking signals where entering cab, no wayside territory.
    As a result of the above, Amtrak requests to retire the following
infrastructure from service:
     Control point Wall at MP 13.3;
     Fixed wayside automatic block signals on Track No. 1
between Mill River and Wood;
     Fixed wayside automatic block signals on Track No. 1
between Hart and Hayden;
     Fixed wayside automatic block signals on Track No. 2
between Mill River and Cedar;
     Fixed wayside automatic block signals on Track No. 2
between Holt and Quarry; and
     Fixed wayside automatic block signals on Track No. 2
between New and Wood.
    Amtrak has begun the joint project with the Connecticut Department
of Transportation and FRA and anticipates completion in April of 2018.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation's (DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations
Facility is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested parties
desire an opportunity for oral comment and a public hearing, they
should notify FRA, in writing, before the end of the comment period and
specify the basis for their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by June 22, 2017 will be considered by FRA
before final action is taken. Comments received after that date will be
considered if practicable.
    Anyone can search the electronic form of any written communications
and comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or signing the document, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better
inform its processes. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including
any personal information the commenter provides, to
www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/
ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See also https://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice for the
privacy notice of regulations.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Robert C. Lauby,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety, Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2017-09262 Filed 5-5-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P