[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 72 (Tuesday, April 15, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21166-21168]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08220]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2014-0178]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Ellie's Wedding Fireworks Display; Long Island
Sound; Greenwich, CT.

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone
on the navigable waters of Long Island Sound near Greenwich, CT for the
Ellie's Wedding fireworks display. This action is necessary to provide
for the safety of life on navigable waters during the event. The safety
zone will facilitate public notification of the event and provide
protective measures for the maritime public and event participants from
the hazards associated with these events. Entering into, transiting
through, remaining, anchoring or mooring within this regulated area
would be prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP)
Sector Long Island Sound.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before May 15, 2014.
    Requests for public meetings must be received by the Coast Guard on
or before April 22, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number using
any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail or Delivery: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Deliveries
accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for further instructions on
submitting comments. To avoid duplication, please use only one of these
three methods.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Petty Officer Scott Baumgartner, Prevention Department,
Coast Guard Sector Long Island Sound,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Barbara Hairston, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided.

1. Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your comments and material online at
http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but
please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online, it
will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment,
it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when
it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you
include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a
telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact
you if we have questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number [USCG-2014-0178] in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change the rule
based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG-2014-0178) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

    Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received into any
of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or
signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act notice
regarding our public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the
Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one, using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES on
or before April 22, 2014. Please explain why you believe a public
meeting would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this
rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later
notice in the Federal Register.

B. Regulatory History and Information

    This is a first time event with no regulatory history.

C. Basis and Purpose

    The legal basis for this temporary rule is 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, and 160.5; Public Law 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1 which
collectively authorize the Coast Guard to define regulatory safety
zones.
    This temporary rule is necessary to promote the safety of life on
navigable waterways during the Ellie's Wedding fireworks display in
Long Island Sound near Greenwich, CT.

D. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    This temporary rule proposes to establish a safety zone for the
Ellie's Wedding fireworks display. This

proposed regulated area includes all waters of Long Island Sound within
a 600 foot radius of the fireworks barge located approximate 1.5 miles
south of Greenwich Point Park in Greenwich, CT.
    This rule will be effective and enforced on June 27, 2014 from 6:30
p.m. through 10:30 p.m.
    Because spectator vessels are expected to congregate around the
location of the fireworks display, this regulated area is necessary to
protect both spectators and participants from the hazards created by
unexpected pyrotechnics detonation, and burning debris. This proposed
rule would temporarily establish a regulated area to restrict vessel
movement on the navigable waters around the location of the fireworks
display to reduce the safety risks associated with it.
    Public notifications may be made to the local maritime community
prior to the event through the Local Notice to Mariners, and Broadcast
Notice to Mariners.

E. Regulatory Analyses

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

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed 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, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    The Coast Guard determined that this rulemaking would not be a
significant regulatory action for the following reasons: The regulated
area will be of limited duration, the area covers only a small portion
of the navigable waterways and waterway users may transit around the
area. Also, mariners may request permission from the COTP Sector Long
Island Sound or the designated representative to transit the zone.
    Advanced public notifications will also be made to the local
maritime community through the Local Notice to Mariners as well as
Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 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
proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to enter,
transit, anchor or moor within the regulated area during the effective
period. The temporary safety zone will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following
reasons: The regulated area will be of limited size and of short
duration and mariners may request permission from the COTP Sector Long
Island Sound or the designated representative to transit the zone.
Notifications will be made to the maritime community through the Local
Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice to Mariners well in advance of
the event.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    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 proposed 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, above. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    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 proposed rule under that Order and
determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. 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.

7. 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 proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

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

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed 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.

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

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

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would 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.

12. Energy Effects

    This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' under
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This proposed rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we
did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed 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
made a preliminary determination 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 proposed rule involves
establishing a safety zone. This rule may be categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the
Commandant Instruction. A preliminary environmental analysis checklist
supporting this determination is available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may
lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this
proposed rule.

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 proposes
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREA 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, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T01-0178 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T01-0178  Safety Zone; Ellie's Wedding Fireworks Display;
Long Island Sound; Greenwich, CT.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of
Long Island Sound within a 600-foot radius of the fireworks barge
located about 1.5 miles south of Greenwich Point Park, Greenwich, CT in
approximate position 40[deg]58'53.76''N, 073[deg]34'47.95''W North
American Datum 1983.
    (b) Enforcement Period. This rule will be enforced on June 27, 2014
from 6:30 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
    (c) Regulations. The general regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.23
apply. During the enforcement period, entering into, transiting
through, remaining, mooring or anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP) or the
designated representatives.
    (1) Definitions. The following definitions apply to this section:
    (i) Designated Representative. A ``designated representative'' is
any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer of the U.S.
Coast Guard who has been designated by the COTP, Sector Long Island
Sound, to act on his or her behalf. The designated representative may
be on an official patrol vessel or may be on shore and will communicate
with vessels via VHF-FM radio or loudhailer. In addition, members of
the Coast Guard Auxiliary may be present to inform vessel operators of
this regulation.
    (ii) Official Patrol Vessels. Official patrol vessels may consist
of any Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, state, or local law
enforcement vessels assigned or approved by the COTP Sector Long Island
Sound.
    (iii) Spectators. All persons and vessels not registered with the
event sponsor as participants or official patrol vessels.
    (2) Spectators desiring to enter or operate within the regulated
area should contact the COTP Sector Long Island Sound at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Sector Long Island Sound command center) or the designated
representative via VHF channel 16 to obtain permission to do so.
Spectators given permission to enter or operate in the regulated area
must comply with all directions given to them by the COTP Sector Long
Island Sound or the designated on-scene representative.
    (3) Upon being hailed by an official patrol vessel or the
designated representative, by siren, radio, flashing light or other
means, the operator of the vessel shall proceed as directed. Failure to
comply with a lawful direction may result in expulsion from the area,
citation for failure to comply, or both.
    (4) Fireworks barges used in this location will have a sign on
their port and starboard side labeled ``FIREWORKS--STAY AWAY''. This
sign will consist of 10 inch high by 1.5 inch wide red lettering on a
white background.

    Dated: March 25, 2014.
E.J. Cubanski, III,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Long Island
Sound.
[FR Doc. 2014-08220 Filed 4-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 91 (Friday, May 10, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20550-20551]
[FR Doc No: 2019-09480]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[EPA-HQ-SFUND-1986-0005; FRL-9993-34-Region 9]

National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
National Priorities List: Partial Deletion of the Beckman Instruments
Superfund Site

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 9 announces
the deletion of the soil portion of the Beckman Instruments Superfund
Site (Site) located in Porterville, California, from the National
Priorities List (NPL). The NPL, promulgated pursuant to section 105 of
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an appendix of the National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). This partial
deletion pertains to the soil portion of the Site. The groundwater will
remain on the NPL and is not being considered for deletion as part of
this action. EPA and the State of California, through the Department of
Toxic Substances Control, have determined that all appropriate response
actions under CERCLA have been completed. However, the deletion of the
soil portion of the Site does not preclude future actions under
Superfund.

DATES: This action is effective May 10, 2019.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-1986-0005. All documents in the docket
are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed
in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or
at the site information repositories. Locations, contacts, phone
numbers and viewing hours are:
    Superfund Records Center, 75 Hawthorne Street, Room 3110, San
Francisco, California, Hours: 8 a.m.-4 p.m.;<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Site Repository: 41 W. Thurman Avenue, Porterville, California.
Call<PHONE_NUMBER> for hours of operation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Holly Hadlock, Superfund Project
Manager, U.S. EPA, Region 9, (SFD-7-3), 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The portion of the Site to be deleted from
the NPL is the soil at the Beckman Instruments Superfund Site,
Porterville, California. A Notice of Intent for Partial Deletion for
this Site was published in the Federal Register (84 FR 4033-4035) on
February 14, 2019. The closing date for comments on the Notice of
Intent for Partial Deletion was March 18, 2019. EPA received two
comments that support the decision to deletion the soil from the NPL.
These comments have been placed in both the docket at
www.regulations.gov (EPA-HQ-SFUND-1986-0005) and in the repositories
listed above.
    EPA maintains the NPL as the list of sites that appear to present a
significant risk to public health, welfare, or the environment.
Deletion of a site from the NPL does not preclude further remedial
action. Whenever there is a significant release from a site deleted
from the NPL, the deleted site may be restored to the NPL without
application of the hazard ranking system. Deletion of portions of a
site from the NPL does not affect responsible party liability, in the
unlikely event that future conditions warrant further actions.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals,
Hazardous waste, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.

     Dated: April 3, 2019.
Michael B. Stoker,
Regional Administrator, Region 9.

    For reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 300 is amended as
follows:

PART 300--NATIONAL OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES POLLUTION
CONTINGENCY PLAN

0
1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1321(d); 42 U.S.C. 9601-9657; E.O. 13626,
77 FR 56749, 3 CFR, 2013 Comp., p. 306; E.O. 12777, 56 FR 54757, 3
CFR, 1991 Comp., p. 351; E.O. 12580, 52 FR 2923, 3 CFR, 1987 Comp.,
p. 193.

0
2. Table 1 of Appendix B to part 300 is amended by removing the
California entry for ``Beckman Instruments (Porterville Plant)'' and
adding an entry for ``Beckman Instruments'' in its place to read as
follows:

Appendix B to Part 300--National Priorities List

                                       Table 1--General Superfund Section
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             State                      Site name               City/County                  Notes (a)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
CA.............................  Beckman Instruments....  Porterville............                            P.

                                                  * * * * * * *

                                                  * * * * * * *

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 * * * * * * *
\(a)\ = Based on issuance of health advisory by Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (if scored, HRS
  score need not be greater than or equal to 28.50).
 * * * * * * *
*P = Sites with partial deletion(s).

[FR Doc. 2019-09480 Filed 5-9-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 188 (Friday, September 27, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 59756]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23575]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2009-0065]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), this document provides the public notice that by a letter dated
September 5, 2013, BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) and the Brotherhood of
Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) have jointly petitioned the
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for an extension of their waiver
of compliance from certain provisions of the Federal hours of service
laws contained at 49 U.S.C. 21103(a)(4). FRA assigned the petition
Docket Number FRA-2009-0065.
    In their petition, BNSF and BLET seek relief from 49 U.S.C.
21103(a)(4), which, in part, requires a train employee to receive 48
hours off duty after initiating an on-duty period each day for 6
consecutive days. Specifically, BNSF and BLET seek an extension of the
waiver to allow a train employee to initiate an on-duty period each day
for 6 consecutive days followed by 24 hours off duty at the 17
locations identified in their petition. In support of the request, BNSF
provided the results from an analysis of its safety data to demonstrate
that there is no difference in the rate of human factors incidents
between the jobs working under the waiver and similar jobs working
without the waiver.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation's Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations Facility is
open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by November 12, 2013 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the document,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
See http://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice for the privacy notice
of regulations.gov or interested parties may review DOT's complete
Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477).

Robert C. Lauby,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2013-23575 Filed 9-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


35315 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 114 / Friday, June 13, 2003 / Rules and Regulations Commodity Parts per million Vegetable, root and tuber, group 1, except sugar beet ................... 0.40 * * * * *

Watercress ...................... 3.5 Wax jambu ...................... 1.0 * * * * *

1 There are no U. S. registration as of June 13, 2003 for use on banana.

* * * * * [ FR Doc. 03   14880 Filed 6   12   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 725 [ OPPT   2002   0041; FRL   7200   3]

RIN 2070   AD43 Burkholderia Cepacia Complex; Significant New Use Rule AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is issuing a significant new use rule ( SNUR) under section 5( a)( 2) of the Toxic Substances Control Act ( TSCA) for Burkholderia cepacia complex ( Bcc), a group of naturallyoccurring microorganisms. Bcc microorganisms, when encountered in sufficient numbers through an appropriate route of exposure by a member of a sensitive population, such as a cystic fibrosis ( CF) patient, have the potential to cause a severe infection, resulting in significantly increased rates of mortality. This rule would require persons who intend to manufacture, import, or process any individual member of Bcc for a significant new use to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing the manufacturing ( including import) or processing of Bcc for a use designated by this SNUR as a significant new use. The required notice would provide EPA with the opportunity to evaluate the intended new use and associated activities and, if necessary, to prohibit or limit that activity before it occurs. DATES: This final rule is effective on August 12, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Barbara Cunningham, Director, Environmental Assistance Division ( 7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 202) 554   1404; e mail address: TSCAHotline epa. gov. For technical information contact: James Alwood, Chemical Control Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics ( 7405M), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 202) 564   8974; e mail address: alwood. jim@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture ( including import), process, or use products that contain living microorganisms subject to jurisdiction under TSCA, especially if you know that your products contain or may contain members of Bcc. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:   Chemical manufacturers ( NAICS 325), e. g., Persons manufacturing, importing, or processing products for commercial purposes containing Bcc for biofertilizers; biosensors; biotechnology reagents; commodity or specialty chemical production; energy applications; and other TSCA uses.   Waste management and remediation ( NAICS 562), e. g., Waste treatment or pollutant degradation. This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System ( NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. To determine whether you or your business may be affected by this action, you should carefully examine the list of substances excluded by TSCA section ( 3)( 2)( B), and the applicability provisions in 40 CFR 725.105( c) for SNUR related obligations. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information?

1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification ( ID) number OPPT   2002   0041. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information ( CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the EPA Docket Center, Rm. B102 Reading Room, EPA West, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The EPA Docket Center Reading Room telephone number is ( 202) 566   1744 and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket, which is located in EPA Docket Center, is ( 202) 566   0280. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. The OPPTS harmonized test guideline referenced in this document is available at http:/ www. epa. gov/ opptsfrs/ home/ guidelin. htm. A frequently updated electronic version of 40 CFR part 725 is available at http:// www. access. gpo. gov/ nara/ cfr/ cfrhtml_ 00/ Title_ 40/ 40cfr725_ 00. html, a beta site currently under development. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the appropriate docket identification number.

II. Background A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

This SNUR will require persons to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing the manufacture, import, or processing of any member of Bcc, a group of naturally occurring microorganisms, for any use other than research and development in the degradation of chemicals via injection into subsurface groundwater.

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 16: 29 Jun 12, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 13JNR1. SGM 13JNR1 OPPT 2002 0041 0001 RECEIVED OPPT NCIC 2003 JUN13 6: 46AM 35316 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 114 / Friday, June 13, 2003 / Rules and Regulations B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

TSCA section 5( a)( 2) authorizes EPA to determine that a use of a chemical substance is a `` significant new use.'' See also, 40 CFR part 725, subparts L   M. EPA must make this determination by rule after considering all relevant factors, including those listed in section 5( a)( 2) of TSCA. Section 5( a)( 2) of TSCA lists the following as potentially relevant factors for EPA to consider: ( A) the projected volume of manufacturing and processing of a chemical substance, ( B) the extent to which a use changes the type or form of exposure to human beings or the environment to a chemical substance, ( C) the extent to which a use increases the magnitude and duration of exposure of human beings or the environment to a chemical substance, and ( D) the reasonably anticipated manner and methods of manufacturing, processing, distribution in commerce, and disposal of a chemical substance.

Once EPA promulgates a rule designating `` significant new uses'' for a given chemical substance, section 5( a)( 1)( B) of TSCA requires persons to submit a notice to EPA at least 90 days before they manufacture, import, or process the substance for that use. The mechanism for reporting under this requirement is established under 40 CFR 725.105( c). EPA has interpreted the TSCA section 3( 2) definition of `` chemical substance '' as authorizing EPA to regulate microorganisms under TSCA. See the Federal Register of April 11, 1997 ( 62 FR 17910 and 17913) ( FRL   5577   2). Microorganisms that are not intergeneric are implicitly included on the TSCA Inventory, which would include naturally occurring microorganisms such as Bcc ( 40 CFR 725.8( b)). Thus, such microorganisms are only subject to TSCA section 5 notification requirements upon promulgation of a SNUR, pursuant to TSCA section 5( a)( 2).

C. Which General Provisions Apply?

General provisions for SNURs appear under subpart L of 40 CFR part 725. These provisions describe persons subject to the rule, recordkeeping requirements, exemptions to reporting requirements, and applicability of the rule to uses occurring before the effective date of the final rule. Provisions relating to user fees appear at 40 CFR part 700. Persons subject to this SNUR must comply with the same notice requirements and EPA regulatory procedures as submitters of Microbial Commercial Activity Notices ( MCANs) or TSCA Experimental Release Applications( TERAs) under section 5( a)( 1)( A) of TSCA. In particular, these requirements include the information submission requirements of TSCA section 5( b) and 5( d)( 1), the conditions necessary to qualify for the exemptions under TSCA section 5( h)( 1), ( h)( 2), ( h)( 3), and ( h)( 5), as codified in the regulations at 40 CFR part 725. In contrast to the provisions of 40 CFR part 721, under 40 CFR part 725, EPA has adopted a narrow interpretation of the TSCA section 5( h)( 3) exemption for small quantities used in research. Under 40 CFR 725.3, EPA has defined small quantities solely for research and development as `` quantities of a microorganism manufactured, imported, or processed or proposed to be manufactured, imported, or processed solely for research and development that meet the requirements of § 725.234.'' Any other research and development activity of a microorganism subject to a SNUR must comply with the section 5( a)( 1)( A) notification requirements unless that activity has been excluded from coverage under the SNUR. See 40 CFR 725.3, subparts E and F of 40 CFR part 725, and the Federal Register of April 11, 1997 ( 62 FR 17921   17926). Once EPA receives an MCAN or TERA, EPA may take regulatory action under TSCA section 5( e), 5( f), 6, or 7 to control the activities on which it has received the MCAN or TERA. If EPA does not take action, EPA is required under TSCA section 5( g) to explain in the Federal Register its reasons for not taking action. Persons who intend to export a substance identified in a proposed or final SNUR are subject to the export notification provisions of TSCA section 12( b). The regulations that interpret TSCA section 12( b) appear at 40 CFR part 707. Persons who intend to import a chemical substance identified in a final SNUR are subject to the TSCA section 13 import certification requirements, which are codified at 19 CFR 12.118 through 12.127 and 127.28. Such persons must certify that they are in compliance with SNUR requirements. The EPA policy addressing the import certification appears at 40 CFR part 707.

III. Summary of the Final Rule A. Final Rule On July 31, 2001, the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation ( CFF) submitted a petition under section 21 of TSCA which requested EPA to `` establish regulations prohibiting the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, and improper disposal of bacterial species within the Burkholderia cepacia complex.'' On November 6, 2001 ( 66 FR 56105) ( FRL   6808   7), EPA published in the Federal Register a notice denying that petition. EPA also stated in the notice that it intended to issue a SNUR for Bcc. On January 9, 2002 ( 67 FR 1179) ( FRL   6809   2) EPA proposed a SNUR for Bcc, where the significant new use for Bcc was designated as any use other than research and development in the degradation of chemicals via injection into subsurface groundwater. EPA received comments regarding the proposed SNUR only from CFF. EPA's response to those comments is contained in the next paragraph. No one identified any other ongoing commercial uses of Bcc other than those identified by EPA. In addition, no new data were submitted or identified that would change EPA's findings regarding the SNUR for Bcc. Therefore, EPA is issuing the SNUR as proposed. This final rule requires persons who intend to manufacture, import, or process Bcc for any use other than research and development in the degradation of chemicals via injection into subsurface groundwater notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing such activity.

B. Response to Comments As noted earlier, the only comments submitted on the proposed SNUR were from CFF. CFF did not challenge or object to any of the provisions proposed by the Agency in the proposed SNUR, but instead suggested that the final rule should be expanded beyond what was proposed in two ways. First, CFF stated that EPA should designate as a significant new use all research and development activities that result in potential environmental release of Bcc. Second, CFF stated that EPA should require manufacturers of microoganisms that may contain Bcc to test their products for the presence of Bcc. Leaving aside the fact that these comments go beyond the scope of the proposed SNUR, the changes proposed by CFF are not appropriate for inclusion in a Significant New Use Rule under section 5 of TSCA. As to CFF's first comment, CFF asks the Agency to require notification even for `` research and development in the degradation of chemicals via injection into subsurface groundwater.'' In the proposed SNUR, EPA identified `` research and development in the degradation of chemicals via injection into subsurface groundwater'' as an existing use. CFF did not present any information to suggest that this particular use is not an existing use, or that new research and development activities would be significantly different in kind or quantity than existing activities. Under the VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 16: 29 Jun 12, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 13JNR1. SGM 13JNR1 35317 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 114 / Friday, June 13, 2003 / Rules and Regulations circumstances, the Agency continues to believe that the particular research and development activities excluded from the proposed SNUR constitute an ongoing use of Bcc, and therefore do not constitute a `` significant new use'' for purposes of section 5( a)( 2) of TSCA. Only significant new uses may be included in a Significant New Use Rule. As to CFF's request that the SNUR require manufacturers of microorganisms to test their products to determine whether they contain Bcc. EPA concurs that manufacturers of microorganisms are responsible for knowing whether their products contain Bcc and EPA encourages manufacturers to test their products if they are uncertain whether the products contain Bcc. EPA's regulations exempt `` chemical'' impurities from SNUR reporting requirements ( 40 CFR 721.45( d)), but those regulations do not provide a similar exemption for `` microorganisms'' produced as impurities ( see 40 CFR 725.912). When this SNUR becomes a final effective rule, all commercial uses of Bcc, except research and development in the degradation of chemicals via injection into subsurface groundwater, will require notification to EPA at least 90 days before commencing the manufacturing ( including import) or processing of Bcc. Any manufacturer, importer, or processor of microorganisms that actually contain Bcc, even if the Bcc is present unintentionally as an impurity, will be required to submit a notification before commencing activities subject to this final SNUR. However, the Agency does not believe that a requirement to test products is appropriate for inclusion in a SNUR under section 5 of TSCA. If a manufacturer, importer, or processor does decide to test its products, the Agency encourages conformity with OPPTS Product Analysis Test Guideline 885.1100 for product identity. Because identification of members of the Bcc may be difficult due to complexities of the taxonomy of this group, EPA believes it advisable to consult experts in this matter prior to testing. EPA encourages any manufacturer, importer, or processor considering such testing to consult the Agency for further guidance or questions.

IV. Objectives and Rationale of the Rule In determining what would constitute a significant new use for the microorganisms that are the subject of this SNUR, EPA considered relevant information on the toxicity of the microorganisms, likely exposures associated with potential uses, information provided by industry sources, and the relevant factors listed in TSCA section 5( a)( 2) and Unit II. B. Based on these considerations, EPA has determined that all uses other than research and development in the degradation of chemicals via injection into subsurface groundwater, are significant new uses. EPA's considerations under each of the relevant factors are discussed below: 1. Projected volume of manufacturing and processing of a chemical substance. At present there is little manufacturing and processing of Bcc, so almost all exposure to Bcc today is from its presence in the natural environment. Any new use of Bcc could result in a significant increase in manufacturing and processing of the compound, and of exposure to it. Microorganisms may reproduce and increase beyond the number initially introduced and may spread beyond the site of manufacture or processing. Thus, what begins as a small localized population of microorganisms may become a large widespread population which could contribute to increased exposure potential for Bcc beyond that which occurs naturally. These facts complicate the Agency's ability to project the potential volume and processing of Bcc. However, Bcc is typically found in the environment in soils at a concentration of 102 to 104 colony forming units ( cfu)/ g. Manufacture of Bcc would result in production of batches of 1016 cfu of Bcc. Depending on the type and duration of use these batches could be even larger. ( See Reference 16, 67 FR 1185, January 9, 2002 ( FRL   6809   2)) 2. Extent to which a use changes the type or form of exposure to human beings or the environment to a chemical substance. Currently, human beings are exposed to Bcc because of its presence in soil, where it is found at concentrations significantly lower than might be seen if it is cultivated for commercial use. In addition to the fact that these uses would likely involve much higher concentrations of Bcc than are naturally found in the environment, some of the potential uses identified for Bcc, including bioremediation ( degradation of toxic chemicals), degradation of grease in drains, turf management, and specialty chemicals production, could also significantly increase direct dermal and inhalation exposures of Bcc to human beings and release of Bcc to the environment. ( See Reference 16, 67 FR 1185, January 9, 2002). This would be especially true for individuals involved directly in or near the manufacturing or application of formulations containing Bcc. These are types and forms of exposures to which human beings and the environment are exposed on a limited basis during field studies of Bcc in the biodegradation of chlorinated solvents in groundwater. 3. Extent to which a use changes the magnitude and duration of exposure to human beings or the environment to a chemical substance. Currently, human beings are exposed to Bcc because of its presence in soil, where it is found at concentrations significantly lower than might be seen if it is cultivated for commercial use. In addition to the fact that these uses would likely involve much higher concentrations of Bcc than are naturally found in the environment, some of the potential uses identified for Bcc, including bioremediation ( degradation of toxic chemicals), degradation of grease in drains, turf management, and specialty chemicals production, could also significantly increase direct dermal and inhalation exposures of Bcc to human beings and release of Bcc to the environment. Releases from typical manufacturing could result in releases to surface waters of 109 to 1013 cfu in water and 105 cfu in the air. Inhalation exposures of 450 cfu and dermal exposures of 1011 cfu to exposed workers could also result from typical manufacturing. ( See Reference 16, 67 FR 1185, January 9, 2002) Exposures from various uses would be the same or higher depending on the method of application. For example, if spray applied, the potential for inhalation exposure would be higher due to potential inhalation of mist. All Bcc produced for uses such as bioremediation ( degradation of toxic chemicals), degradation of grease in drains, and turf management would eventually be released to the environment. New uses could also significantly increase the duration of exposure. Use in bioremediation for research and development could be limited to a few days/ yr. In instances where manufacturing and application of formulations containing Bcc are repeated or continuous this increased level of exposure could occur on a daily basis throughout the year. In addition, repeated or continuous applications of formulations containing Bcc at the same location would increase the likelihood that a small localized population could become a larger and more widespread population. All of these factors would contribute to a change in the magnitude and duration of exposure to which human beings and the environment are not currently exposed. 4. The reasonably anticipated manner and methods of manufacturing, processing, distribution in commerce, and disposal of a chemical substance. EPA has not currently identified any VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 16: 29 Jun 12, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 13JNR1. SGM 13JNR1 35318 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 114 / Friday, June 13, 2003 / Rules and Regulations general commercial use of Bcc. EPA has identified field studies of Bcc in the biodegradation of chlorinated solvents in groundwater. ( See Reference 15, 67 FR 1185, January 9, 2002) EPA expects only limited exposures from the identified field studies of Bcc as only technically qualified individuals are growing and injecting Bcc directly into groundwater. Other potential uses identified for Bcc which include bioremediation ( degradation of toxic chemicals), degradation of grease in drains, turf management, and specialty chemicals production, could significantly increase dermal and inhalation exposures of Bcc to human beings as well as releases to the environment. Currently, there are no exposures to human beings and no releases to the environment from these uses. In most cases these exposures would be higher than typically found in nature and more likely to be encountered by a member of a sensitive population. EPA wants to achieve the following objectives with regard to the significant new uses that are designated in this rule. EPA wants to ensure that:   EPA will receive notice of any company's intent to manufacture, import, or process Bcc for a significant new use before that activity begins.   EPA will have an opportunity to review and evaluate data submitted in an MCAN or TERA before the notice submitter begins manufacturing, importing, or processing Bcc for a significant new use.   EPA would be able to regulate prospective manufacturers, importers, or processors of Bcc before a significant new use occurs, provided such regulation is warranted pursuant to TSCA section 5( e) or section ( 5)( f).

V. Alternatives Before issuing this SNUR, EPA considered the following alternative regulatory actions for Bcc. In addition, EPA determined that Bcc is currently not subject to Federal notification requirements. 1. Promulgate a TSCA section 8( a) reporting rule for Bcc. Under a TSCA section 8( a) rule, EPA could require any person to report information to the Agency when they intend to manufacture or import Bcc. However, the use of TSCA section 8( a) rather than the SNUR authority, would not provide the opportunity for EPA to review human and environmental hazards and exposures associated with the new uses of these substances and, if necessary, to take immediate regulatory action under TSCA section 5( e) or section 5( f) to prohibit or limit the activity before it begins. In addition, EPA may not receive important information from small businesses, because those firms generally are exempt from TSCA section 8( a) reporting requirements. In view of EPA's concerns about Bcc and its interest in having the opportunity to review these substances and regulate them as appropriate, pending the development of exposure and/ or hazard information should a significant new use be initiated, the Agency believes that a TSCA section 8( a) rule for Bcc would not meet all of EPA's regulatory objectives. 2. Regulate Bcc under TSCA section 6. EPA must regulate under TSCA section 6 if there is a reasonable basis to conclude that the manufacture, import, processing, distribution in commerce, use, or disposal of a chemical substance or mixture `` presents or will present'' an unreasonable risk of injury to human health or the environment. Based on EPA's findings that there is currently no general commercial use of Bcc, EPA concluded that risk management action under TSCA section 6 is not necessary at this time. This SNUR will allow the Agency to address the potential risks associated with any intended significant new use of Bcc.

VI. Test Data and Other Information EPA recognizes that section 5 of TSCA does not require the development of any particular test data before submission of a MCAN or TSCA Experimental Release Application ( TERA). Persons are required only to submit test data in their possession or control and to describe any other data known to or reasonably ascertainable by them ( 15 U. S. C. 2604( d); 40 CFR 725.160). However, in view of the potential health risks posed by the significant new uses of Bcc, EPA requests that potential MCAN or TERA submitters include data that would permit a reasoned evaluation of risks posed by Bcc when used for an intended significant new use. EPA also requests that potential MCAN or TERA submitters include data that demonstrate that the bacteria which would be the subject of the MCAN or TERA are in fact in the Bcc. EPA encourages persons to consult with the Agency before submitting an MCAN or TERA for Bcc. As part of this optional pre notice consultation, EPA will discuss specific data it believes are necessary to evaluate a significant new use of Bcc. EPA urges MCAN or TERA submitters to provide detailed information on human and environmental exposures that would result or could reasonably be anticipated to result from the significant new uses of Bcc. In addition, EPA encourages persons to submit information on risks posed by Bcc compared to risks posed by possible substitutes. An MCAN or TERA submitted without sufficient data to reasonably evaluate risks posed by a significant new use of Bcc may increase the likelihood that EPA will take action under TSCA section 5( e).

VII. Applicability of Rule to Uses Occurring Before Effective Date of the Final Rule EPA believes that the intent of section 5( a)( 1)( B) of TSCA is best served by designating a use as a significant new use as of the proposal date of the SNUR, rather than as of the effective date of the final rule. If uses begun after publication of the proposed SNUR were considered to be ongoing, rather than new, it would be difficult for EPA to establish notification requirements, because any person could defeat the SNUR by initiating the proposed significant new use before the proposed rule became final, and then argue that the use was ongoing. Any person who, after publication of the proposed SNUR, began commercial manufacture, import, or processing of Bcc, for the significant new use in this SNUR, must stop such activity before the effective date of the final rule. To resume commercial manufacture, import or processing of Bcc, those persons will have to meet all applicable MCAN or TERA requirements and wait until the notice review period, including all extensions, expires before engaging in any commercial manufacture, import, or processing of Bcc for a significant new use. If, however, persons who began commercial manufacture or import of Bcc for a significant new use between the proposal and the effective date of the final SNUR met the conditions of advance compliance as codified at 40 CFR 725.912, those persons would be considered to have met the requirements of the final SNUR for those activities.

VIII. Economic Considerations EPA has evaluated the potential costs of establishing a SNUR for potential manufacturers, importers, and processors of Bcc. These potential costs are related to the submission of MCANs, TERAs, and the export notification requirements of TSCA section 12( b). EPA notes that, the costs of submission of MCANs or TERAs will not be incurred by any company unless that company decides to pursue a significant new use as defined in this SNUR. The VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 16: 29 Jun 12, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 13JNR1. SGM 13JNR1 35319 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 114 / Friday, June 13, 2003 / Rules and Regulations Agency's economic analysis is available in the public docket for this rule.

A. MCANs and TERAs Because of uncertainties related to predicting the number of MCANs or TERAs that will be submitted as a result of this SNUR, EPA is unable to calculate the total annual cost of compliance with the final rule. However, EPA estimates that the cost for preparation and submission of an MCAN ranges from approximately $ 7,582 to $ 42,736, which includes the $ 2,500 user fee required by the Agency. EPA notes that small businesses with annual sales of less than $ 40 million are subject to a reduced user fee of $ 100. The cost of a TERA is estimated to range from $ 6,905 to $ 73,562. Based on past experience with SNURs and the low number of Significant New Use Notices ( SNUNs) which are submitted on an annual basis, EPA believes that there would be few, if any, MCANs or TERAs submitted as a result of this SNUR. Furthermore, no company is required to submit an MCAN or TERA for Bcc unless the company decides to begin manufacture, import, or processing of Bcc for any use other than research and development in the degradation of chemicals via injection into subsurface groundwater. As a result, EPA expects that companies would be able to determine if the burden of submitting an MCAN or TERA would be likely to create significant adverse economic impacts for the company prior to incurring MCAN/ TERA related costs.

B. Export Notification As noted in Unit II. C., persons who intend to export a microorganism identified in a proposed or final SNUR are subject to the export notification provisions of TSCA section 12( b) ( 15 U. S. C. 2611( b)). These provisions require that a company notify EPA of the first shipment to a particular country of an affected microorganism. The estimated cost of the TSCA section 12( b)( 1) export notification, which would be required for the first export to a particular country of a microorganism subject to this rule, is estimated to be $ 158.35 for the first time that an exporter must comply with TSCA section 12( b)( 1) export notification requirements, and $ 14.43 for each subsequent export notification submitted by that exporter. EPA is unable to estimate the total number of TSCA section 12( b) notifications that will be received as a result of this SNUR, or the total number of companies that will file these notices. However, EPA expects that the total cost of complying with the export notification provisions of TSCA section 12( b) will be limited based on historical experience with TSCA section 12( b) notifications and the fact that no companies have currently been identified that currently market Bcc commercially. If companies were to manufacture the microorganisms covered by this SNUR for export only, these companies would incur costs associated with export notification even if these companies decided to forgo any domestic significant new use. EPA is not aware of any companies in this situation, and expects that any potential impact would be limited to the small burden of export notification.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review Under Executive Order 12866, entitled Regulatory Planning and Review ( 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) has determined that SNURs are not a `` significant regulatory action'' subject to review by OMB, because they do not meet the criteria in section 3( f) of the Executive Order.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act According to the Paperwork Reduction Act ( PRA), 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq., an Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information that requires OMB approval under the PRA, unless it has been approved by OMB and displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations, after initial display in the preamble of the final rule and in addition to its display on any related collection instrument, are listed 40 CFR part 9. The information collection requirements related to this action have already been approved by OMB pursuant to the PRA under OMB control number 2070   0012 ( EPA ICR No. 1188.06). This action does not impose any burden requiring additional OMB approval. If an entity were to submit an MCAN or TERA to the Agency, the annual burden is estimated to average between 98.96 and 118.92 hours per response at an estimated reporting cost between $ 5,957 and $ 7,192 per MCAN. This burden estimate includes the time needed to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and maintain the data needed, and complete, review and submit the required MCAN or TERA. This burden estimate does not include the $ 2,500 user fee submission of an MCAN ($ 100 for businesses with less than $ 40 million in annual sales). Send any comments about the accuracy of the burden estimate, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques, to the Director, OP Regulatory Information Division ( 2137), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001. Please remember to include the OMB control number in any correspondence, but do not submit any completed forms to this address.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Pursuant to section 605( b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act ( RFA) ( 5 U. S. C. 601 et seq.), the Agency hereby certifies that promulgation of this SNUR will not have a significant adverse economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The rationale supporting this conclusion is as follows. A SNUR applies to any person ( including small or large entities) who intends to engage in any activity described in the rule as a `` significant new use.'' By definition of the word `` new,'' and based on all information currently available to EPA, it appears that no small or large entities presently engage in such activity. Since a SNUR only requires that any person who intends to engage in such activity in the future must first notify EPA by submitting an MCAN or TERA, no economic impact will even occur until someone decides to engage in those activities. Although some small entities may decide to conduct such activities in the future, EPA cannot presently determine how many, if any, there may be. However, EPA's experience to date is that, in response to the promulgation of over 1000 SNURs, the Agency receives fewer than 10 SNUNs per year. Of those SNUNs submitted, none appear to be from small entities in response to any SNUR. In addition, the estimated reporting cost for submission of an MCAN or TERA ( see Unit VIII. A.) are minimal regardless of the size of the firm. Therefore, EPA believes that the potential economic impact of complying with this SNUR is not expected to be significant or adversely impact a substantial number of small entities. This rationale has been provided to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Based on EPA's experience with SNURs, State, local, and tribal governments have not been impacted by these rulemakings, and EPA does not VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 16: 29 Jun 12, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 13JNR1. SGM 13JNR1 35320 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 114 / Friday, June 13, 2003 / Rules and Regulations have any reasons to believe that any State, local, or tribal government will be impacted by this rulemaking. As such, EPA has determined that this regulatory action does not impose any enforceable duty, contain any unfunded mandate, or otherwise have any effect on small governments subject to the requirements of sections 202, 203, 204, or 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 ( UMRA) ( Public Law 104   4).

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism This action will not have a substantial direct effect on 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism ( 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments This rule does not have tribal implications because it is not expected to have substantial direct effects on Indian Tribes. This does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal governments, nor does it involve or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 13175, entitled Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments ( 65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), which took effect on January 6, 2001 do not apply to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks ( 62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because this is not an economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866, and this action does not address environmental health or safety risks disproportionately affecting children.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use ( 66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act In addition, since this action does not involve any technical standards, section 12( d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 ( NTTAA), Public Law 104   113, section 12( d) ( 15 U. S. C. 272 note), does not apply to this action.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations This action does not entail special considerations of environmental justice related issues as delineated by Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations ( 59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

K. Executive Order 12630: Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630, entitled Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights ( 53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988), by examining the takings implications of this rule in accordance with the `` Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the Executive Order.

L. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform In issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct, as required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988, entitled Civil Justice Reform ( 61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996).

M. Congressional Review Act The Congressional Review Act, 5 U. S. C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the Agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U. S. Senate, the U. S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a `` major rule'' as defined by 5 U. S. C. 804( 2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 725 Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: June 6, 2003. Charles M. Auer, Director, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.

 Therefore, 40 CFR part 725 is amended as follows:

PART 725   [ AMENDED]

 1. The authority citation for part 725 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U. S. C. 2604, 2607, 2613, and 2625.

 2. By adding new § 725.1075 to subpart M to read as follows:

§ 725.1075 Burkholderia cepacia complex.

( a) Microorganism and significant new uses subject to reporting. ( 1) The microorganisms identified as the Burkholderia cepacia complex defined as containing the following nine species, Burkholderia cepacia, Burkholderia multivorans, Burkholderia stabilis, Burkholderia vietnamiensis, Burkholderia ambifaria, Burkholderia pyrrocinia, Burkholderia cepacia genomovar VIII ( Burkholderia anthina), and Burkholderia cepacia genomovars III and VI are subject to reporting under this section for the significant new uses described in paragraph ( a)( 2) of this section. ( 2) The significant new use is any use other than research and development in the degradation of chemicals via injection into subsurface groundwater. ( b) [ Reserved]

[ FR Doc. 03   15010 Filed 6   12   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 16: 29 Jun 12, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\ FR\ FM\ 13JNR1. SGM 13JNR1


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 133 (Friday, July 10, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41342-41343]
[FR Doc No: 2020-14860]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0354; Airspace Docket No. 20-ASW-3]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Kountze/Silsbee, TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the Class E airspace extending upward from
700 feet above the surface at Hawthorne Field, Kountze/Silsbee, TX.
This action is the result of an airspace review caused by the
decommissioning of the Hardin County non-directional beacon (NDB). The
geographic coordinates of the airport are also being updated to
coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, September 10, 2020. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
Title 1 Code of Federal Regulations part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above
the surface at Hawthorne Field, Kountze/Silsbee, TX, to support
instrument flight rule operations at this airport.

History

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register (85 FR 27184; May 7, 2020) for Docket No. FAA-2020-0354 to
amend the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface at Hawthorne Field, Kountze/Silsbee, TX. Interested parties
were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting
written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11D, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15,
2019, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.11D, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and effective September 15,
2019. FAA Order 7400.11D is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11D lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 amends the Class E airspace area extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface to within a 6.4-mile (decreased from 6.6-mile) radius
at Hawthorne Field, Kountze/Silsbee, TX; updates the header of the
airspace legal description to read Kountze/Silsbee, TX (previously
Kountze-Silsbee, TX) to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database;
removes the city associated with the airport to comply with changes to
FAA Order 7400.2M, Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters; and
updates the geographic coordinates of the airport to coincide with the
FAA's aeronautical database.
    These actions are the result of an airspace review caused by the
decommissioning of the Hardin County NDB which provided navigation
information for the instrument procedures at these airports.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

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

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11D,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2019, and
effective September 15, 2019, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

ASW TX E5 Kountze/Silsbee, TX [Amended]

Hawthorne Field, TX
    (Lat. 30[deg]20'11'' N, long. 94[deg]15'27'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of Hawthorne Field.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on July 6, 2020.
Steven T. Phillips,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2020-14860 Filed 7-9-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 14 (Monday, January 23, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3932-3933]
[FR Doc No: 2023-01057]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 14 / Monday, January 23, 2023 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2023-0034; Airspace Docket No. 23-AGL-3]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Watertown, SD

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend the Class E airspace at
Watertown, SD. The FAA is proposing this action due to an airspace
review conducted as part of the decommissioning of the Watertown very
high frequency omnidirectional range (VOR) as part of the VOR Minimum
Operating Network (MON) Program. The name and geographic coordinates of
the airport would also be updated to coincide with the FAA's
aeronautical database.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 9, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590; telephone
(202) 366-9826, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2023-0034/Airspace Docket No. 23-AGL-3 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at
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 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except federal holidays.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would amend the Class E surface airspace and the Class E airspace
extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Watertown Regional
Airport, Watertown, SD, to support instrument flight rule operations at
this airport.

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-2023-0034/
Airspace Docket No. 23-AGL-3.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at
www.faa.gov/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 the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number)
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Traffic
Organization, Central Service Center, Operations Support Group, 10101
Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19, 2022, and effective
September 15, 2022. FAA Order JO 7400.11G is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11G
lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service
routes, and reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 by:
    Amending the Class E surface airspace at Watertown Regional
Airport, Watertown, SD, by updating the name (previously Watertown
Municipal

Airport) and geographic coordinates of the airport to coincide with the
FAA's aeronautical database;
    And amending the Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface at Watertown Regional Airport by removing the
Watertown VOR/tactical air navigation (VORTAC) and the associated
extension to the north of the airport; removing the extension south of
the airport as it is no longer required; removing the airspace
extending 1,200 feet above the surface from the airspace legal
description as it is redundant with the airspace extending 1,200 feet
above the surface over the State of South Dakota and State of
Minnesota; and updating the name (previously Watertown Municipal
Airport) and geographic coordinates of the airport to coincide with the
FAA's aeronautical database.
    This action is the result of an airspace review conducted as part
of the decommissioning of the Watertown VOR, which provided
navigational information to this airport, as part of the VOR MON
Program.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraphs 6002 and
6005, respectively, of FAA Order JO 7400.11G, dated August 19, 2022,
and effective September 15, 2022, which is incorporated by reference in
14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document
will be published subsequently in FAA Order JO 7400.11.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
is published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. 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, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``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

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, 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

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

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

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19,
2022, and effective September 15, 2022, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Area Designated as Surface Areas.

* * * * *

AGL SD E2 Watertown, SD [Amended]

Watertown Regional Airport, SD
    (Lat. 44[deg]54'50'' N, long. 97[deg]09'17'' W)

    Within a 4.3-mile radius of Watertown Regional Airport.

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

* * * * *

AGL SD E5 Watertown, SD [Amended]

Watertown Regional Airport, SD
    (Lat. 44[deg]54'50'' N, long. 97[deg]09'17'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.8-mile radius of Watertown Regional Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 17, 2023.
Martin A. Skinner,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2023-01057 Filed 1-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: June 8, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 109)]
[Notices]
[Page 32459]
[DOCID:fr08jn10-87]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice Announcing Preliminary Permit Drawing

May 28, 2010.
    In the matter of: Three Rivers Park District, Project No. 13457-
000, BOST1 Hydroelectric LLC, Project No. 13458-000.

    On May 1, 2009, at 8:30 a.m., the Commission received two
preliminary permit applications for proposed projects to be located at
the existing Coon Rapids Dam on the Mississippi River in Hennepin and
Anoka Counties, Minnesota.\1\ The applications were filed by Three
Rivers Park District, for Project No. 13457 and BOST1 Hydroelectric
LLC, for Project No. 13458.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Commission is open each day from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
except Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays. 18 CFR 375.101(c) (2009).
The applications were filed between 5 p.m. on Thursday April 30,
2009, and 8:30 a.m. on Friday May 1, 2009. Under the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure, any document received after regular
business hours is considered filed at 8:30 a.m. on the next regular
business day. 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(2) (2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Where all permit applicants are municipalities or all permit
applicants are non-municipalities, and no applicant's plans are better
adapted than the others' to develop, conserve, and utilize in the
public interest the water resources of a region, the Commission issues
a permit to the applicant who filed first in time.\2\ In this case,
because two applications from entities not claiming municipal
preference are deemed filed at the same time, the Commission will
conduct a random tie breaker to determine priority. In the event that
the Commission concludes that neither applicant's plans are better
adapted than the other, priority will be determined accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 18 CFR 4.37 (2009). See, e.g., BPUS Generation Development,
LLC, 126 FERC ] 61,132 (2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 8, 2010, at 2 p.m. (eastern time), the Secretary of the
Commission, or her designee, will, by random drawing, determine the
filing priority for the two applicants identified in this notice. The
drawing is open to the public and will be held in room 2C, the
Commission Meeting Room, located at 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC
20426. The results of the drawing will be recorded by the Secretary or
her designee. A subsequent notice will be issued by the Secretary
announcing the results of the drawing.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-13558 Filed 6-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: March 17, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 51)]
[Notices]
[Page 12770]
[DOCID:fr17mr10-91]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: FEMA-2009-0001]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB
Review; Comment Request, OMB No. 1660--NEW; Regional Catastrophic
Preparedness Grant Program (RCPGP)

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice; 30-day notice and request for comments; new information
collection; OMB No. 1660--NEW; FEMA Form FEMA Form 089-19, RCPGP
Investment Justification Template; FEMA Form 089-26, RCGCP (Sample)
Detailed Project Plan Template; FEMA Form 089-17, RCPT Membership List.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has submitted
the information collection abstracted below to the Office of Management
and Budget for review and clearance in accordance with the requirements
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The submission describes the
nature of the information collection, the categories of respondents,
the estimated burden (i.e., the time, effort and resources used by
respondents to respond) and cost, and the actual data collection
instruments FEMA will use.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before April 16, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments on the proposed information
collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office
of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the Desk
Officer for the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, and sent via electronic mail to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection should be made to Director, Office
of Records Management, 1800 South Bell Street, Arlington, VA 20598-
3005, facsimile number<PHONE_NUMBER>, or e-mail address FEMA-
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Collection of Information

    Title: FEMA Preparedness Grants: Regional Catastrophic Preparedness
Grant Program (RCPGP).
    Type of information collection: New information collection.
    OMB Number: 1660--NEW.
    Form Titles and Numbers: FEMA Form 089-19, RCPGP Investment
Justification Template; FEMA Form 089-26, RCGCP (Sample) Detailed
Project Plan Template; FEMA Form 089-17, RCPT Membership List.
    Abstract: The RCPGP is an important tool among a comprehensive set
of measures to help strengthen the Nation against risks associated with
potential terrorist attacks. DHS/FEMA uses the information to evaluate
applicants' familiarity with the national preparedness architecture and
identify how elements of this architecture have been incorporated into
regional/state/local planning, operations, and investments.
    Affected Public: State, Local or Tribal Government.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 10.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Estimated Average Hour Burden per Respondent: 176.2 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,762 hours.
    Estimated Cost: There is no annual reporting recordkeeping cost
associated with this collection.

    Dated: March 2, 2010.
Larry Gray,
Director, Office of Records Management, Office of Management, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2010-5854 Filed 3-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-46-P