[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 204 (Friday, October 21, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65378-65380]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27258]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0834]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; The Florida Orchestra Pops in the Park Fireworks
Display, Tampa Bay, St. Petersburg, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
waters of Tampa Bay in the vicinity of Spa Beach in St. Petersburg,
Florida during The Florida Orchestra Pops in the Park Fireworks Display
on Saturday, October 22, 2011. The safety zone is necessary to protect
the public from the hazards associated with launching fireworks over
navigable waters of the United States. Persons and vessels are
prohibited from entering, transiting through, anchoring in, or
remaining within the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of
the Port St. Petersburg or a designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8 p.m. until 10 p.m. on October 22,
2011.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2011-0834 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2011-0834 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary final rule, call or e-mail Marine Science Technician Second
Class Chad R. Griffiths, Sector St. Petersburg Prevention Department,
Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright,
Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because the Coast Guard did not receive
necessary information regarding the fireworks display with sufficient
time to publish an NPRM and to receive public comments prior to the
fireworks display. Any delay in the effective date of this rule would
be contrary to the public interest because immediate action is needed
to minimize potential danger to the public during the fireworks
display.
    For the same reason discussed above, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) the
Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective
less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for the rule is the Coast Guard's authority to
establish regulated navigation areas and other limited access areas: 33
U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33
CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
    The purpose of the rule is to protect the public from the hazards
associated with the launching of fireworks over navigable waters of the
United States.

Discussion of Rule

    On Saturday, October 22, 2011, The Florida Orchestra Pops in the
Park Fireworks Display is scheduled to take place in St. Petersburg,
Florida. The fireworks will be launched from Spa Beach. The fireworks
will explode over Tampa Bay. The fireworks display is scheduled to
commence at approximately 9 p.m.
    The safety zone encompasses certain waters of Tampa Bay in the
vicinity of Spa Beach in St. Petersburg, Florida. The safety zone will
be enforced from 8 p.m. until 10 p.m. on October 22, 2011. The safety
zone will be enforced beginning one hour prior to the scheduled
commencement of the fireworks display to ensure the safety zone is
clear of persons and vessels. The safety zone will cease being enforced
approximately one hour after the scheduled conclusion of the fireworks
display to account for possible delays.
    Persons and vessels are prohibited from entering, transiting
through, anchoring in, or remaining within the safety zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg or a designated
representative. Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through,
anchor in, or remain within the safety zone may contact the Captain of
the Port St. Petersburg by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a designated
representative via VHF radio on channel 16, to request authorization.
If authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within
the safety zone is granted by the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg or
a designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such
authorization must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the
Port St. Petersburg or a designated representative. The Coast Guard
will provide notice of the safety zone by Local Notice to Mariners,
Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene designated representatives.

Regulatory Analyses

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

Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, and does not require an
assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of
that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not reviewed it
under that Order.
    The economic impact of this rule is not significant for the
following reasons: (1) The safety zone will be enforced for only two
hours; (2) although persons and vessels will not be able to enter,
transit through, anchor in, or remain

within the safety zone without authorization from the Captain of the
Port St. Petersburg or a designated representative, they may operate in
the surrounding area during the enforcement period; (3) persons and
vessels may still enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within
the safety zone if authorized by the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg
or a designated representative; and (4) the Coast Guard will provide
advance notification of the safety zone to the local maritime community
by Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This rule may affect the following entities, some of which
may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within that portion of
Tampa Bay encompassed within the safety zone from 8 p.m. until 10 p.m.
on October 22, 2011. For the reasons discussed in the Executive Order
12866 and Executive Order 13563 section above, this rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.

Assistance for Small Entities

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

Collection of Information

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

Federalism

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

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

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

Indian Tribal Governments

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

Energy Effects

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

Technical Standards

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

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34)(g), of
the Instruction. This rule involves establishing a temporary safety
zone that will be enforced for two hours. An environmental analysis
checklist

and a categorical exclusion determination are available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add a temporary Sec.  165.T07-0834 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T07-0834  Safety Zone; The Florida Orchestra Pops in the Park
Fireworks Display, Tampa Bay, St. Petersburg, FL.

    (a) Regulated Area. The following regulated area is a safety zone:
All waters of Tampa Bay within a 120 yard radius of position
27[deg]46'30'' N, 82[deg]37'38'' W. All coordinates are North American
Datum 1983.
    (b) Definition. The term ``designated representative'' means Coast
Guard Patrol Commanders, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty
officers, and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and
Federal, state, and local officers designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port St. Petersburg in the enforcement of the regulated
area.
    (c) Regulations.
    (1) All persons and vessels are prohibited from entering,
transiting through, anchoring in, or remaining within the regulated
area unless authorized by the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg or a
designated representative.
    (2) Persons and vessels desiring to enter, transit through, anchor
in, or remain within the regulated area may contact the Captain of the
Port St. Petersburg by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a designated
representative via VHF radio on channel 16, to request authorization.
If authorization to enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within
the regulated area is granted by the Captain of the Port St. Petersburg
or a designated representative, all persons and vessels receiving such
authorization must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the
Port St. Petersburg or a designated representative.
    (3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area by
Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners, and on-scene
designated representatives.
    (d) Effective Date. This rule is effective from 8 p.m. until 10
p.m. on October 22, 2011.

    Dated: September 28, 2011.
S. L. Dickinson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port.
[FR Doc. 2011-27258 Filed 10-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 249 (Tuesday, December 29, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 81405-81407]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32651]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76737; File No. SR-Phlx-2015-102]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Delete
Rule 1068, Execution of Multi-Part Orders

December 22, 2015.
    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 December 15, 2015, NASDAQ OMX PHLX LLC (``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 delete Rule 1068, Execution of Multi-Part
Orders, as described further below.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqomxphlx.cchwallstreet.com/, at the principal
office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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 filing is to update the Exchange's rulebook by
deleting Rule 1068, Execution of Multi-Part Orders.\3\ This rule
pertains to the execution of a foreign currency options--futures multi-
part order, which is a type of spread order that consists of multiple
components.\4\ Rule 1068 was adopted when the Exchange operated a
trading floor for both foreign currency options and foreign currency
futures (which were traded on the Philadelphia Board of Trade
(``PBOT''), a futures exchange). The rule enumerates the process for
representing and executing a foreign currency options--futures multi-
part order in the trading crowd.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 28117 (June 14,
1990), 55 FR 25188 (June 20, 1990) (SR-Phlx-89-58).
    \4\ In Rule 1066(c), the Exchange previously defined a multi-
part order as an order to buy and/or sell a stated number of foreign
currency option contracts and a stated number of foreign currency
futures contracts. This order type was deleted. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 69471 (April 29, 2013), 78 FR 26096 (May 3,
2013) (SR-Phlx-2013-09).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PBOT has long been replaced by successive futures exchanges (NASDAQ
Futures Exchange, Inc. and, most recently, NASDAQ Futures, Inc.
(collectively ``NFX'')). NFX operates as an all-electronic futures
exchange, such that no trading floor exists \5\ upon which an order
with a futures component can be executed. Although foreign currency
options can be executed on the options trading floor, futures orders
cannot. Rule 1068 refers to the execution of this order pursuant to NFX
Rule 327, which no longer exists.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See SR-NFX-2009-04. This rule self-certification was filed
with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission on March 26, 2009 and
eliminated open outcry rules in connection with the termination of
floor trading.
    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 1068 inadvertently remained in the rulebook after NFX no
longer operated with a trading floor, and is now proposed to be
deleted.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \7\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \8\ in particular, in that it is designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade and protect investors and the
public interest, by eliminating an obsolete rule and thereby preventing
confusion as to whether such a multi-part order can be executed.
Eliminating the execution rule associated with multi-part orders
promotes just and equitable principles of trade, because the order type
itself was previously deleted, and because it is impossible to trade.
Eliminating this rule is also consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest because investors would not
reasonably expect to be able to execute such an order and there has
been no demand for this order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. There are no market
participants impacted by the deletion of this rule. This rule was
specifically intended to permit NFX members to transact business on a
trading floor, which no longer exists. Further, the Exchange does not
list these products and therefore no market participant may transact
foreign currency futures. Those Phlx members desiring to transact
foreign currency options may continue to trade those securities on
Phlx. Accordingly, there is no impact on intra-market competition.
Market participants who seek to trade in foreign currency options along
with foreign currency futures can do so by submitting separate orders
to various securities and futures exchanges.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \9\ and
subparagraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(iii).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (i)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the
Commission shall institute proceedings to determine whether the
proposed rule should be approved or disapproved.

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 email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-Phlx-2015-102 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2015-102. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email 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 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
the 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 available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-Phlx-2015-102 and should be submitted on or before
January 19, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-32651 Filed 12-28-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: July 27, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 143)]
[Notices]
[Page 43974-43975]
[DOCID:fr27jy10-85]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2005-0062; FRL-9180-6]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental
Policy Act and Assessing the Environmental Effects Abroad of EPA
Actions (Renewal); EPA ICR No. 2243.06, OMB Control No. 2020-0033

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)(44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection
Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing
approved collection. The ICR, which is abstracted below, describes the
nature of the information collection and its estimated burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before August 26,
2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OECA-
2005-0062, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB by mail
to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jessica Trice, Office of Federal
Activities, Mail Code 2252A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202)
564-6646; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On May 7, 2010 (75 FR 25237), EPA sought comments on this ICR
pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any additional
comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days
of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OECA-2005-0062, which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Enforcement and
Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room
3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC 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 Reading
Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Enforcement and
Compliance Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://
www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the
index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those
documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number
identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public
comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made
available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA
receives them and without change, unless the comment contains
copyrighted material, confidential

business information (CBI), or other information whose public
disclosure is restricted by statute. For further information about the
electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
    Title: Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental
Policy Act and Assessing the Environmental Effects Abroad of EPA
Actions (Renewal).
    ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 2243.06, OMB Control No. 2020-0033.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on August 31, 2010.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
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 OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42
U.S.C. 4321-4347 establishes the federal government's national policy
for protection of the environment. The Council on Environmental Quality
Regulations (CEQ Regulations) at 40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508
establish procedures implementing the national policy. The CEQ
Regulations (40 CFR 1505.1) require federal agencies to adopt and, as
needed, revise their own implementing procedures to supplement the CEQ
Regulations and to ensure their decision-making processes are
consistent with NEPA. EPA accordingly laid out its ``Procedures for
Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act and Assessing the
Environmental Effects Abroad of EPA Actions'' at 40 CFR part 6.
    Those subject to the final NEPA rule include certain grant or
permit applicants who must submit environmental information
documentation to EPA for their proposed projects. The final NEPA
regulations consolidate and standardize the environmental review
process applicable to all EPA actions subject to NEPA, including those
actions now specifically addressed in the regulations and other actions
subject to NEPA but not specifically addressed in the regulations
(e.g., certain grants awarded for special projects authorized by
Congress through the Agency's annual Appropriations Act).
    EPA is collecting information from certain applicants as part of
the process of complying with either NEPA or Executive Order 12114
(``Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions''). EPA's NEPA
regulations apply to the actions of EPA that are subject to NEPA in
order to ensure that environmental information is available to the
Agency's decision-makers and the public before decisions are made and
before actions are taken.
    When EPA conducts an environmental assessment pursuant to its
Executive Order 12114 procedures, the Agency generally follows its NEPA
procedures. Compliance with the procedures is the responsibility of
EPA's Responsible Officials, and for applicant-proposed actions
applicants may be required to provide environmental information to EPA
as part of the environmental review process. For this Information
Collection Request (ICR), applicant-proposed projects subject to either
NEPA or Executive Order 12114 (and that are not addressed in other EPA
programs' ICRs) are addressed through the NEPA process.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 123
hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by
this action are certain grant or permit applicants who must submit
environmental information documentation to EPA for their projects to
comply with NEPA or Executive Order 12114, including Wastewater
Treatment Construction Grants Program facilities, State and Tribal
Assistance Grant recipients and new source National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System permittees.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 312.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 38,472 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $3,503,245, includes $7,638 annualized
capital or O&M costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 9,675 hours in the
total estimated burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of
Approved ICR Burdens. This decrease reflects the increasing the number
of projects that are documented with a categorical exclusion (CE)
rather than an environmental assessment (EA). Under the current ICR,
approximately 60% of the annual 300 grant projects were documented with
a CE, and 40% with an EA. However, we estimate that out of the 300
annual grant projects, 75% will be documented with a CE and 25% will be
documented with an EA.

    Dated: July 21, 2010.
John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2010-18367 Filed 7-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 78 (Tuesday, April 23, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16770-16775]
[FR Doc No: 2019-06986]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 120

Office of the Secretary of Transportation

49 CFR Parts 40

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 199

Federal Transit Administration

49 CFR Part 655

RIN 2105-AE78

Conforming Amendments and Technical Corrections to Department
Rules Implementing the Transportation Industry Drug Testing Program

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST), Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA), Federal Transit Administration (FTA),
and Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA);
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This final rule makes minor technical corrections to the OST,
FAA, FTA, and PHMSA regulations governing drug testing for safety-
sensitive employees to ensure consistency with the recent amendments
made to the Department of Transportation's regulation, ``Procedures for
Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs,'' which
added requirements to test for oxycodone, oxymorphone, hydrocodone, and
hydromorphone to DOT-regulated drug testing programs. The changes to
the Department's regulation make it necessary to refer to these
substances, as well as the previously covered drugs morphine, 6-
acetylmorphine, and codeine, by the more inclusive term ``opioids,''
rather than ``opiates.'' This rule amends the term in the FAA, FTA, and
PHMSA regulations to ensure that all DOT drug testing rules are
consistent with one another and with the Mandatory Guidelines for
Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs. In addition, this rule makes a
conforming amendment to include the term ``opioids'' in the wording of
the Department's annual information collection requirement and
clarifications to section 40.26 and Appendix H regarding the
requirement for employers to follow the Department's instructions for
the annual information collection.

DATES: This rule is effective on April 23, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For OST, Patrice M. Kelly, Director,
Office of Drug and Alcohol Policy and Compliance, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected]). For FTA, for program issues, contact Iyon
Rosario, Office of Transit Safety and Oversight (TSO), FTA, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001 (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email: [email protected]). For legal issues, contact Bruce Walker,
Office of Chief Counsel (TCC), FTA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001 (telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
[email protected]). For FAA, Rafael Ramos, Office of Aerospace
Medicine, Drug Abatement Division, AAM-800, FAA, 800 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591 (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; facsimile 202-
267-5200; email: [email protected]). For PHMSA, Wayne Lemoi, Drug
and Alcohol Program Manager, PHMSA Office of Pipeline Safety (telephone
909-937-7232, email [email protected]).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On January 23, 2017, the Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS) published its final version of its Mandatory Guidelines for
Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Urine (HHS Mandatory
Guidelines) (82 FR 7920). In that final rule, HHS added four semi-
synthetic opioid substances (hydrocodone, hydromorphone, oxycodone, and
oxymorphone) to the drugs for which laboratories test under the HHS
Mandatory Guidelines. That rule became effective October 1, 2017.
    By statute, the Department of Transportation is required to follow
the HHS Mandatory Guidelines for the

drugs for which it tests in the transportation industry drug testing
program. Consequently, the Department issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) on January 23, 2017 (82 FR 7771). In that NPRM, the
Department proposed to revise 49 CFR part 40 (part 40) to harmonize
with certain parts of the revised HHS Mandatory Guidelines. The
Department received 69 comments on the NPRM from various stakeholders,
which were addressed in the final rule published on November 13, 2017.
    The Department's final rule, among other things, added the four
semi-synthetic opioid substances (hydrocodone, hydromorphone,
oxycodone, and oxymorphone) to the Department's drug testing program
(82 FR 52229). The Department's final rule became effective on January
1, 2018. These testing requirements are now codified at 49 CFR 40.85(d)
and 40.87.
    Before the 2017 HHS and DOT rulemakings, laboratories under the HHS
Mandatory Guidelines and Part 40 tested for codeine, 6-acetylmorphine,
and morphine, properly referred to as ``opiates.'' The four substances
added in the DOT 2017 final rule are semi-synthetic substances, closely
related to opiates but chemically distinct. For this reason, it is more
accurate to refer to all six substances under the more inclusive term
``opioids.''

DOT Management Information System Form

    The 2017 DOT final rule changed the terminology from ``opiates'' to
``opioids'' throughout part 40, with one minor exception in the DOT's
Management Information System (MIS) Form. Specifically, we did not
change the term ``opiates'' to ``opioids'' within the MIS Form in order
to avoid any confusion on what employers were to report for the 2017
calendar year MIS reporting period. Since testing for the semi-
synthetic opioids began in calendar year 2018, employers would not need
to report that data until after January 1, 2019. Therefore, we are now
updating the MIS Form to be consistent with the rest of part 40. The
costs for the additional opioid testing were addressed in the final
rule dated November 13, 2017.
    In addition, in our November 13, 2017, final rule (82 FR 52243), we
moved the instructions to the MIS data collection form from Appendix H
to our website. We did so to provide greater flexibility to make
changes and/or updates to the MIS instructions. We did not intend for
this to suggest that employers were no longer required to use the MIS
instructions as they have been required to do by part 40 and the
respective DOT Agency regulations since 2003. Therefore, we are making
a technical amendment to Sec.  40.26 and Appendix H to part 40 to
clarify the requirement for employers to use the MIS instructions.

Discussion

    The Department's 2017 final rule was promulgated under the
authority of the Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act (OTETA) of
1991 (Pub. L. 102-143, Title V, 105 Stat. 952). The OTETA sets the
requirements for DOT's reliance on the HHS Mandatory Guidelines for
scientific testing issues. Section 503 of the Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 1987 (Pub. L. 100-71, 101 Stat 391, 468), 5 U.S.C.
7301, and Executive Order 12564 establish HHS as the agency that
directs scientific and technical guidelines for Federal workplace drug-
testing programs and standards for certification of laboratories'
regulated programs. While the Department has discretion concerning many
aspects of the regulations governing testing in the transportation
industries' regulated programs, we must follow the HHS Mandatory
Guidelines for the drugs for which we require testing.
    The final rule follows that same mandate with respect to 49 CFR
part 40 (OST), 14 CFR part 120 (FAA), and 49 CFR part 655 (FTA), all of
which are directly subject to the OTETA mandate to conform to the HHS
Mandatory Guidelines. Although PHMSA is not one of the agencies
mentioned in OTETA, PHMSA's drug testing rule (49 CFR part 199) has
always incorporated part 40 procedures, and it is important for all DOT
drug testing regulations, and their terminology, to remain consistent.
For this reason, we are changing the definition of ``prohibited drug''
in part 199 to directly reference part 40 and not the Controlled
Substances Act.
    In the OST rule, in Appendix H, the MIS form, in Section III,
``Drug Testing Data,'' the word ``opiates'' in Column 7 is being
changed to ``opioids.''
    In the FAA rule, the FAA is revising the definition of ``prohibited
drug'' in Sec.  120.7(m) to mean any of the drugs specified in part 40.
The FAA is also revising Sec. Sec.  120.107 and 120.109 to replace the
list of drugs and drug metabolites with the term ``prohibited drug.''
These changes will harmonize part 120, in pertinent part, with part 40.
In Sec.  120.109(c) the words ``can not'' are being corrected to
``cannot.''
    In the FTA rule, the FTA is replacing the term ``opiates'' with
``opioids'' in 49 CFR 655.21(b)(3).
    In the PHMSA rule, 49 CFR 199.5, pipeline operators are required to
conduct their anti-drug programs according to the requirements of part
199 and the DOT Procedures in part 40. Moreover, the regulations
explain that the terms and concepts used in part 199 have the same
meaning as in the DOT Procedures in part 40. The ODAPC final rule,
dated November 13, 2017, changed the definition of ``drug'' in 49 CFR
40.3 to: ``The drugs for which tests are required under this part and
DOT Agency regulations are marijuana, cocaine, amphetamines,
phencyclidine (PCP), and opioids.'' As a conforming amendment, PHMSA is
changing the definition of ``prohibited drug'' in part 199 to align it
with the recently changed definition of ``drugs'' in part 40. Instead
of referencing the Controlled Substances Act, the definition of
``prohibited drug'' will now reference part 40. This change will also
conform with the requirement under part 40 that the drug test panel
includes the four semi-synthetic opioids (i.e., hydrocodone, oxycodone,
hydromorphone, oxymorphone) in addition to the three natural opiates
(i.e., heroin, morphine, codeine) previously included in DOT drug
tests.

Regulatory Analyses and Notices

Good Cause for Immediate Adoption Without Prior Notice and Comment

    Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5
U.S.C. 551 et seq.) authorizes agencies to dispense with prior notice
and comment for rules when the agency for ``good cause'' finds that
those procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the
public interest.'' Under this section, an agency, upon finding good
cause, may issue a final rule without seeking comment prior to the
rulemaking.
    As discussed above, this final rule revises the terminology in the
respective OST, FAA, FTA, and PHMSA drug testing rules to conform to
the Department of Transportation's final rule requiring testing for
semi-synthetic opioids. Also, as discussed above, OST, FAA, and FTA are
statutorily required to incorporate the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) scientific and technical guidelines, including mandatory
guidelines establishing the list of controlled substances which
individually may be tested. While PHMSA is not subject to the OTETA
mandate to follow the HHS Mandatory Guidelines, the PHMSA rule already
required compliance with part 40. The terminological changes involved
will not make substantive changes in the obligations of regulated
parties but clarify those parties' obligations. For these reasons, we
find that it is

unnecessary to seek public comment before issuing this final rule.
    There will be no additional costs associated with any of these
changes, which are all administrative. Each of these changes removes
inconsistencies and harmonizes with changes made to the HHS Mandatory
Guidelines in January of 2017 that were incorporated into 49 CFR part
40 on November 13, 2017. Any costs associated with the substantive
rulemaking changes to add the semi-synthetic opioids were accounted for
in the final rule dated November 13, 2017 (82 FR 52229).
    Similarly, section 553(d)(3) of the APA requires that agencies
publish a rule not less than 30 days before its effective date, except
as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published
with the rule. DOT finds that, for the same reasons stated above, there
is good cause to make these amendments effective immediately.

Executive Order 12866 and 13563

    Executive Order 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs
and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563
emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of
reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility.
This final rule implements changes that are administrative in nature.
All agencies involved have determined that this action is not a
significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866, nor is it significant within the meaning of Department of
Transportation regulatory policies and procedures.
    This rule provides technical corrections to the cited regulations
harmonizing them with part 40. The only entities affected by this rule
are those aviation, transit, and pipeline entities already subject to
DOT drug testing rules and the changes made to part 40 by the final
rule dated November 13, 2017. This rule does not require any additional
costs associated with compliance. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed
by the Office of Management and Budget.
    This rule is not expected to impose any new compliance costs, and
would not adversely affect, in any material way, any sector of the
economy. There are no significant changes to the existing program with
the publication of this rulemaking. Additionally, this rule does not
interfere with any action planned by another agency and does not
materially alter the budgetary impact of any entitlements, grants, user
fees, or loan programs. Consequently, a full regulatory evaluation is
not required.

Executive Order 13771

    This rule is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because
this rule is not significant under Executive Order 12866.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) do not
apply when an agency finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt
a rule without prior notice and comment. Because this rule adopts
Departmental regulatory requirements pursuant to part 40, the involved
agencies have determined that there is good cause to adopt the rule as
a final rule; therefore, RFA analysis is not required. Additionally,
this administrative action will result in no significant economic
impact nor impose any additional cost to small entities that are
subject to alcohol misuse and controlled substance testing requirements
of the cited regulations.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not provide a new collection of information that is
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the affected
agencies may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to or may not be penalized for failing to comply with, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.

Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 sets forth principles and criteria that
agencies must adhere to in formulating and implementing policies that
have Federalism implications. That is, regulations that have
substantial direct effects on the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
Federal agencies must closely examine the statutory authority
supporting any action that would limit the policymaking discretion of
the States, and to the extent practicable, must consult with State and
local officials before implementing any such action.
    The agencies involved have reviewed this rule under the threshold
criteria of Executive Order 13132 on Federalism and certify that the
rule would not have Federalism implications as defined by the Executive
Order. The rule would not significantly affect the rights, roles, and
responsibilities of States, and would not involve preemption of State
law, nor would it limit State policymaking discretion.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This rule is not an unfunded Federal mandate within the meaning of
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4, March 22,
1995, 109 Stat. 48). This rule will not result in the expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $148.1 million or more in any one year (2 U.S.C.
1532).

Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)

    The agencies involved have analyzed this action under Executive
Order 13175, and determined that this rule would not have substantial
direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes; would not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on Indian Tribal governments; and
would not preempt Tribal law.

National Environmental Policy Act

    The Department has analyzed the environmental impacts of this
action pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has determined that it is categorically
excluded pursuant to DOT Order 5610.1C, Procedures for Considering
Environmental Impacts (44 FR 56420, Oct. 1, 1979). Categorical
exclusions are actions identified in an agency's NEPA implementing
procedures that do not normally have a significant impact on the
environment and therefore do not require either an environmental
assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS). See 40 CFR
1508.4. In analyzing the applicability of a categorical exclusion, the
agency must also consider whether extraordinary circumstances are
present that would warrant the preparation of an EA or EIS. Id.
Paragraph 4(c)(5) of DOT Order 5610.1C incorporates by reference the
categorical exclusions for all DOT Operating Administrations. This
action is covered by the categorical exclusion listed in the Federal
Transit Administration's implementing procedures, ``[p]lanning and
administrative activities that do not involve or lead directly to
construction, such as: . . . promulgation of rules, regulations,
directives . . .'' 23 CFR 771.118(c)(4). The purpose of this rulemaking
is to make minor technical corrections to the Department's drug-testing
regulations. The Department does not anticipate any environmental
impacts and there are no extraordinary

circumstances present in connection with this rulemaking.

International Compatibility and Cooperation

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation (ICAO), it is FAA policy to conform to
ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices to the maximum extent
practicable. The FAA has determined that its portion of this final rule
does not conflict with any international agreement of the United
States.

List of Subjects

14 CFR Part 120

    Air carriers, Alcoholism, Alcohol abuse, Aviation safety, Drug
abuse, Drug testing, Operators, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Safety, Safety-sensitive, Transportation.

49 CFR Part 40

    Administrative practice and procedures, Alcohol abuse, Alcohol
testing, Drug abuse, Drug testing, Laboratories, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Safety, Transportation.

49 CFR Part 655

    Mass transportation, Alcohol testing, Drug testing, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Safety, Transportation.

49 CFR Part 199

    Alcohol testing, Drug testing, Pipeline safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Safety, Transportation.

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Department of Transportation
and its agencies amend their regulations as follows:

Title 14--Aeronautics and Space

PART 120--DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING PROGRAM

0
1. The authority citation for part 120 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40101-40103, 40113, 40120,
41706, 41721, 44106, 44701, 44702, 44703, 44709, 44710, 44711,
45101-45105, 46105, 46306.

0
2. In Sec.  120.7, revise paragraph (m) to read as follows:

Sec.  120.7  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (m) Prohibited drug means any of the drugs specified in 49 CFR part
40.
* * * * *

0
3. Revise Sec.  120.107 to read as follows:

Sec.  120.107  Substances for which testing must be conducted.

    Each employer shall test each employee who performs a safety-
sensitive function for evidence of a prohibited drug during each test
required by Sec.  120.109.

0
4. In Sec.  120.109, revise paragraphs (a)(5) and (c) to read as
follows:

Sec.  120.109  Types of drug testing required.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (5) Before hiring or transferring an individual to a safety-
sensitive function, the employer must advise each individual that the
individual will be required to undergo pre-employment testing in
accordance with this subpart, to determine the presence of a prohibited
drug in the individual's system. The employer shall provide this same
notification to each individual required by the employer to undergo
pre-employment testing under paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
* * * * *
    (c) Post-accident drug testing. Each employer shall test each
employee who performs a safety-sensitive function for the presence of a
prohibited drug in the employee's system if that employee's performance
either contributed to an accident or cannot be completely discounted as
a contributing factor to the accident. The employee shall be tested as
soon as possible but not later than 32 hours after the accident. The
decision not to administer a test under this section must be based on a
determination, using the best information available at the time of the
determination, that the employee's performance could not have
contributed to the accident. The employee shall submit to post-accident
testing under this section.
* * * * *

Title 49--Transportation

PART 40--PROCEDURES FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKPLACE DRUG AND ALCOHOL
TESTING PROGRAMS

0
5. The authority citation for part 40 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 102, 301, 322, 5331, 20140, 31306, and
54101 et seq.

0
6. Revise Sec.  40.26 to read as follows:

Sec.  40.26  What form must an employer use to report Management
Information System (MIS) data to a DOT agency?

    As an employer, when you are required to report MIS data to a DOT
agency, you must use the U.S. Department of Transportation Drug and
Alcohol Testing MIS Data Collection Form to report that data. You must
use the form and instructions referenced at Appendix H to part 40. You
must submit the MIS report in accordance with rule requirements (e.g.,
dates for submission; selection of companies required to submit, and
method of reporting) established by the DOT agency regulating your
operation.

0
7. Revise Appendix H to part 40 to read as follows:

Appendix H to Part 40--DOT Drug and Alcohol Testing Management
Information System (MIS) Data Collection Form

    The following form is the MIS Data Collection form required for use
to report calendar year MIS data. The instructions for this form are
found at https://www.transportation.gov/odapc.
BILLING CODE 4910-9x-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23AP19.024

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR23AP19.025

BILLING CODE 4910-9x-C

PART 199--DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING

0
8. The authority citation for part 199 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5103, 60102, 60104, 60108, 60117, and
60118; 49 CFR 1.53.

0
9. In Sec.  199.3, revise the definition of ``Prohibited drug'' to read
as follows:

Sec.  199.3  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Prohibited drug means any of the substances specified in 49 CFR
part 40.
* * * * *

PART 655--PREVENTION OF ALCOHOL MISUSE AND PROHIBITED DRUG USE IN
TRANSIT OPERATIONS

0
10. The authority citation for part 655 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5331; 49 CFR 1.91.

0
11. Amend Sec.  655.21 by revising paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows:

Sec.  655.21  Drug testing.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) Opioids;
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on Tuesday, March 19, 2019.
Elaine L. Chao,
Secretary of Transportation.
Daniel K. Elwell,
Acting Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2019-06986 Filed 4-22-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


[Federal Register: October 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 193)]
[Notices]
[Page 51648-51650]
[DOCID:fr07oc09-118]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0221]

Operating Limitations at Newark Liberty International Airport

ACTION: Notice of order extending and modifying the limitations on
scheduled operations at Newark Liberty International Airport.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is amending the May 15, 2008, order limiting the
number of scheduled aircraft operations at Newark Liberty International
Airport (EWR) during peak operating hours (May 2008 order).\1\ The
amendment extends the May 2008 order by approximately two years,
through October 29, 2011. In addition, because the amendment extends
the May 2008 order's duration, the amendment clarifies that the FAA
will not allocate new or returned capacity under the order via the
auction procedure that the order originally described.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Order Limiting Scheduled Operations at Newark Liberty
International Airport, 73 FR 29,550 (May 21, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If you wish to review the background documents or comments received
in this proceeding, you may go to http://www.regulations.gov at any
time and follow the online instructions for accessing the electronic
docket. You may also go to the U.S. Department of Transportation's
Docket Operations in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the West
Building at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

DATES: These amendments to the May 2008 order are effective immediately
upon publication in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James W. Tegtmeier, Associate Chief
Counsel for the Air Traffic Organization; telephone--(202) 267-8323; e-
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On June 5, 2009, the FAA published a notice that invited comments
on its proposal to extend the May 2008 order limiting scheduled
operations at EWR.\2\ At the time, the May 2008 order was scheduled to
expire on October 24, 2009. For the reasons described in the notice, it
was unrealistic to expect a long-term rule to take effect and control
the significant congestion-related delays that the FAA anticipated
would occur at EWR if the May 2008 order were to expire as originally
scheduled. Given the uncertainty over when a final rule would take
effect and the impending expiration of the May 2008 order, the FAA
proposed to extend the May 2008 order for approximately one year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 74 FR 27,060.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA expected the one-year extension of the May 2008 order to
serve as at least a partial bridge to the implementation of a long-term
measure to control congestion and related delays at EWR. The FAA
received written submissions on the proposal from seven commenters. The
commenters include four scheduled carriers, two industry organizations,
and the airport operator.

II. Summary and Analysis of the Comments

A. Amended Duration

    Five of the seven commenters express support for an extension of
the May 2008 order to prevent a return of the congestion-related delays
that passengers previously experienced at EWR. Although the FAA
proposed an

extension of about one year, two of the commenters state that an
extension of longer than one year is appropriate. These commenters
assert that one year is not sufficient time to finalize and to
implement a new rule to manage congestion at the airport.
    The FAA proposed a one-year extension of the May 2008 order because
the FAA never intended the order to serve as a long-term solution to
congestion at EWR. From this perspective, using the minimum number of
short-term extensions would offer the benefit of regular and public
status reports on where the FAA stands in establishing a longer-term
solution to overscheduling at EWR. As the commenters note, however,
such short-term extensions may not best facilitate the long-term
planning of some carriers that conduct, or hope to conduct, service at
the airport. Accordingly, while the FAA does not agree that an
indefinite extension is appropriate, the FAA will increase the duration
of the present extension to about two years to accommodate carriers'
longer term planning. The May 2008 order will now expire on October 29,
2011. The reporting deadlines for carriers to return Operating
Authorizations for all or part of a scheduling season in paragraph
9.b.i. are also amended to reflect the longer duration of the order.

B. Buy and Sell Authority

    In light of the increased duration of the May 2008 order, four
commenters question the ban on the purchase, sale, or long-term lease
of the Operating Authorizations held by virtue of the original order.
The commenters reason that the FAA included the ban as a result of the
May 2008 order's short duration. The commenters perceive that extending
the order increases the importance of a market mechanism that permits
the sale and purchase of operating authority, which would facilitate
competition and new entry, as well as leases for such authority that
extend beyond the order's expiration date.
    The FAA included in the May 2008 order the ability of carriers to
trade or to lease Operating Authorizations to other carriers; however,
the duration of the trade or lease could not exceed the duration of the
order.\3\ The commenters claim that relying on short-term trades and
leases alone may become limiting as the May 2008 order remains
effective over a significantly longer term. The proposed extension of
the May 2008 order, however, specifically limited the comments to the
proposed extension.\4\ The FAA intends to address long-term transfers
of Operating Authorizations at some point in the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 73 FR at 29,554 (ordering paragraphs seven and eight).
    \4\ 74 FR at 27,061 (``any submission to the current docket
should be limited to the proposed extension of the May 2008
order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. New Entrant and Limited Incumbent Opportunities

    One carrier, Virgin America, Inc., observes that the May 2008 order
originally provided limited opportunities for new entrant and limited
incumbent carriers to initiate or to augment their scheduled operations
at EWR. Virgin America offers that any extension of the order should
include enhancements that could increase service at the airport from
new entrant and limited incumbent carriers.
    Virgin America is correct in noting that the extension of the May
2008 order merits a revisitation of the opportunities that are
available at EWR for new entrant and limited incumbent carriers.\5\
There are currently several avenues for carriers to conduct scheduled
service, to acquire Operating Authorizations, or to adjust the timing
of their Operating Authorizations at EWR. First, the May 2008 order is
effective daily from 6 a.m. until 10:59 p.m., local time, and carriers
can schedule additional operations during the hours that the May 2008
order is not in effect. Second, subject to FAA written approval, a
carrier can request a new Operating Authorization or a shift of an
existing Operating Authorization in any half hour that the order is in
effect. Third, all carriers have the opportunity to lease or trade
Operating Authorizations for any period not exceeding the duration of
the May 2008 order. Fourth, in the event that there is new capacity at
EWR while the May 2008 order remains in effect, the order provides a
mechanism under which carriers can bid on a leasehold interest in the
new operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 73 FR at 29,551, 29,553-54.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After the May 2008 order took effect, Congress enacted the Omnibus
Appropriations Act of 2009. In part, this statute precluded the use of
appropriated funds to take any action involving the scheduling of
airline operations if the action also involves the auctioning of
permission to conduct airline operations at an airport.\6\ Because this
language could be construed to preclude the FAA from eliciting bids
from carriers to acquire a leasehold interest in newly available
capacity, which is listed as the fourth alternative in the preceding
paragraph, the FAA is withdrawing that provision, effective
immediately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, Pub. L. 111-8, section 5,
div. I, tit. I, section 115, 123 Stat. 524, 921-22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the ordering paragraphs of the May 2008 order are
hereby amended as follows:
    1. This Order assigns operating authority to conduct an arrival or
a departure at EWR during the affected hours to the U.S. air carrier or
foreign air carrier identified in the appendix to this Order. The FAA
will not assign operating authority under this Order to any person or
entity other than a certificated U.S. or foreign air carrier with
appropriate economic authority and FAA operating authority under 14 CFR
part 121, 129, or 135. This Order applies to the following:
    a. All U.S. air carriers and foreign air carriers conducting
scheduled operations at EWR as of the date of this Order, any U.S. air
carrier or foreign air carrier that operates under the same designator
code as such a carrier, and any air carrier or foreign-flag carrier
that has or enters into a codeshare agreement with such a carrier.
    b. All U.S. air carriers or foreign air carriers initiating
scheduled or regularly conducted commercial service to EWR while this
Order is in effect.
    c. The Chief Counsel of the FAA, in consultation with the Vice
President, System Operations Services, is the final decisionmaker for
determinations under this Order.
    2. This Order governs scheduled arrivals and departures at EWR from
6 a.m. through 10:59 p.m., Eastern Time, Sunday through Saturday.
    3. This Order takes effect at 6 a.m., Eastern Time, on June 20,
2008, and expires at 11:59 p.m., Eastern Time, on October 29, 2011.
    4. Under the authority provided to the Secretary of Transportation
and the FAA Administrator by 49 U.S.C. 40101, 40103 and 40113, we
hereby order that:
    a. No U.S. air carrier or foreign air carrier initiating or
conducting scheduled or regularly conducted commercial service at EWR
may conduct such operations without an Operating Authorization assigned
by the FAA.
    b. Except as provided in the appendix to this Order, scheduled U.S.
air carrier and foreign air carrier arrivals and departures will not
exceed 81 per hour from 6 a.m. through 10:59 p.m., Eastern Time.
    c. The Administrator may change the limits if he determines that
capacity exists to accommodate additional operations without a
significant increase in delays.
    5. For administrative tracking purposes only, the FAA will assign
an

identification number to each Operating Authorization.
    6. A carrier holding an Operating Authorization may request the
Administrator's approval to move any arrival or departure scheduled
from 6 a.m. through 10:59 p.m. to another half hour within that period.
Except as provided in paragraph seven, the carrier must receive the
written approval of the Administrator, or his delegate, prior to
conducting any scheduled arrival or departure that is not listed in the
appendix to this Order. All requests to move an allocated Operating
Authorization must be submitted to the FAA Slot Administration Office,
facsimile<PHONE_NUMBER> or e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and must
come from a designated representative of the carrier. If the FAA cannot
approve a carrier's request to move a scheduled arrival or departure,
the carrier may then apply for a trade in accordance with paragraph
seven.
    7. For the duration of this order, a carrier may enter into a lease
or trade of an Operating Authorization to another carrier for any
consideration. Notice of a trade or lease under this paragraph must be
submitted in writing to the FAA Slot Administration Office, facsimile
(202) 267-7277 or e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and must come from a
designated representative of each carrier. The FAA must confirm and
approve these transactions in writing prior to the effective date of
the transaction. The FAA will approve transfers between carriers under
the same marketing control up to five business days after the actual
operation, but only to accommodate operational disruptions that occur
on the same day of the scheduled operation. The FAA's approval of a
trade or lease does not constitute a commitment by the FAA to grant the
associated historical rights to any operator in the event that slot
controls continue at EWR after this order expires.
    8. A carrier may not buy, sell, trade, or transfer an Operating
Authorization, except as described in paragraph seven.
    9. Historical rights to Operating Authorizations and withdrawal of
those rights due to insufficient usage will be determined on a seasonal
basis and in accordance with the schedule approved by the FAA prior to
the commencement of the applicable season.
    a. For each day of the week that the FAA has approved an operating
schedule, any Operating Authorization not used at least 80% of the time
over the period authorized by the FAA under this paragraph will be
withdrawn by the FAA for the next applicable season except:
    i. The FAA will treat as used any Operating Authorization held by a
carrier on Thanksgiving Day, the Friday following Thanksgiving Day, and
the period from December 24 through the first Saturday in January.
    ii. The Administrator of the FAA may waive the 80% usage
requirement in the event of a highly unusual and unpredictable
condition which is beyond the control of the carrier and which affects
carrier operations for a period of five consecutive days or more.
    b. Each carrier holding an Operating Authorization must forward in
writing to the FAA Slot Administration Office a list of all Operating
Authorizations held by the carrier and for each Operating
Authorization, along with a listing of the Operating Authorizations
and:
    i. The dates within each applicable season on which it intends to
commence and to cease scheduled operations.
    A. For each winter scheduling season, the report must be received
by the FAA no later than August 15 during the preceding summer.
    B. For each summer scheduling season, the report must be received
by the FAA no later than January 15 during the preceding winter.
    ii. The completed operations for each day of the applicable
scheduling season:
    A. No later than September 1 for the summer scheduling season.
    B. No later than January 15 for the winter scheduling season.
    iii. A final report of the completed operations for each day of the
scheduling season within 30 days after the last day of the applicable
scheduling season.
    10. In the event that a carrier surrenders to the FAA any Operating
Authorization assigned to it under this Order or if there are
unallocated Operating Authorizations, the FAA will determine whether
the Operating Authorizations should be reallocated. The FAA may
temporarily allocate an Operating Authorization at its discretion. Such
temporary allocations will not be entitled to historical status for the
next applicable scheduling season under paragraph 9.
    11. If the FAA determines that an involuntary reduction in the
number of allocated Operating Authorizations is required to meet
operational needs, such as reduced airport capacity, the FAA will
conduct a weighted lottery to withdraw Operating Authorizations to meet
a reduced hourly or half-hourly limit for scheduled operations. The FAA
will provide at least 45 days' notice unless otherwise required by
operational needs. Any Operating Authorization that is withdrawn or
temporarily suspended will, if reallocated, be reallocated to the
carrier from which it was taken, provided that the carrier continues to
operate scheduled service at EWR.
    12. The FAA will enforce this Order through an enforcement action
seeking a civil penalty under 49 U.S.C. 46301(a). A carrier that is not
a small business as defined in the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632,
will be liable for a civil penalty of up to $25,000 for every day that
it violates the limits set forth in this Order. A carrier that is a
small business as defined in the Small Business Act will be liable for
a civil penalty of up to $10,000 for every day that it violates the
limits set forth in this Order. The FAA also could file a civil action
in U.S. District Court, under 49 U.S.C. 46106, 46107, seeking to enjoin
any air carrier from violating the terms of this Order.
    13. The FAA may modify or withdraw any provision in this Order on
its own or on application by any carrier for good cause shown.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 1, 2009.
J. Randolph Babbitt,
Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-24118 Filed 10-2-09; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 84 (Thursday, May 1, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24720-24721]
[FR Doc No: 2014-09949]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP14-728-000]

El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.; Notice of Petition for
Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on April 10, 2014, pursuant to Rule 207(a)(2) of
the Commission's Rules of Practices and Procedure, 18 CFR
385.207(a)(2)(2014), El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C. (EPNG) filed a
petition for a Declaratory Order seeking guidance concerning how EPNG
is to evaluate competing bids in a right-of-first-refusal open season
where the shipper currently holding the capacity is subject to Article
11.2 of EPNG's 1996 settlement and other potential bidders for the
capacity are not, as more fully explained in the Petition.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in this proceedings
must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or
before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to
the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must
serve a copy of that document on the Petitioner.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an

eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling
link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on May 12, 2014.

    Dated: April 14, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-09949 Filed 4-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: July 31, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 146)]
[Notices]
[Page 38181-38182]
[DOCID:fr31jy09-51]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER09-1480-000]

Marble River, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

July 27, 2009.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Marble River, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with
an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is August 17, 2009.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for

review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC.
There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers
to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed
docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-18305 Filed 7-30-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P