[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 51 (Wednesday, March 16, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13968-13969]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05862]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 11

[Docket No. FAA-2011-1136; Amdt. No. 11-59]
RIN 2120-AJ33

Air Carrier Contract Maintenance Requirements

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: On March 4, 2015, the FAA published a final rule entitled
``Air Carrier Contract Maintenance Requirements'' which will result in
new information collection requirements. This technical amendment
updates the FAA's list of OMB control numbers to display the control
number associated with the approved information collection activities
in the ``Air Carrier Contract Maintenance Requirements'' final rule.

DATES: Effective March 16, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this action, contact Wende T. DiMuro, AFS-330, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On March 4, 2015, the FAA published a final rule entitled ``Air
Carrier Contract Maintenance Requirements'' (80 FR 11537). This final
rule amends the maintenance regulations for domestic, flag, and
supplemental operations, and for commuter and on-demand operations for
aircraft type certificated with a passenger seating configuration of 10
seats or more (excluding any pilot seat). The new rules require
affected air carriers and operators to develop policies, procedures,
methods, and instructions for performing contract maintenance that are
acceptable to the FAA, and include them in their maintenance manuals.
This rule also requires the air carriers and operators to provide a
list to the FAA of all persons with whom they contract their
maintenance. These changes are needed because contract maintenance has
increased to over 70 percent of all air carrier maintenance, and
numerous investigations have shown deficiencies in maintenance
performed by contract maintenance providers.
    This final rule will result in new information collection
requirements. As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3507(d)), the FAA submitted these information collection
amendments to OMB for its review.
    On February 25, 2016, OMB approved the information collection
request. The OMB control number is 2120-0766.

Technical Amendment

    The FAA lists OMB control numbers assigned to its information
collection activities in 14 CFR 11.201(b). Accordingly, this technical
amendment updates 14 CFR 11.201(b) to display OMB control number 2120-
0766 associated with the information collection activities in the final
rule, Air Carrier Contract Maintenance Requirements. See 80 FR 11537.
    Because this amendment is technical in nature and results in no
substantive change, the FAA finds that the notice and public procedures
under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary. For the same reason, the FAA
finds good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to make the amendment
effective in less than 30 days.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 11

    Administrative practice and procedure, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR Chapter I as follows:

PART 11--GENERAL RULEMAKING PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 11 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40101, 40103, 40105,
40109, 40113, 44110, 44502, 44701-44702, 44711, and 46102.

0
2. In Sec.  11.201 amend the table in paragraph (b) by revising the
entries for Part 121 and Part 135 to read as follows:

Sec.  11.201  Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control numbers
assigned under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 14 CFR part or section identified
           and described                   Current OMB control No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              * * * * * * *
Part 121..........................  2120-0008, 2120-0028, 2120-0535,
                                     2120-0571, 2120-0600, 2120-0606,
                                     2120-0614, 2120-0616, 2120-0631,
                                     2120-0651, 2120-0653, 2120-0691,
                                     2120-0702, 2120-0739, 2120-0760,
                                     2120-0766.

                              * * * * * * *
Part 135..........................  2120-0003, 2120-0028, 2120-0039,
                                     2120-0535, 2120-0571, 2120-0600,
                                     2120-0606, 2120-0614, 2120-0616,
                                     2120-0620, 2120-0631, 2120-0653,
                                     2120-0766.

                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issued in Washington, DC under the authority provided by 49
U.S.C. 106(f) and 44701(a) on March 8, 2016.
Lirio Liu,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2016-05862 Filed 3-15-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 149 (Thursday, August 2, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45987-45988]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18916]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2011-1436; Airspace Docket No. 11-ACE-29]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Guthrie, IA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E airspace at Guthrie, IA.
Decommissioning of the Guthrie Center non-directional radio beacon
(NDB) at Guthrie County Regional Airport, Guthrie, IA, has made this
action necessary for the safety and management of Instrument Flight
Rules (IFR) operations at the airport. Geographic coordinates of the
airport would also be adjusted.

DATES: 0901 UTC. Comments must be received on or before September 17,
2012.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. You
must identify the docket number FAA-2011-1436/Airspace Docket No. 11-
ACE-29, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments
through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the
public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any
final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Office
(telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the building at
the above address.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2011-1436/
Airspace Docket No. 11-ACE-29.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

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

The Proposal

    This action proposes to amend Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), Part 71 by modifying Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface for standard instrument approach procedures
at Guthrie County Regional Airport, Guthrie, IA. Airspace
reconfiguration is necessary due to the decommissioning of the Guthrie
Center NDB and the cancellation of the NDB approach. Controlled
airspace is necessary for the safety and management of IFR operations
at the airport. Geographic coordinates of the airport would also be
adjusted to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9V, dated August 9, 2011 and effective September 15, 2011, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document would be published subsequently in
the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore, (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would amend controlled airspace at Guthrie County Regional
Airport, Guthrie, IA.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (Air).

The Proposed Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.9V, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 9,
2011, and effective September 15, 2011, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

ACE IA E5 Guthrie, IA [Amended]

Guthrie County Regional Airport, IA
    (Lat. 41[deg]41'13'' N., long. 94[deg]26'06'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of Guthrie County Regional Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on July 25, 2012.
David P. Medina,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2012-18916 Filed 8-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4901-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 17 (Thursday, January 26, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5012-5013]
[FR Doc No: 2023-01499]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2022-0705]

Certificate of Alternative Compliance for SHAVER O.N. 1257204,
HULL 129

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notification of issuance of a certificate of alternative
compliance.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces that the Chief, Prevention Division,
Thirteenth Coast Guard District has issued a certificate of alternative
compliance from the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions
at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS), for the SHAVER, O.N. 1257204, HULL 129. We
are issuing this notice because its publication is required by statute.
Due to the construction and placement of the mooring and anchor winches
and fittings, placement of the sidelights in this area would be a
potential hazard to the crew during vessel operations and may subject
them to potential damage during mooring. The SHAVER, O.N. 1257204, HULL
129, cannot fully comply with the light, shape, or sound signal
provisions of the 72 COLREGS without interfering with the vessel's
design and construction. This

notification of issuance of a certificate of alternative compliance
promotes the Coast Guard's marine safety mission.

DATES: The Certificate of Alternative Compliance was issued on December
20, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information or questions about
this notice call or email Ms. Jill L. Lazo, Thirteenth District, U.S.
Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States is signatory to the
International Maritime Organization's International Regulations for
Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972 (72 COLREGS), as amended. The
special construction or purpose of some vessels makes them unable to
comply with the light, shape, or sound signal provisions of the 72
COLREGS. Under statutory law, however, specified 72 COLREGS provisions
are not applicable to a vessel of special construction or purpose if
the Coast Guard determines that the vessel cannot comply fully with
those requirements without interfering with the special function of the
vessel.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 33 U.S.C. 1605.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The owner, builder, operator, or agent of a special construction or
purpose vessel may apply to the Coast Guard District Office in which
the vessel is being built or operated for a determination that
compliance with alternative requirements is justified,\2\ and the Chief
of the Prevention Division would then issue the applicant a certificate
of alternative compliance (COAC) if he or she determines that the
vessel cannot comply fully with 72 COLREGS light, shape, and sound
signal provisions without interference with the vessel's special
function.\3\ If the Coast Guard issues a COAC, it must publish notice
of this action in the Federal Register.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 33 CFR 81.5.
    \3\ 33 CFR 81.9.
    \4\ 33 U.S.C. 1605(c) and 33 CFR 81.18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Chief, Prevention Division, of the Thirteenth Coast Guard
District, U.S. Coast Guard, certifies that the SHAVER, O.N. 1257204,
HULL 129, is a towing vessel of special construction or purpose, and
that, with respect to the position of the sidelights, stern and towing
lights, it is not possible to comply fully with the requirements of the
provisions enumerated in the 72 COLREGS, without interfering with the
normal operation, construction, or design of the vessel. The Chief,
Prevention Division further finds and certifies that the sidelights,
are in the closest possible compliance with the applicable provisions
of the 72 COLREGS.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 33 U.S.C. 1605(a); 33 CFR 81.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice is issued under authority of 33 U.S.C. 1605(c) and 33
CFR 81.18.

    Dated: January 11, 2023.
P.C. Burkett,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Prevention Division, Thirteenth Coast
Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2023-01499 Filed 1-25-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 246 (Tuesday, December 23, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 76999]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29959]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL15-31-000]

PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on December 15, 2014, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.,
pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824e, and
Part 35 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
regulations, 18 CFR part 35, submits tariff filing per 385.206:
Revisions to the Amended and Restated Operating Agreement and Open
Access Transmission Tariff re Offer Caps to be effective 1/9/2015.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for electronic 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 December 23, 2014.

    Dated: December 15, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-29959 Filed 12-22-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 180 (Wednesday, September 17, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55786-55787]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22096]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 9842-006]

Mr. Ray F. Ward; Application Tendered for Filing With the
Commission and Soliciting Additional Study Requests and Establishing
Procedural Schedule for Relicensing and a Deadline for Submission of
Final Amendments

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Minor New License.
    b. Project No.: 9842-006.
    c. Date filed: August 28, 2014.
    d. Applicant: Mr. Ray F. Ward.
    e. Name of Project: Ward Mill Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On the Watauga River, in the Township of Laurel Creek,
Watauga County, North Carolina. The project does not occupy lands of
the United States.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791 (a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Andrew C. Givens, Cardinal Energy Service,
Inc., 620 N. West St., Suite 103, Raleigh, North Carolina 27603, (919)
834-0909.
    i. FERC Contact: Adam Peer at<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the
environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such
requests described in item l below. Cooperating agencies should note
the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the preparation
of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See, 94 FERC ]
61,076 (2001).
    k. Pursuant to section 4.32(b)(7) of 18 CFR of the Commission's
regulations, if any resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person believes
that an additional scientific study should be conducted in order to
form an adequate factual basis for a complete analysis of the
application on its merit, the resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person
must file a request for a study with the Commission not later than 60
days from the date of filing of the application, and serve a copy of
the request on the applicant.
    l. Deadline for filing additional study requests and requests for
cooperating agency status: October 27, 2014
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
additional study requests and requests for cooperating agency status
using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202)
502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy
to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street
NE., Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-9842-006.
    m. The application is not ready for environmental analysis at this
time.
    n. The Ward Mill Project consists of: (1) An existing 130-foot-long
by 20-foot-high dam; (2) An existing 4.6 acre reservoir with an
estimated gross storage capacity of 16.3 acre-feet; (3) a 14-foot-long,
5-foot-wide, and 7.5-foot-tall penstock made of rock, concrete and
reinforced steel; (4) a powerhouse containing two generating units for
a total installed capacity of 168 kilowatts; (5) existing transmission
facilities; and (6) appurtenant facilities. The project is estimated to
generate from below 290,000 to over 599,000 kilowatt-hours annually.
The dam and existing facilities are owned by the applicant. No new
project facilities are proposed.
    o. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the

``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC Online Support. A copy is also available for
inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    p. Procedural schedule and final amendments: The application will
be processed according to the following preliminary Hydro Licensing
Schedule. Revisions to the schedule will be made as appropriate.

    Issue Acceptance or Deficiency Letter October 2014
    Request Additional Information October 2014
    Issue Notice of Acceptance January 2015
    Issue Scoping Document 1 for comments February 2015
    Comments on Scoping Document 1 April 2015
    Issue Scoping Document 2 May 2015
    Issue notice of ready for environmental analysis May 2015
    Commission issues EA January 2016
    Comments on EA February 2016
    Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice
of ready for environmental analysis.

    Dated: September 10, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-22096 Filed 9-16-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 151)]
[Notices]
[Page 39689-39690]
[DOCID:fr07au09-65]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings No. 1

August 3, 2009.

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
    Docket Numbers: RP09-848-000.
    Applicants: Kern River Gas Transmission Company.
    Description: Kern River Transmission Company submits Seventh
Revised Sheet 490 et al. of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume
1, to be effective 9/2/09.
    Filed Date: 07/30/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090730-0242.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, August 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-849-000.
    Applicants: Ozark Gas Transmission, L.L.C.
    Description: Ozark Gas Transmission, LLC submits First Revised
Sheet No. 178 to its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1.
    Filed Date: 07/30/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090730-0245.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, August 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-850-000.
    Applicants: Mojave Pipeline Company.
    Description: Mojave Pipeline Company submits Twenty Sixth Revised
Sheet 11 to its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume 1 to be
effective 9/1/09.
    Filed Date: 07/30/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090730-0147.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, August 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-851-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company.
    Description: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company submits First
Revised Sheet 171 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume 1,
to be effective 8/30/09.
    Filed Date: 07/30/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090731-0086.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, August 11, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-852-000.
    Applicants: Dominion South Pipeline Co., LP.

    Description: Dominion South Pipeline Co., LP Annual Report of
Penalty Revenues for the period May 1, 2008 through April 30, 2009.
    Filed Date: 07/31/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090731-5034.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-853-000.
    Applicants: White River Hub, LLC.
    Description: White River Hub, LLC submits First Revised Sheet 76 et
al. to Original Volume 1 of its FERC Gas Tariff, to be effective 8/31/
09.
    Filed Date: 07/31/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090731-0106.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-854-000.
    Applicants: Sea Robin Pipeline Company, LLC.
    Description: Sea Robin Pipeline Company, LLC submits First Revised
Sheet 121 to its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume 1, to be
effective 9/1/09.
    Filed Date: 07/31/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090731-0103.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-855-000.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.
    Description: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America LLC submits
First Revised Sheet 600 et al. part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Seventh
Revised Volume 1, to be effective 9/1/09.
    Filed Date: 07/31/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090731-0112.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-856-000.
    Applicants: Horizon Pipeline Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Horizon Pipeline Company, LLC submits First Revised
Sheet 300 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1 to be effective
9/1/09.
    Filed Date: 07/31/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090731-0113.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-857-000.
    Applicants: Southern LNG Inc.
    Description: Southern LNG, Inc submits Second Revised Sheet 41 et
al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1 to be effective 9/1/09.
    Filed Date: 07/31/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090731-0114.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: RP09-858-000.
    Applicants: Trailblazer Pipeline Company LLC.
    Description: Trailblazer Pipeline Company LLC submits First Revised
Sheet 300 et al. part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Seventh Revised Volume 1,
to be effective 9/1/09.
    Filed Date: 07/31/2009.
    Accession Number: 20090731-0115.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 12, 2009.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
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 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. 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
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    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 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 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. E9-18921 Filed 8-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 110 (Thursday, June 7, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26361-26364]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12281]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket Number USCG-2018-0088]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulation; Tred Avon River, Between Bellevue, MD
and Oxford, MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing special local regulations for
certain waters of the Tred Avon River. This action is necessary to
provide for the safety of life on these navigable waters located
between Bellevue, MD, and Oxford, MD, during a swim event on June 9,
2018. If necessary, due to inclement weather, the event will be
rescheduled to June 10, 2018. This action will prohibit persons and
vessels from being in the regulated area unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Maryland--National Capital Region or Coast Guard
Patrol Commander.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8:30 a.m. on June 9, 2018 through 11
a.m. on June 10, 2018.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2018-0088 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Mr. Ronald Houck, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Maryland--
National Capital Region; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On June 13, 2017, Charcot-Marie-Tooth Association of Trappe, MD,
notified the Coast Guard that from 9:15 a.m. until 10:15 a.m. on June
9, 2018, and if necessary, due to inclement weather, from 9:15 a.m.
until 10:15 a.m. on June 10, 2018, it will be conducting the swim
portion of the Oxford Biathlon in the Tred Avon River that starts at
Bellevue, MD and finishes at Oxford, MD. In response, on April 4, 2018,
the Coast Guard published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
entitled ``Special Local Regulation; Tred Avon River, between Bellevue,
MD and Oxford, MD'' (83 FR 14381). There we stated why we issued the
NPRM, and invited comments on our proposed regulatory action related to
this fireworks display. During the comment period that ended May 4,
2018, we received one comment.
    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. Due to the date of the event, it
would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest to make the
regulation effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.
The regulation must be in place by June 9th in order to protect the
public from the hazards associated with this swim event.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1233, which authorizes the Coast Guard to establish and define special
local regulations. The Captain of the Port (COTP) Maryland--National
Capital Region has determined that potential hazards associated with
the swim would be a safety concern for anyone intending to operate
within certain waters of the Tred Avon River between Bellevue, MD, and
Oxford, MD. The purpose of this rulemaking is to protect event
participants, spectators and transiting vessels on specified waters of
the Tred Avon River before, during, and after the scheduled event.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    As noted above, we received one comment on our NPRM published April
4, 2018. The comment addressed issues not related to this rulemaking.
Therefore, there are no substantive changes in the regulatory text of
this rule from the proposed rule in the NPRM.
    This rule establishes a special local regulation to be enforced
from 8:30 a.m. until 11 a.m. on June 9, 2018, and if necessary, due to
inclement weather, from 8:30 a.m. until 11 a.m. on June 10, 2018. The
regulated area covers all navigable waters of the Tred Avon River, from
shoreline to shoreline, within an area bounded on the east by a line
drawn from latitude 38[deg]42'25'' N, longitude 076[deg]10'45'' W,
thence south to latitude 38[deg]41'37'' N, longitude 076[deg]10'26'' W,
and bounded on the west by a line drawn from latitude 38[deg]41'58'' N,
longitude 076[deg]11'04'' W, thence south to latitude 38[deg]41'25'' N,
longitude 076[deg]10'49'' W, thence east to latitude 38[deg]41'25'' N,
longitude 076[deg]10'30'' W, located at Oxford, MD. The enforcement and
duration of the regulated area is intended to ensure the safety of
event participants and vessels within the specified navigable waters
before, during, and after the 9:15 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. swim. Except for
Oxford Biathlon participants, no vessel or person will be permitted to
enter the regulated area without obtaining permission from the COTP
Maryland--National Capital Region or Coast Guard Patrol Commander.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size and
duration of the regulated area, which would impact a small designated
area of the Tred Avon River for 2\1/2\ hours. The Coast Guard will
issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about
the status of the regulated area. Moreover, the rule will allow vessels
to request permission to enter the regulated area, and vessel traffic
will be able to safely transit the regulated area once the Coast Guard
Patrol Commander deems it safe to do so.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
regulated area may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on any
vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against

small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy
or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, 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. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that
do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the
human environment. This rule involves implementation of regulations
within 33 CFR part 100 applicable to organized marine events on the
navigable waters of the United States that could negatively impact the
safety of waterway users and shore side activities in the event area
lasting 2\1/2\ hours. It is categorically excluded from further review
under paragraph L[61] of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual
023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Memorandum For Record for Categorically
Excluded Actions supporting this determination is available in the
docket where indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

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

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

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

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

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233; 33 CFR 1.05-1.

0
2. Add Sec.  100.501T05-0088 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.501T05-0088  Special Local Regulation; Tred Avon River,
between Bellevue, MD and Oxford, MD.

    (a) Definitions--(1) Captain of the Port (COTP) Maryland--National
Capital Region means the Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Maryland--
National Capital Region or any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or
petty officer who has been authorized by the COTP to act on his behalf.
    (2) Coast Guard Patrol Commander means a commissioned, warrant, or
petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard who has been designated by the
Commander, Coast Guard Sector Maryland--National Capital Region.
    (3) Official Patrol means any vessel assigned or approved by
Commander, Coast Guard Sector Maryland--National Capital Region with a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer on board and displaying a Coast
Guard ensign.
    (4) Participant means all persons and vessels registered with the
event sponsor as participating in the Oxford Biathlon event or
otherwise designated by event sponsor as having a function tied to the
event.
    (b) Location. The following location is a regulated area: All
navigable waters of the Tred Avon River, from shoreline to shoreline,
within an area bounded on the east by a line drawn from latitude
38[deg]42'25'' N, longitude 076[deg]10'45'' W, thence south to latitude
38[deg]41'37'' N, longitude 076[deg]10'26'' W, and bounded on the west
by a line drawn from latitude 38[deg]41'58'' N, longitude
076[deg]11'04'' W, thence south to latitude 38[deg]41'25'' N, longitude
076[deg]10'49'' W, thence east to latitude 38[deg]41'25'' N, longitude
076[deg]10'30'' W, located at Oxford, MD. All coordinates reference
Datum NAD 1983.
    (c) Special local regulations. (1) The COTP or Coast Guard Patrol
Commander may forbid and control the movement of all vessels and
persons, including event participants, in the regulated area. When
hailed or signaled by an official patrol, a vessel or person in the
regulated area shall immediately comply with the directions given.
Failure to do so may result in expulsion from the area, citation for
failure to comply, or both. The Coast Guard Patrol Commander may
terminate the event, or the operation of any support vessel
participating in the event, at any time it is deemed necessary for the
protection of life or property.
    (2) Except for participants and vessels already at berth, all
persons and vessels within the regulated area at the time it is
activated are to depart the regulated area.
    (3) Persons and vessels desiring to transit, moor, or anchor within
the regulated area must obtain authorization from the COTP Maryland--
National Capital Region or Coast Guard Patrol Commander. During the
enforcement period, persons or vessel operators may request permission
to transit, moor, or anchor within the regulated area from the Coast
Guard Patrol Commander on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8
MHz). The Coast Guard Patrol Commander and official patrol vessels
enforcing this regulated area can be contacted on marine band radio
VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) and channel 22A (157.1 MHz).
    (4) The Coast Guard will publish a notice in the Fifth Coast Guard
District Local Notice to Mariners and issue a marine information
broadcast on VHF-FM marine band radio.
    (d) Enforcement officials. The Coast Guard may be assisted with the
marine event patrol and enforcement of the

regulated area by other Federal, State, and local agencies.
    (e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 8:30
a.m. until 11 a.m. on June 9, 2018, and if necessary, due to inclement
weather, from 8:30 a.m. until 11 a.m. on June 10, 2018.

    Dated: June 4, 2018.
Joseph B. Loring,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Maryland--National
Capital Region.
[FR Doc. 2018-12281 Filed 6-6-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


OMB Control No. 2040-0293, EPA ICR No. 2562.02
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 United States
 Environmental Protection
 Agency

Supporting Statement for the
Public Notification Requirements for Combined Sewer Overflows to the
Great Lakes Basin Information
Collection Request Update

                                                                August 26, 2020

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

                               TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                                           Page
A.	Justification	1
1.	Explain the circumstances that make the collection necessary and explain the legal or administrative requirements relevant to the collection and attach a copy of the statute or regulation authorizing the collection	1
2.	Indicate how, by whom and for what purpose the information is to be used	2
3.	Describe whether and to what extent the collection involves the use of automated processes or information technology to aid with the collection	4
4.	Describe the efforts to identify duplication	4
5.	Explain whether the collection impacts small entities	5
6.	Describe the consequences to the program if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently	5
7.	Explain any special circumstances associated with "extraordinary burden" placed on respondents	5
8.	Provide a copy and identify the date and page number of the notice in the Federal Register	5
8a.	Federal Register Notice Publication and a Summary of Comments Received and EPA's Response	5
8b.	EPA's Consultation with Stakeholders	6
9.	Explain any decision to provide compensation to respondents	7
10.	Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents	7
11.	Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature	7
12.	Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information	7
13.	Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to respondents	8
14.	Provide an estimate of the annualized cost to the federal government	9
15.	Explain the reasons for any adjustments reported in items 13 or 14 of OMB  Form 83-I	10
16.	Outline any plans for tabulation and publication of the information	10
17.	Explain any requests to not display the expiration date of OMB approval	10
18.	Explain any exceptions to the certification statement 5 CFR 1320.9, "Agency Certifications for Proposed Collections of Information."	10
B. 	Statistical Methods (used for collection of information employing statistical methods)	11

A.	Justification
1.	Explain the circumstances that make the collection necessary and explain the legal or administrative requirements relevant to the collection and attach a copy of the statute or regulation authorizing the collection
On January 8, 2018, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized a rule to establish public notification requirements for combined sewer overflow (CSO) discharges to the Great Lakes, as required by Section 425 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016 (Pub. L. 114 - 113) (hereafter, referred to as "Section 425"). Section 425 requires EPA to work with the Great Lakes states to create these public notification requirements.
In response, EPA has established public notification requirements for permittees authorized to discharge from a CSO to the Great Lakes Basin [82 FR 4233]. These requirements address: 1) signage; 2) notification to local public health department and other potentially affected public entities; 3) notification to the public; and 4) annual notice. Permittees are also required to develop a public notification plan and to seek and consider input on these plans from local public health departments and other potentially affected public entities. The public notification plans would also provide state permit writers with detailed information needed to write permit conditions.
Some permittees affected by this public notification rule may already have implemented some of these requirements and the associated burden is already covered under the ICR for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program (Renewal) (OMB Control No. 2040-0004, EPA ICR No. 0229.21). This rule also has a few additional requirements that are not already covered by the ICR for NPDES Program (Renewal):
More timely reporting of information already collected on CSO discharges.
Annual CSO notice, made publicly available.
Public notification plans that will provide system-specific details describing the discharger's public notification efforts (required to seek input from potentially affected public entities).
  This ICR calculates the incremental increase in burden and costs associated with implementation of the CSO notification requirements for CSO permittees in the Great Lakes Basin. The original ICR developed to support the rulemaking (OMB Control No. 2040-NEW, EPA ICR No. 2562.01) covered years 1 through 3 after promulgation of the rule (2018 to 2020). This updated ICR covers years 2021 to 2023. Under the rule, EPA requires the following items be disclosed to the public, some of which are already covered to some extent under the existing ICR for NPDES Program (Renewal):

A description of the permittee's signage program (partially accounted for in the ICR for NPDES Program (Renewal)).
Identification of municipal entities that may be impacted by the permittee's CSO discharges.
Input from the health department (local or state) and other potentially affected entities.
Protocols for the initial and supplemental notice of the public (partially accounted for in the ICR for NPDES Program (Renewal)).
Method for determining volume and duration of CSO discharges (partially accounted for in the ICR for NPDES Program (Renewal)).
Protocols for making the annual notice available to the public.
Significant modifications to the permittee's public notification plan and a description of the availability of the plan to the public.
A description of the location, treatment provided, and receiving water of each CSO discharge point (partially accounted for in the ICR for NPDES Program (Renewal)).
The date, location, duration, and volume of each wet weather CSO discharge (partially accounted for in the ICR for NPDES Program (Renewal)).
The date, location, duration, and volume of each dry weather CSO discharge (partially accounted for in ICR for NPDES Program (Renewal)).
A summary of available monitoring data (partially accounted for in the ICR for NPDES Program (Renewal)).
A description of any public access areas impacted by CSO discharges.
Representative precipitation data.
Permittee contact information.
2.	Indicate how, by whom and for what purpose the information is to be used
A combined sewer system (CSS) collects rainwater runoff, snowmelt, domestic sewage, and industrial wastewater into one pipe. Under normal conditions, the CSS transports the wastewater it collects to a wastewater treatment plant for treatment, then discharges to a water body. The volume of wastewater collected can sometimes exceed the capacity of the CSS or treatment plant (e.g., during heavy rainfall events and/or snowmelt). When this occurs, untreated stormwater and wastewater discharge directly to nearby streams, rivers, and other water bodies; this event is referred to as a combined sewer overflow (CSO) discharge. CSO discharges are managed and operated mostly by municipalities that also operate the publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) to which the wastewater flows under normal conditions.
CSO discharges release wastewater containing untreated or partially treated human and industrial waste, toxic materials, and debris as well as stormwater to public waterways. They are a priority human health and water pollution concern for the approximately 700 municipalities across the U.S. that have CSSs. CSO discharges can be detrimental to human health and the environment because they introduce pathogens, bacteria, and other pollutants to receiving waters, cause beach closures, contaminate drinking water supplies, and impair water quality. Depleted oxygen levels that can be caused by CSO discharges can also impact fish and other aquatic populations.
The public notification requirements in this regulation are specific to CSO discharges in the Great Lakes Basin and are intended to alert the public, local public health departments, and other potentially affected public entities to the short- and long-term public health and environmental hazards associated with CSO discharges. Such notification will enable potentially affected parties to take action that may help prevent serious health effects that may otherwise occur if they were to remain unaware of the occurrence of CSO discharges.
This ICR covers information that must be provided by operators of CSSs (CSO permittees) that discharge within the watershed of the Great Lakes Basin. EPA has identified 161 NPDES CSO permits located in seven states (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) that cover approximately 1,570 CSO discharge points. Each of these permits is the responsibility of a local government entity. A review of how the CSSs are managed indicated that, in some cases, one entity (e.g., a municipality or multi-jurisdictional wastewater authority) may be responsible for the operation and management of the CSSs associated with multiple individual permits. The 161 NPDES CSO permits are managed by a total of 157 CSO permittees, which are each considered as a separate respondent in this ICR.
One unique multi-jurisdictional entity is the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (MWRD), which manages the Tunnel and Reservoir Plan (TARP), a storage system that includes a reservoir and four distinct tunnel systems designed to store combined wastewater for later treatment. Within the drainage area of the TARP there are nearly 400 CSO discharge points and associated CSSs that receive capacity relief from the TARP system. The MWRD serves 39 CSO permittees. Because of engineering modifications to the local rivers, including the construction of canals, under normal conditions the receiving water for these CSO discharge points do not flow into Lake Michigan but rather to the Mississippi River along with water from Lake Michigan. Flow into and out of Lake Michigan is controlled by three control structures. During extreme wet weather conditions, flow in these receiving waters is reversed and they flow into Lake Michigan. Flow into Lake Michigan through these control structures has occurred 21 times since 2000.
The MWRD, which manages four CSO permits, and the City of Chicago, which manages one CSO permit, have jointly developed a CSO discharge notification plan and alert system that encompasses many of the CSO discharge points and waterways within the drainage area of the TARP. The NPDES permits for the CSO permittees in the MWRD service area provide that public notification programs may be developed in conjunction with the MWRD. Given this arrangement, the other 37 CSO permittees that manage a single permit associated with the TARP system are considered to have a reduced burden requirement compared to similar sized CSO permittees in the other states because they can utilize the notification resources made available by the MWRD. In this ICR, the 37 CSO permittees that are within the TARP system but are not managed by the MWRD or the City of Chicago are referred to as "TARP CSO permittees." All 37 TARP CSO permittees, MWRD, and the City of Chicago are subject the requirements of this public notification rule.
The information covered in this ICR includes activities related to public notification of the occurrence of CSO discharges in the Great Lakes Basin plus the submission of related information (e.g., plans, annual reports) to NPDES permitting authorities (i.e., state agencies). These activities also include those associated with NPDES program oversight. All the Great Lakes states within the scope of this regulation are authorized to administer the NPDES program and thus, state agencies will perform all related NPDES program oversight activities.
3.	Describe whether and to what extent the collection involves the use of automated processes or information technology to aid with the collection
Except for CSO discharge point and public access area signs, the public notifications themselves, as well as the plans and annual notices, will be managed predominantly through electronic media and automated processes. This rule includes specific requirements for electronic reporting of any CSO discharge that occurred during the past calendar year that has not been previously reported pursuant to a permit requirement (40 CFR 122.38(c)) and for electronic reporting of all CSO discharges in a discharge monitoring report or a sewer overflow event report (40 CFR 122.42(f)(9)). The ICR for the NPDES Program (OMB Control No. 2040-0004, EPA ICR No. 0229.22, expiration date March 31, 2022) includes specific electronic reporting requirements that were phased in on December 21, 2016, for DMR data (Phase 1) and are to be phased in by December 21, 2023 with extensions up to December 21, 2026, for all other NPDES program reports, including sewer overflow event reports (Phase 2) (Phase 2 deadline extended, OMB Control No. 2020-02889). Given that relevant electronic reporting requirements are already being phased in, EPA has concluded that any incremental burden increase or decrease associated with electronic reporting requirements for Great Lakes CSO notification data is already accounted for in the referenced NPDES Electronic Reporting ICR and extension and thus no incremental burden adjustment is assigned to these requirements.
4.	Describe the efforts to identify duplication
EPA identified several duplicative efforts and has previously revised the associated sections to remove the duplication. In 40 CFR 122.38(b), EPA revised the due date for the annual notice to avoid duplicative efforts with existing annual reporting requirements, by allowing permittees to combine the requirements stated in the rule with existing reporting requirements into one report. In the same section of the rule, several commenters noted that the electronic reporting requirements associated with the annual notice were somewhat redundant of the NPDES Electronic Reporting Rule. EPA revised the language in the final regulatory text to remove this duplication (written in the proposed rule under 40 CFR 122(c)).
5.	Explain whether the collection impacts small entities
The 157 CSO permittees potentially impacted by this regulation are all municipalities. Of these an estimated 122 have aggregate populations of less than 50,000 and are classified as small governmental jurisdictions and thus are small entities. EPA specifically performed separate calculations of the ICR burden for the subgroup of CSO permittees that would be classified as small entities. EPA then evaluated the impact of this regulation on these small entities in relation to available financial data and concluded that this information collection will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. A more detailed description of this evaluation and its conclusions can be found in the document titled, "Analysis of Costs and Executive Orders" (docket ID EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0376-0178).
6.	Describe the consequences to the program if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently
CSO discharges in the Great Lakes Basin can be detrimental to human health and the environment because they introduce pathogens, bacteria, and other pollutants to receiving waters, causing beach closures, contaminating drinking water supplies, and impairing water quality. Timely notification to the public, public health departments, and other potentially affected public entities is important for protecting the public from potential serious public health consequences related to contact with receiving water contaminated by CSO discharges or consumption of potentially contaminated drinking water or aquatic organisms. Failure to provide wide-spread and timely notification of CSO discharges increases the risk of serious public health consequences for persons exposed to CSO contaminated water or who consume aquatic organisms.
7.	Explain any special circumstances associated with "extraordinary burden" placed on respondents
There are no special circumstances where "extraordinary burden" is placed on respondents. The collection of information is conducted in a manner consistent with the Paperwork Reduction Act guidelines at 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2).
8.	Provide a copy and identify the date and page number of the notice in the Federal Register
8a.	Federal Register Notice Publication and a Summary of Comments Received and EPA's Response
The proposed rule for the Public Notification Requirements for Combined Sewer Overflows to the Great Lakes Basin was published in the Federal Register on January 13, 2017 (82 FR 4233). The notice included a request for comment on the content and impact of these information collection requirements on the regulated permittee. EPA solicited public comment through March 14, 2017 and received approximately 1,300 comment letters (45 of which were unique) concerning the proposed rule from municipalities, states, environmental organizations, trade associations, Indian Tribes, and private citizens. EPA responded to each of the comments in the document titled, "Public Notification Requirements for Combined Sewer Overflows to the Great Lakes Basin: EPA's Response to Public Comments" (docket ID EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0376-0180).
In general, commenters did not pose significant concerns with the requirements of this public notification rule. EPA received comments regarding the scope and anticipated burden of the rule, the need for the rule, clarification on certain definitions, and the specific activities required (e.g., signage, initial and supplemental notifications, public notification plan, annual notice). Some commenters expressed concern with the burden (time and costs) associated with collecting the necessary data to meet the public notification requirements. In response to these comments, EPA further evaluated and worked to reduce the incremental burden associated with each required activity, consulted with states and acquired additional state information (e.g., CSO discharge point counts, lists of permittees within scope, existing state requirements), and developed a document for explaining one way for implementing a predictive approach (see Predictive Approach Memorandum for the Great Lakes Basin) that can help CSO permittees meet the initial notification requirements with much less burden than real-time monitoring or complex models. EPA also revised the language from the proposed rule to clarify specific questions and concerns from commenters and revised the overall burden estimate of the final rule. Please refer to the preamble to the final rule and the document titled, "Public Notification Requirements for Combined Sewer Overflows to the Great Lakes Basin: EPA's Response to Public Comments" (docket ID EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0376-0180) for a more detailed summary of the comments received.
8b.	EPA's Consultation with Stakeholders
During the rulemaking, EPA conducted consultations with stakeholders to solicit their input on the requirements for public notification of CSO discharges in the Great Lakes Basin. Throughout the development of the rule, EPA worked with the Great Lakes states to identify and evaluate options for implementing Section 425. The Great Lakes states provided descriptions of existing state notification requirements, shared their insight on implementation issues with the proposed requirements, made recommendations regarding the rule, and commented on the burden to implement the rule. EPA also met with various stakeholder groups that represent municipalities and environmental organizations to hear each of their perspectives.
On August 1, 2016, EPA published a request for stakeholder input regarding potential approaches for developing public notice requirements for CSO discharges to the Great Lakes Basin under Section 425 of the 2016 Appropriations Act (81 FR 50434). As part of this effort, EPA held a public "listening session" on September 14, 2016, which provided stakeholders and other members of the public an opportunity to share their views regarding potential new public notification requirements for CSO discharges in the Great Lakes Basin. The record for the rulemaking includes a summary of the oral comments made at the public listening session (EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0376-0123). As part of the request for stakeholder input (81 FR 50434), EPA requested written comments on potential approaches for public notification requirements through September 23, 2016. The written comments are discussed throughout the preamble to the proposed rule.
EPA also participated in calls with the National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA), the Alliance of the Great Lakes, and the National Parks Conservation Association in March and April of 2016 to better understand their perspectives of Section 425. In addition, EPA participated in a call organized by NACWA in May 2016 in which NACWA members (primarily local agencies responsible for POTWs) provided input on technical and financial issues associated with public notification.
After the proposed rule comment period closed in March 2017, EPA consulted states about the comments they submitted, the burden they and their CSO permittees anticipated from the proposed requirements, and the expected difficulty of modifying their existing state requirements to incorporate certain public notification requirements included in the rule.  From these conversations, EPA revised the rule language to reduce the burden on states and CSO permittees (e.g., extending the supplemental notification timeframe from 24-hours to 7 days). EPA included memorandums in the docket to detail the discussions held with Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.
9.	Explain any decision to provide compensation to respondents
No payments or gifts are provided to respondents.
10.	Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents
Applications for an NPDES permit may contain confidential business information. However, EPA does not consider the specific information being requested by this rule or the public nature of the CSO permittees themselves to be typical of confidential business or personal information. Any respondent that considers this information to be of a confidential nature may request that such information be treated as confidential. All confidential data will be handled in accordance with 40 CFR 122.7, 40 CFR part 2, and EPA's Security Manual part III, chapter 9, dated August 9, 1976.
11.	Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature
No sensitive questions pertaining to private or personal information, such as sexual behavior or religious beliefs, are included in this information collection.
12.	Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information
The annual average reporting and record keeping burden for the collection of information by CSO permittees that are subject to the notification requirements for CSO discharges in the Great Lakes Basin is estimated to be 8,564 hours of burden, which is equal to an average of 55 hours ($2,600) per municipal respondent when divided among an anticipated annual average of 157 CSO permittees. The state agency reporting and record keeping burden for the review, oversight, and administration of the rule is estimated to be an annual average of 130 hours, which is equal to an average 19 hours ($1,000) per respondent when divided among seven states. The total annual average labor burden for municipal respondents and states combined is 8,694 hours ($420,647). The frequency of responses varies between activities; some activities are conducted once or on an as needed basis, while others are conducted annually. Appendix A of the document titled, "Analysis of Costs and Executive Orders" (docket ID docket ID EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0376-0178) provides a more detailed table showing the calculated values for respondents, responses, burden, and costs by activity. Section 2 of the document titled, "Analysis of Costs and Executive Orders" (docket ID docket ID EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0376-0178) provides a description of the information collected and methodology used for estimating respondent burden and costs, including labor rate data.
Table 12-1 summarizes the labor burden and associated labor costs. This table includes information on very small CSO permittees (population less than 10,000), small CSO permittees (population between 10,000 and 50,000), large CSO permittees (population greater than 50,000), and state agencies, as well as a total for all CSO permittees and all respondents (i.e., CSO permittees and state agencies). Table 12-2 presents the average labor burden and associated labor costs per respondent, which range from $1,000 to $4,000 depending on the size of the permittee. The annual burden hours and cost do not include contractor labor used by very small permittees. These costs are considered capital costs and are summarized in Tables 13-1 and 13-2.
Table 12-1 Annual Labor Burden and Labor Costs
(Average of Three-Year Period)

Respondents
Annual Total Burden (hours)
Annual Total Labor Costs (2020$)
Very Small CSO permittees
                                                                             53
                                                                          2,635
                                                                       $127,269
Small CSO permittees
                                                                             69
                                                                          3,283
                                                                       $158,599
Large CSO permittees
                                                                             35
                                                                          2,646
                                                                       $127,809
Total CSO permittees
                                                                            157
                                                                          8,564
                                                                       $413,678
State agencies
                                                                              7
                                                                            130
                                                                         $6,969
Totals
                                                                            164
                                                                          8,694
                                                                       $420,647

Table 12-2 Annual Labor Burden and Labor Costs per Respondent
(Average of Three-Year Period)

Respondents
Annual Burden per respondent (hours)
Annual Labor Cost per respondent
Very Small CSO permittees
                                                                             53
                                                                             50
                                                                        $2,401
Small CSO permittees
                                                                             69
                                                                             48
                                                                        $2,299
Large CSO permittees
                                                                             35
                                                                             76
                                                                        $3,652
Total CSO permittees
                                                                            157
                                                                             55
                                                                        $2,635
State Agencies
                                                                              7
                                                                             19
                                                                          $996
Totals
                                                                            164
                                                                             53
                                                                        $2,565

13.	Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to respondents
This section addresses non-labor costs only. The non-labor costs for CSO permittees and state agencies are the total capital and operation and maintenance costs collectively incurred for all activities during the 3-year period covered by this ICR. Table 13-1 provides the average annual number of respondents, capital, and operation and maintenance costs for CSO permittees and state agencies. Table 13-2 provides the same information as Table 13-1 but on a per respondent basis. There are no capital startup costs included in the burden for this ICR as the startup period ended during the prior ICR. There are no average annual operation and maintenance costs because EPA categorized contractor-led sign inspection, maintenance, and replacement as a capital cost under the recurring activities included in the rule. The total average annual recurring capital costs are higher in these tables for very small and small CSO permittees because the non-labor capital costs include contractor labor, which EPA assumed is used by all very small and 50 percent of small CSO permittees in this burden estimate. The actual labor hours and costs for non-contractor labor (i.e., municipal staff) are included as labor burden and costs, which are presented in Tables 12-1 and 12-2. Section 2.2.1 of the document titled, "Analysis of Costs and Executive Orders" (docket ID docket ID EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0376-0178) describes the hourly labor rates assumed for this rule, including contractor labor rates. The methodology used to derive the costs and detailed year-by-year estimates for each activity can be found in the document titled, "Analysis of Costs and Executive Orders" (docket ID EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0376-0178).
Table 13-1 Annual Non-Labor Costs
(Average of Three-Year Period)

                                  Respondents
                    Annual Recurring Capital Costs (2020$)
                      Total Average Annual Costs (2020$)
Very Small CSO permittees
                                      53
                                     $517
                                     $517
Small CSO permittees
                                      69
                                    $1,205
                                    $1,205
Large CSO permittees
                                      35
                                    $3,690
                                    $3,690
CSO permittees
                                      157
                                    $5,412
                                    $5,412
Totals
                                      164
                                    $5,412
                                    $5,412

Table 13-2 Annual Non-Labor Costs per Respondent
(Average of Three-Year Period)

                                  Respondents
             Annual Recurring Capital Costs per Respondent (2020$)
Very Small CSO permittees
                                                                             53
                                      $10
Small CSO permittees
                                                                             69
                                      $17
Large CSO permittees
                                                                             35
                                     $105
CSO permittees
                                                                            157
                                      $34
State Agencies
                                                                              7
                                      $0
Totals
                                                                            164
                                      $33

14.	Provide an estimate of the annualized cost to the federal government
Affected respondent CSO permittees are all located within seven Great Lakes states (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin). These states are all authorized to administer the NPDES program. Thus, the burden for the federal government is associated only with EPA's general CSO program oversight which is covered under a separate ICR (OMB Control No. 2040-0004, EPA ICR No. 0229.21). As such, EPA has concluded that there is no incremental increase in burden to the federal government.
15.	Explain the reasons for any adjustments reported in items 13 or 14 of OMB
Form 83-I
   There is an estimated net decrease of 1,607 burden hours since the prior approved ICR. The decrease in labor hours from the prior ICR is due to the completion of capital activities performed during startup  (i.e., during the first two years of the prior ICR). Also, one permittee (Woodville, Ohio NPDES Permit No. OH0020591) separated the city's combined sewer system and therefore, is no longer within the scope of the rule and this updated ICR.

   There was an increase in labor costs (+$31,841) due to a projected increase in labor base wages and total compensation (i.e., benefits). There was a decrease in non-labor costs
   (-$65,039) due to a decrease in capital costs after the initial startup period.

   Overall, total burden hours decreased by 1,607 hours and total burden cost decreased by $31,048 for the three-year period.
16.	Outline any plans for tabulation and publication of the information
The rule requires CSO permittees in the Great Lakes Basin to provide public notification for CSO discharges. Public notification must be through electronic media, such as by text, email, social media alerts to subscribers, or by posting a notice on the CSO permittee's public access website, and by other appropriate means (e.g., newspaper, radio, television).
The rule requires that by May 1 of each calendar year (or an alternative date specified by the state director or authorized representative), all permittees authorized to discharge a CSO to the Great Lakes Basin must make available to the public an annual notice that describes the CSO discharges from their CSO discharge point(s) that occurred in the previous year. The annual notices are required to contain information on each CSO discharge point, each CSO discharge, a summary of available monitoring data for each CSO discharge, a description of any public access areas potential impacted by CSO discharges, representative precipitation information, and a concise summary of implementation of the nine minimum controls and the long-term CSO control plan. The rule alternatively allows for the state permitting authority to develop the annual notice and requires the CSO permittee to make publicly available the state-issued annual notice.
Permit related data can also be accessed by the public in one of three ways:
Via an on-line query using EPA's Envirofacts Data Warehouse and Applications website at http://www.epa.gov/enviro/index.html. Accessing data via Envirofacts provides a method to combine Integrated Compliance Information System data with other EPA databases and mapping tools.
Via an on-line query using EPA's Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO) website at: https://echo.epa.gov/. ECHO provides a method for the public to access compliance history related data for permit holders by geographic area.
Via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by submitting a request to EPA or the state.
17.	Explain any requests to not display the expiration date of OMB approval
EPA has not made a request regarding display of the OMB approval expiration date.
18.	Explain any exceptions to the certification statement 5 CFR 1320.9, "Agency Certifications for Proposed Collections of Information."
The agency can certify compliance with all provisions under Item 19 of OMB Form 83-I.
B. 	Statistical Methods (used for collection of information employing statistical methods)
Statistical methods are not used with this collection.


Summary of EPA Meeting with Textile Rental Services Association of America (TRSA)
                                October 5, 2011

On Wednesday, October 5, 2011, members from EPA's Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR) met with members of TRSA to answer their questions on the Solvent-Contaminated Industrial Wipes rulemaking. TRSA asked whether EPA was on track to finish the rulemaking. EPA confirmed that the rule is on schedule and is anticipated to be completed June 2012. TRSA also asked whether the 2011 Definition of Solid Waste proposed rule (published July 22, 2011) would impact the wipes final rulemaking. EPA stated that the two rulemakings are separate and that the DSW final rulemaking was not expected to impact the schedule for the wipes final rule. TRSA asked whether they could include comments on potential impacts of the DSW proposed rule on the wipes rulemaking. EPA confirmed that TRSA could include any comments they would like. TRSA also discussed their LaundryESP program.

Attendees:

Amanda Geldard, EPA/ORCR
Richard Huggins, EPA/ORCR
Joseph Ricci, TRSA
Kevin Schwalb, TRSA
Jessica Skerritt, TRSA
John Wittenborn, Kelley Drye, LLP


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 104 (Tuesday, May 31, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34348-34349]
[FR Doc No: 2016-12654]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2016-N-0001]

Clinical Trial Design Considerations for Malaria Drug
Development; Notice of Public Workshop; Correction

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is correcting a notice
that appeared in the Federal Register of Tuesday, May 10, 2016 (81 FR
28876). The document announced a public workshop entitled ``Clinical
Trial Design Considerations for Malaria Drug Development.'' The
document was

published with the incorrect title and incorrect Internet address in
the Transcripts section. This document corrects those errors.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lori Benner and/or Jessica Barnes,
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration,
10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Rm. 6221, Silver Spring, MD 20993-
0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. 2016-10913, appearing on page
28876 in the Federal Register of Tuesday, May 10, 2016, the following
corrections are made:
    1. On page 28876, in the first column, the title is corrected to
read ``Clinical Trial Design Considerations for Malaria Drug
Development.''
    2. On page 28876, in the second column, the Transcripts section is
corrected to read ``Please be advised that as soon as a transcript is
available, it will be accessible at http://www.regulations.gov. It may
be viewed at the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and
Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm.1061, Rockville, MD. A
transcript will also be available in either hard copy or on CD-ROM,
after submission of a Freedom of Information request. Written requests
are to be sent to Division of Freedom of Information (HFI-35), Office
of Management Programs, Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 6-30, Rockville, MD 20857. Transcripts will also be available
on the Internet at http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/ucm490084.htm
approximately 45 days after the workshop.
    If you need special accommodations because of a disability, please
contact Jessica Barnes or Lori Benner (see Contact Person) at least 7
days in advance.''

    Dated: May 24, 2016.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-12654 Filed 5-27-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P