[Federal Register: June 28, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 123)]
[Notices]
[Page 36648-36650]
[DOCID:fr28jn10-54]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

June 18, 2010.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER05-1482-006; ER06-442-001; ER08-1168-003; ER09-
1505-004; ER94-1188-050; ER98-4540-019; ER99-1623-019.
    Applicants: Kentucky Utilities Company, LG&E Energy Marketing Inc.,
Louisville Gas & Electric Company, Electric Energy, Inc., Stony Creek
Wind

Farm, LLC, Munnsville Wind Farm, LLC, Midwest Electric Power, Inc.;
LG&E Energy Marketing-Hadson Energy.
    Description: Change in Status Filing of LG&E Energy Marketing Inc.,
et al.
    Filed Date: 06/18/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100618-5026.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 9, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER01-1099-014; ER02-1406-015.
    Applicants: Cleco Power LLC; Acadia Power Partners, LLC.
    Description: Cleco Companies submits Simultaneous Import Limitation
data filing.
    Filed Date: 06/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100617-0043.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-863-002.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc
submits proposed revisions to the Agreement of Transmission Facilities
Owners to Organize the Midwest Independent Transmission System
Operator.
    Filed Date: 06/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100618-0201.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-355-000.
    Applicants: AEP Appalachian Transmission Company, In, AEP Indiana
Michigan Transmission Company, AEP Kentucky Transmission Company, Inc.,
AEP Ohio Transmission Company, Inc., AEP Oklahoma Transmission Company,
Inc., AEP Southwestern Transmission Company, Inc., AEP West Virginia
Transmission Company, Inc.
    Description: American Electric Power Service Corporation submit its
Annual Update Informational filings in two parts on May 25, 2010 and
supplement its filings on 6/8/10.
    Filed Date: 05/25/2010; 06/08/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100608-5093; 20100525-5113; 20100525-5114.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, June 29, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1154-001.
    Applicants: Buy Energy Direct, LLC.
    Description: Buy Energy Direct, LLC submits Substitute Original
Sheet 3 to Rate Schedule FERC No 1 to be effective 6/30/10.
    Filed Date: 06/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100617-0203.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 7, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1406-000.
    Applicants: Lake Cogen, Ltd.
    Description: Community Power & Utility submits petition for
acceptance of initial tariff, waivers and Blanket Authority.
    Filed Date: 06/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100616-0220.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1463-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc
submits an executed Interconnection Agreement.
    Filed Date: 06/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100617-0201.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 7, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1463-001.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc
submits an executed Interconnection Agreement with City of Columbia et
al.
    Filed Date: 06/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100617-0206.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1464-000.
    Applicants: Black Hills Power, Inc.
    Description: Black Hills Power, Inc submits proposed updated rates
for Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation of Other
Sources Service.
    Filed Date: 06/16/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100617-0202.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 7, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1470-000.
    Applicants: Plymouth Rock Energy, LLC.
    Description: Petition for acceptance of initial tariff, waivers and
blanket authorization re Plymouth Rock Energy, LLC.
    Filed Date: 06/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100617-0207.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1471-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, LLC submits an executed
interconnection service agreement with The Dayton Power and Light
Company.
    Filed Date: 06/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100617-0205.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1472-000.
    Applicants: Choice Energy.
    Description: Application of Choice Energy LLC for order accepting
rates for filing and granting waivers and blanket approvals re Choice
Energy, LLC.
    Filed Date: 06/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100617-0210.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1473-000.
    Applicants: Pennsylvania Power Company.
    Description: Pennsylvania Power Company submits tariff filing per
35: Compliance Baseline Filing to be effective 6/17/2010.
    Filed Date: 06/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100617-5094.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1474-000.
    Applicants: Metropolitan Edison Company.
    Description: Metropolitan Edison Company submits tariff filing per
35: Compliance Baseline filing to be effective 6/17/2010.
    Filed Date: 06/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100617-5098.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1475-000.
    Applicants: Allegheny Energy, Inc.
    Description: Allegheny Energy, Inc. request a waiver of certain
affiliate restriction requirements.
    Filed Date: 06/17/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100618-0202.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, July 8, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1476-000.
    Applicants: Tampa Electric Company.
    Description: Tampa Electric Company submits tariff filing per
35.12: Baseline-Market Based Tariff to be effective 6/18/2010.
    Filed Date: 06/18/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100618-5027.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 9, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1477-000.
    Applicants: FirstEnergy Solutions Corp.
    Description: FirstEnergy Solutions Corp. submits tariff filing per
35: Compliance Baseline Filing to be effective 6/18/2010.
    Filed Date: 06/18/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100618-5031.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 9, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1478-000.
    Applicants: Pennsylvania Electric Company.
    Description: Pennsylvania Electric Company submits tariff filing
per 35.12: Compliance Baseline Filing to be effective 6/18/2010.
    Filed Date: 06/18/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100618-5039.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 9, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1479-000.
    Applicants: Carolina Power & Light Company.
    Description: Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc submits revisions to
the Network Integration Transmission Service Agreement with North
Carolina Eastern Municipal Power Agency to be effective 7/1/10.
    Filed Date: 06/18/2010.
    Accession Number: 20100618-0208.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, July 9, 2010.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of
self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not
institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice
of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides
notification that the entity making the filing has determined the
facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a
qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protests do not lie in dockets
that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-
recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying
facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR
292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to
notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications
and self-recertifications.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-15575 Filed 6-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION III

	1650 Arch Street

	Philadelphia, Pennsylvania  19103

DATE:	September 5, 2007

SUBJECT:	Technical Support Document-Virginia-Amendments to Chapter 20, 9
VAC 5-20-21, and Chapter 40, Articles 42, 48, 49, and 50

FROM:	Ellen Wentworth   /s/

Air Quality Planning Branch

TO:		File

THRU: 	Marilyn Powers, Acting Branch Chief  /s/

Air Quality Planning Branch

I.  Background

The Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) requires the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) to prescribe primary and secondary air quality standards to
protect public health and public welfare, respectively, for each
pollutant for which air quality criteria were issued before the
enactment of the CAA in 1970.  These standards are known as the national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).  Each state is required to adopt
and submit to the EPA a state implementation plan (SIP) that provides
for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS within
each air quality control region in the state.

Areas that do not meet the ozone NAAQS are designated as ozone
nonattainment areas as opposed to attainment or unclassifiable areas.
Nonattainment areas are further classified as marginal, moderate,
serious, severe, and extreme, and are subject to more stringent measures
as the classification moves from marginal nonattainment to extreme
nonattainment.

The Commonwealth of Virginia(s regulations establish VOC and NOx
emissions control areas to provide the legal mechanism to define the
geographic areas in which Virginia implements control measures to attain
and maintain the air quality standards for ozone.  The emissions control
areas may or may not coincide with the nonattainment areas, depending
upon the necessity of the planning requirements.

The original ozone air quality standard was a 1-hour standard.  On July
18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard of 0.08 parts
per million (ppm).  This new standard is more stringent than the
previous 1-hour standard.  On April 30, 2004, (69 FR 23858), the EPA
designated and classified areas for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.  For most
areas, these designations became effective June 15, 2004.  EPA
designated, as nonattainment, any area violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
based on the air quality data for the three years of 2001-2003.  These
were the most recent three years of data at the time EPA designated
8-hour areas.  The 8-hour standard replaced the 1-hour standard on June
15, 2005 (69 FR 23996).

II.  EPA Analysis of the Commonwealth’s Request

On May 14, 2007, the Commonwealth of Virginia submitted a formal
revision to its SIP amending 9 VAC 5, Chapter 20, and 9 VAC 5 Chapter 40
of Virginia’s regulations.  Specifically, this revision amends 9 VAC 5
Chapter 20, Part I, Administrative, 9 VAC 5-20-21, Documents
Incorporated by Reference, and 9 VAC 5, Chapter 40, Existing Stationary
Sources, Articles 42, 48, 49, and 50.  This revision was changed from
the proposal in that it adds six specialty architectural and industrial
maintenance coating categories from the Federal AIM rule that were
inadvertently omitted from the original regulation.

Specifically, the amendments to 9 VAC 5-20-21 consist of the
incorporation by reference of two additional test methods and procedures
needed for Virginia’s Architectural and Industrial Maintenance
Coatings Rule (9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 49).  These are American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) documents D 3912-95,
“Standard Test Method for Chemical Resistance of Coatings Used in
Light-Water Nuclear Power Plant” (reapproved 2001); and D 4082-02,
“Standard Test Method for Effects of Gamma Radiation on Coatings for
Use in Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants.”

Currently, Chapter 40 of the Regulations for the Control and Abatement
of Air Pollution contains a number of rules used to enforce control
measures designed to attain and maintain the ozone air quality standard.
 The geographic applicability of these rules is defined by establishing
VOC and NOx emission control areas in a list located in 9 VAC 5-20-206.
Most of these Chapter 40 rules automatically apply within all of the VOC
emissions control areas.  Some Chapter 40 rules have provisions that
apply only to certain existing VOC and NOx emission control areas.
Other Chapter 40 regulations were originally adopted to apply only
within the Northern Virginia VOC Emissions Control Area.  Others will be
expanded to apply in the Fredericksburg VOC Emissions Control Area as
contingency measures in its maintenance plan.  Accordingly, the May 14,
2007 SIP revision amends the following Chapter 40 regulations to apply
within the new Fredericksburg VOC Emissions Control Area:  Article 42,
Emission Standards for Portable Fuel container Spillage (9 VAC
5-40-5700-5770); Article 48, Emission Standards for Mobile Equipment
Repair and Refinishing Operations (9 VAC 5-40-6970-7110); Article 49,
Emission Standards for Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings
(9 VAC 5-40-7120-7230); and Article 50, Emission Standards for Consumer
Products (9 VAC 5-40-7240-7360).  At present these four regulations are
only applicable in the Northern Virginia VOC Emissions Control Area.

The Fredericksburg VOC Emissions Control Area consists of Spotsylvania
County and Fredericksburg City.  Persons affected by the extension of
the provisions of Articles 42, 48, 49, and 50 to the Fredericksburg VOC
Emissions Control Area must comply by January 1, 2008.

Chapter 40, Article 42 – Emission Standards for Portable Fuel
Container Spillage (9 VAC 5-40-5700 to 9 VAC 5-40-5770) is being amended
to apply within the new Fredericksburg VOC Emissions Control Area in
addition to the Northern Virginia VOC Emissions Control Area.  The
provisions of this Article apply to any person who sells, supplies,
offers for sale, or manufactures for sale portable fuel containers or
spouts.  The provisions of this article apply only to sources and
persons in the Northern Virginia and Fredericksburg VOC Emissions
Control Areas designated in 9 VAC 5-20-206.  The provisions of this
Article do not apply to any portable fuel container or spout
manufactured for shipment, sale, and use outside of the Northern
Virginia and Fredericksburg VOC Emissions Control Areas.  Exemptions
apply to a manufacturer or distributor who sells, supplies, or offers
for sale a portable fuel container or spout that does not comply with
the emission standards specified in 9 VAC 5-40-5720, as long as the
manufacturer or distributor can demonstrate that: (i) the portable fuel
container or spout is intended for shipment and use outside of the
Northern Virginia and Fredericksburg VOC Emissions Control Areas; and
(ii) that the manufacturer or distributor has taken reasonable prudent
precautions to assure that the portable fuel container or spout is not
distributed within the Northern Virginia and Fredericksburg VOC
Emissions Control Areas.  Other exemptions are listed in the regulation.
 The regulation sets standards for volatile organic compounds, as well
as test procedures for compliance.  Affected persons in the
Fredericksburg VOC Emissions Control Area will be required to comply
with the provisions of this Article no later than January 1, 2008.

Chapter 40, Article 48 – Emission Standards for Mobile Equipment
Repair and Refinishing Operations (9 VAC 5-40-6970-7110) is being
amended to apply within the new Fredericksburg VOC Emissions Control
Area in addition to the Northern Virginia VOC Emissions Control Area.
The provisions of this Article apply to each mobile equipment repair and
refinishing operation in the Northern Virginia and Fredericksburg VOC
Emissions Control Area designated in 9 VAC 5-20-206.  Certain provisions
also apply to each person providing or selling affected coatings.  The
provisions of this Article do not apply if the mobile equipment repair
and refinishing operation is subject to Article 28 of Chapter 40,
Emission Standards for Automobile and Light duty Truck Coating
Application Systems, or Article 34 of Chapter 40, Emission Standards for
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Coating Application Systems; if
the person applying the coatings does not receive compensation for the
application of the coatings, and if the mobile equipment repair and
refinishing operations use coatings required to meet military
specifications (MILSPEC) where no other existing coating can be used
that meets the provisions of this Article.  The regulation sets
allowable content of VOCs in Mobile Equipment Repair and Refinishing
Coatings (as applied) in weight of VOC per Volume of Coating (minus
water and non-VOC solvents).  Affected persons and facilities in the
Fredericksburg VOC Emissions Control Area will be required to comply
with the provisions of this article no later than January 1, 2008.

Chapter 40, Article 49 – Emission Standards for Architectural and
Industrial Maintenance Coatings (9 VAC 5-40-7120-7230), is being amended
to apply within the new Fredericksburg VOC Emissions Control Area in
addition to the Northern Virginia VOC Emissions Control Area. Article 49
is also being amended to add standards and definitions for six new
coating categories: calcimine recoaters, conversion varnishes, concrete
surface retarder, impacted immersion coatings; nuclear coatings;
thermoplastic rubber coating and mastic.  These coatings are listed in
the Federal AIM rule (See Appendix A).  The provisions of this Article
do not apply to:  (1) any architectural coating that is sold or
manufactured for use exclusively outside of the Northern Virginia and
Fredericksburg VOC Emissions Control Areas or for shipment to other
manufacturers for reformulation or repackaging; (2) any aerosol coating
product; (3) any architectural coating that is sold in a container with
a volume of one liter (1.057 quart) or less.  The regulation sets
standards for VOC limits found in Table 4-49A, VOC Content Limits for
Architectural Coatings, of the regulation.  Affected persons in the
Fredericksburg VOC Emissions Control Area will be required to comply
with the provisions of this article no later than January 1, 2008.

Chapter 40, Article 50 – Emission Standards for Consumer Products (9
VAC 5-40-7240 -9 VAC 5-40-7360) is being amended to apply within the new
Fredericksburg VOC Emissions Control Area in addition to the Northern
Virginia VOC Emissions Control Area.  The regulation is also being
amended to revise the definition of “Automotive windshield washer
fluid,” to allow the higher VOC automotive windshield washer fluid
standards to also be applied to some manual automotive windshield
washing systems so that they may be used in winter.  The provisions of
this Article apply to those persons who sell, supply, offer for sale, or
manufacture for sale any consumer product that contains VOCs as defined
in 9 VAC 5-10-20.  Exempted from the regulation is any consumer product
manufactured in the applicable VOC emissions control areas designated in
9 VAC 5-40-7240 for shipment and use outside of those areas.  Also
exempted from the provisions of this Article are manufacturers or
distributors who sell, supply, or offer for sale a consumer product that
does not comply with the VOC standards specified in 9 VAC 5-40-7270 as
long as the manufacturer or distributor can demonstrate both that the
consumer product is intended for shipment and use outside of the
applicable VOC Emissions Control Areas designated in 9 VAC 5-40-7240,
and that the manufacturer or distributor has taken reasonable prudent
precautions to assure that the consumer product is not distributed to
those applicable VOC Emissions Control Areas.  The regulation does not
apply to consumer products that are sold, supplied, or offered for sale
by any person to retail outlets in those applicable VOC emissions
control areas.  Other exemptions are listed in the regulation.  This
regulation sets specific VOC content limits in percent VOCs by weight
for consumer products with a compliance date specified in 9 VAC
5-40-7330.  Alternative control plans (ACPs) are also provided by
allowing responsible parties the option to voluntarily enter into
separate ACP agreements for the consumer products mentioned above.  The
test methods used to test coatings must be the most current approved
method at the time testing is performed.  The regulation also contains
notification, records, and reporting requirements.  Affected persons in
the Fredericksburg VOC Emissions Control Area will be required to comply
with the provisions of this article no later than January 1, 2008.

III.  Conclusions and Recommended Agency Action:

These amendments extend the applicability of four consumer and
commercial product regulations into the new Fredericksburg VOC Emissions
Control Area.  These amendments are necessary to implement the VOC
contingency measures as called for in the Fredericksburg Area 8-Hour
Ozone Maintenance Plan.  These regulations will limit ground-level ozone
formation, thereby better protecting the public health and welfare in
those areas.  Therefore, I recommend approval of the above SIP revision.

Appendix A

Chapter 20       	General Provisions

Part I			Administrative

9 VAC 5-20-21	Documents Incorporated by Reference (additional test
methods)

4.  American Society for Testing and Materials

(21) D 3912-95, “Standard Test Method for Chemical Resistance of
Coatings Used in Light-Water Nuclear Power Plant” (reapproved 2001)

(22)  D 4082-02, “Standard Test Method for Effects of Gamma Radiation
on Coatings for Use in Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants.”

Chapter 40		 Existing Stationary Sources

Part II  			 Emission Standards

Article 49 Architectural and Industrial Maintenance coatings (additional
coatings)

9 VAC 5-40-7130, Definitions (modified)

9 VAC 5-40-7140, Standards for volatile organic compounds (modified)

 “Calcimine recoater” means a flat solvent borne coating formulated
and recommended specifically for recoating calcimine-painted ceilings
and other calcimine-painted substrates.

“Concrete surface retarder” means a mixture of retarding ingredients
such as extender pigments, primary pigments, resin, and solvent that
interact chemically with the cement to prevent hardening on the surface
where the retarder is applied, allowing the retarded mix of cement and
sand at the surface to be washed away to create an exposed aggregate
finish.

“Conversion varnish” means a clear acid curing coating with an alkyd
or other resin blended with amino resins and supplied as a single
component or two-component product.  Conversion varnishes produce a
hard, durable, clear finish designed for professional application to
wood flooring.  The film formation is the result of an acid-catalyzed
condensation reaction, affecting a transetherification at the reactive
ethers of the amino resins.

“Impacted immersion coating” means a high performance maintenance
coating formulated and recommended for application to steel structures
subject to immersion in turbulent, debris-laden water.  These coatings
are specifically resistant to high-energy impact damage caused by
floating ice or debris.

“Nuclear coating” means a protective coating formulated and
recommended to seal porous surfaces such as steel (or concrete) that
otherwise would be subject to intrusions by radioactive materials.
These coatings must be resistant to long-term (service life) cumulative
radiation exposure as determined by ASTM Standard Test Method for
Effects of Gamma Radiation on Coatings for Use in Light-Water Nuclear
Power Plants (see 9 VAC 5-20-21), relatively easy to decontaminate, and
resistant to various chemicals to which the coatings are likely to be
exposed as determined by ASTM Standard Test Method for Chemical
Resistance of Coatings Used in Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants (see 9
VAC 5-20-21).

“Thermoplastic rubber coating and mastic” means a coating or mastic
formulated and recommended for application to roofing or mastic
formulated and recommended for application to roofing or other
structural surfaces and that incorporates no less than 40% by weight of
thermoplastic rubbers in the total resin solids and may also contain
other ingredients including, but not limited to, fillers, pigments, and
modifying resins.

Article 50, Consumer Products Rule (definition amended)

“Automotive windshield washer fluid” means any liquid designed for
use in a motor vehicle windshield washer system either as an antifreeze
or for the purpose of cleaning, washing, or wetting the windshield.
Automotive windshield washer fluid also includes liquids that are (i)
packaged as a pre-wetted, single-use manual wipe and (ii) designed
exclusively for cleaning, washing or wetting automotive glass surfaces
for the purpose of restoring or maintaining visibility for the driver.
Glass cleaners that are intended for use on other glass surfaces are not
included in this definition.  Automotive windshield washer fluid does
not include fluids placed by the manufacturer in a new vehicle.

 PAGE

 PAGE  1


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 221 (Thursday, November 15, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 57511]
[FR Doc No: 2018-25021]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, November 15, 2018.

PLACE: The meeting will be held at the Commission's headquarters, 100 F
Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.

STATUS: This meeting will be closed to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners,
the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend
the closed meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the
matters also may be present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (6), (7), (8), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR
200.402(a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(9)(ii) and (a)(10),
permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the closed meeting.
    Commissioner Stein, as duty officer, voted to consider the items
listed for the closed meeting in closed session.
    The subject matters of the closed meeting will be:
    Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
    Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;
    Resolution of litigation claims; and
    Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information and to
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed;
please contact Brent J. Fields from the Office of the Secretary at
(202) 551-5400.

    Dated: November 8, 2018.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-25021 Filed 11-13-18; 11:15 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 31, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 212)]
[Notices]
[Page 65003]
[DOCID:fr31oc08-125]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Intent To Request Revision From the Office of
Management and Budget of a Currently Approved Information Collection
Activity, Request for Comments; Exemptions for Air Taxi and Commuter
Air Carrier Operations

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA invites public comments about our intention to request
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approve a current
information collection. 14 CFR Part 298 requires air carrier operators
to obtain a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the
DOT, with the exception of air taxi and commuter air operators.

DATES: Please submit comments by December 30, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carla Mauney on<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

    Title: Exemptions for Air Taxi and Commuter Air Carrier Operations.
    Type of Request: Extension without change of an approved
collection.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0633.
    Form(s): OST Form 4507.
    Affected Public: A total of 2,040 Respondents.
    Frequency: The information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: Approximately 30 minutes per
response.
    Estimated Annual Burden Hours: An estimated 1,026 hours annually.
    Abstract: 14 CFR Part 298 requires air carrier operators to obtain
a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the DOT, with
the exception of air taxi and commuter air operators.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the FAA at the following address: Ms. Carla
Mauney, Room 712, Federal Aviation Administration, IT Enterprises
Business Services Division, AES-200, 800 Independence Ave., SW.,
Washington, DC 20591.
    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimates of the burden of
the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 24, 2008.
Carla Mauney,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises Business
Services Division, AES-200.
[FR Doc. E8-25945 Filed 10-30-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[ Federal Register: July 7, 2004 ( Volume 69, Number 129)] [ Notices] [ Page 40927 40928] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [ wais. access. gpo. gov] [ DOCID: fr07jy04 90]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OPPT 2004 0102; FRL 7368 5]

Approval of Test Marketing Exemption for a Certain New Chemical AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA's approval of an application for test marketing exemption ( TME) under section 5( h)( 1) of the Toxic Substances Control Act ( TSCA) and 40 CFR 720.38. EPA has designated this application as TME 04 5. The test marketing conditions are described in the TME application and in this notice.

DATES: Approval of this TME is effective June 29, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Colby Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, 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: TSCA Hotline@ epa. gov.

For technical information contact: Adella Watson, CCD ( 7405M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460 0001; telephone number: ( 202) 564 9364; e mail address: watson. adella@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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

This action is directed in particular to the chemical manufacturer and/ or importer who submitted the TME to EPA. This action may, however, be of interest to the public in general. Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. 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 2004 0102. 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/.

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 ID number.

II. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

Section 5( h)( 1) of TSCA and 40 CFR 720.38 authorizes EPA to exempt persons from premanufacture notification ( PMN) requirements and permit them to manufacture or import new chemical substances for test marketing purposes, if the Agency finds that the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, and disposal of the substances for test marketing purposes will not present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. EPA may impose restrictions on test marketing activities and may modify or revoke a test marketing exemption upon receipt of new information which casts significant doubt on its finding that the test marketing activity will not present an unreasonable risk of injury.

III. What Action is the Agency Taking?

EPA approves the above referenced TME. EPA has determined that test marketing the new chemical substance, under the conditions set out in the TME application and in this notice, will not present any unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment.

IV. What Restrictions Apply to this TME?

The test market time period, production volume, number of customers, and use must not exceed specifications in the application and this notice. All other conditions and restrictions described in the application and in this notice must also be met.

TME 04 05 Date of Receipt: May 14, 2004. Notice of Receipt: June 14, 2004 ( 69 FR 33015) ( FRL 7365 3). Applicant: CBI. Chemical: ( G) reaction products of fatty acids and hydroxy acids.

[[ Page 40928]]

Use: ( G) colored coatings and related vehicles Production Volume: CBI. Number of Customers: CBI. Test Marketing Period: CBI. The following additional restrictions apply to this TME. A bill of lading accompanying each shipment must state that the use of the substance is restricted to that approved in the TME. In addition, the applicant shall maintain the following records until 5 years after the date they are created, and shall make them available for inspection or copying in accordance with section 11 of TSCA: 1. Records of the quantity of the TME substance produced and the date of manufacture. 2. Records of dates of the shipments to each customer and the quantities supplied in each shipment. 3. Copies of the bill of lading that accompanies each shipment of the TME substance.

V. What was EPA's Risk Assessment for this TME?

EPA identified no significant health or environmental concerns for the test market substance. Therefore, the test market activities will not present any unreasonable risk of injury to human health or the environment.

VI. Can EPA Change Its Decision on this TME in the Future?

Yes. The Agency reserves the right to rescind approval or modify the conditions and restrictions of an exemption should any new information that comes to its attention cast significant doubt on its finding that the test marketing activities will not present any unreasonable risk of injury to human health or the environment.

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Test marketing exemptions.

Dated: June 29, 2004. Anna Coutlakis, Acting Chief, New Chemicals Prenotice Management Branch, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. [ FR Doc. 04 15351 Filed 7 6 04 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560 50 S


[Federal Register: January 4, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 2)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 296]
[DOCID:fr04ja07-20]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0577-200620(b); FRL-8265-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Tennessee:
Approval of Revisions to the Knox County Portion of the Tennessee State
Implementation Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Tennessee State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Tennessee, through
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, on January 20,
2006. The revisions pertain to the Knox County portion of the Tennessee
SIP and include changes to the Knox County Air Quality Regulations
Section 46.0--``Regulation of Volatile Organic Compounds.'' The changes
were made in response to changes made by EPA to corresponding federal
law. The change involves the addition of four compounds to the list of
compounds excluded from the definition of volatile organic compounds on
the basis that they make a negligible contribution to ozone formation.
This action is being taken pursuant to section 110 of the Clean Air
Act.
    In the Final Rules Section of this Federal Register, the EPA is
approving the State's SIP revisions as a direct final rule without
prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial
submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for
the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no significant,
material, and adverse comments are received in response to this rule,
no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments,
the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments
received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this
document. Any parties interested in commenting on this document should
do so at this time.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before February 5, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2006-0577 by one of the following methods:

    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0577,'' Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Dr. Egide Louis, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation.
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal holidays.

    Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules
section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to
submit comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Egide Louis, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number
is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Dr. Louis can also be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For additional information see the direct
final rule which is published in the Rules Section of this Federal
Register.

    Dated: December 20, 2006.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
 [FR Doc. E6-22477 Filed 1-3-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 104 (Tuesday, May 31, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 34403]
[FR Doc No: 2016-12674]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-292, OMB Control No. 3235-0330]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

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

Extension:
    Form N-SAR.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the
collection of information summarized below. The Commission plans to
submit this existing collection of information to the Office of
Management and Budget (``OMB'') for extension and approval.
    Form N-SAR (OMB Control No. 3235-0330, 17 CFR 249.330) is the form
used by all registered investment companies with the exception of face
amount certificate companies, to comply with the periodic filing and
disclosure requirements imposed by Section 30 of the Investment Company
Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq.) (``Investment Company Act''), and
of rules 30a-1 and 30b1-1 thereunder (17 CFR 270.30a-1 and 17 CFR
270.30b1-1). The information required to be filed with the Commission
assures the public availability of the information and permits
verification of compliance with Investment Company Act requirements.
Registered unit investment trusts are required to provide this
information on an annual report filed with the Commission on Form N-SAR
pursuant to rule 30a-1 under the Investment Company Act, and registered
management investment companies must submit the required information on
a semi-annual report on Form N-SAR pursuant to rule 30b1-1 under the
Investment Company Act.
    The Commission estimates that the total number of respondents is
3,168 and the total annual number of responses is 5,564 ((2,396
management investment company respondents x 2 responses per year) +
(772 unit investment trust respondents x 1 response per year)). The
Commission estimates that each registrant filing a report on Form N-SAR
would spend, on average, approximately 14.21 hours in preparing and
filing reports on Form N-SAR and that the total hour burden for all
filings on Form N-SAR would be 79,064 hours.
    The collection of information under Form N-SAR is mandatory.
Responses to the collection of information will not be kept
confidential. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number.
    The public may view the background documentation for this
information collection at the following Web site, www.reginfo.gov.
Comments should be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office
Building, Washington, DC 20503, or by sending an email to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549 or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30
days of this notice.

    Dated: May 24, 2016.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-12674 Filed 5-27-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Recoverable facilities costs for the laboratory building were allocated using the square footage Page 47 allocation method calculating the square footage that is used by the Compliance and Development Testing group for confirmatory and compliance testing only. The office building costs were allocated by the square footage allocation method, by determining the square footage occupied by the recoverable FTE housed in that building.

The ongoing costs of the lab building are 35 percent recoverable based on the square footage that is used for recoverable activities. By the same method, 11 percent of the office building operation costs are recoverable.

The amount allocated by industry is based on CCD and LOD recoverable direct FTE by industry divided by the overall CCD and LOD recoverable direct FTE. These percentages multiplied by the recoverable amount of $ 1,603,231 equals: $ 1,401,415 ( LDV), $ 60,545 ( MC), $ 90,817 ( HD HW), and $ 50,454 ( Other). These amounts are pulled forward to the Overall Summary Worksheet # 1.

CCD and LOD's portion by industry was determined using the FTE allocation method, by taking the total recoverable amount per industry multiplied by the ratio of CCD or LOD Direct Recoverable FTE by the Total Recoverable Direct FTE by industry. For Example:

LDV Amt $ 1,401,415 CCD FTE  LDV/ Toal FTE  LDV  ( 21.72/ 34.72) * .6256 CCD LDV Amount $ 876,692 Special Case: Security Services are available to both the office building and the laboratory building. The recoverable cost is determined using a weighted average of square footage occupied in the laboratory and Office buildings related to compliance and confirmatory testing. The square footage percentages for the lab and office buildings were weighted 75 percent and 25 percent, respectively. This reflects the usage rate of services by both buildings. This percentage is multiplied by the annual contract cost of $ 650,000 which results in a recoverable cost of approximately $ 188,036.

NVFEL Laboratory Modernization Budget Request ( Worksheet # 10) The NVFEL Laboratory Modernization Plan consists of equipment and upgrades necessary to ensure that the National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory in Ann Arbor, has the necessary tools to perform all the testing that is required for new rules and regulations regarding mobile sources and air quality. The portion deemed recoverable are determined using the actual cost allocation method, because the pieces of equipment and upgrades are related to compliance and confirmatory testing. All laboratory modernization costs were amortized on a straight line basis over a 10 year period based on the useful life of the equipment. Page 48 To prepare for testing of these new regulatory standards, OAR developed a " Laboratory Equipment Modernization Program" for the Ann Arbor Laboratory. The principle functions that require upgrading at the laboratory are:  testing of vehicles at very low emission levels using a variety of fuels;  testing of heavy duty engines;  fuel and chemical analysis capabilities The NVFEL Laboratory Modernization Plan Budget Submission consists of three critical testing support areas requiring new instrumentation and upgrades. These critical areas are:  Critical Tier II LDV Test Capability ( recoverable costs)  Critical Diesel Engine Standards Test Capability ( recoverable costs)  Critical Regulatory Development Test Capability ( non recoverable)

The critical testing areas, shown on the Worksheet # 10, indicate the required upgrades needed to support compliance testing. Note that the Critical Regulatory Development test capability area is not involved in compliance testing. The instrumentation required in this area will support developmental testing and research and is therefore non recoverable.

Critical Tier II LDV Test Capability:

Standard Tier II LDV Test Capacity This category includes gasoline fueled, 2WD car and truck compliance testing. EPA must accurately and reliably measure emissions from Tier 2 level cars and trucks. The equipment listed in Worksheet # 10 includes low range analytical instruments, exhaust sampling and conditioning systems and instruments needed for the new gas standards and support systems required to operate these systems in a reliable manner. Worksheet # 10 also lists the laboratory equipment required to operate these cells in compliance with the revised federal test procedures.

Diesel and 4WD Car/ Truck Test Site This category includes gasoline fueled 4WD car, truck and hybrid compliance testing, and all diesel fueled car and truck compliance testing. NVFEL will upgrade current laboratory equipment to test 4WD vehicles and trucks. Currently the laboratory is only capable of testing 4WD designs in 2WD mode. In addition, upgrades will allow the testing of hybrid vehicle designs that also have 4WD capability. Requests have been made for instrumentation that is needed to test medium duty passenger vehicles powered by engines that comply with Tier 2 emission standards. The laboratory modernization budget worksheet lists all of the test equipment upgrades required to measure diesel emissions at the Tier 2 levels.

The total recoverable cost for this category is $ 8,100,000. There were no non recoverable items.

Critical Diesel Engine Standards Test Capability:

Heavy duty Engine Test Sites Page 49 This category covers testing equipment needed to perform quality compliance testing of heavyduty highway engines at the current standards, at the 2004 MY standards and at the even tighter 2007 MY standards. Low range analytical instruments and a sophisticated exhaust sampling and conditioning system will be required to reliably measure the lower levels of HC, NOx and particulate matter. Worksheet # 10 lists, in this category, the equipment necessary for EPA to test heavy duty engines that meet the current, 2004 MY, and 2007 MY standards.

EPA has two HDE test cells that it will use to conduct most of the recoverable heavy duty testing. We determined that most compliance testing will occur in HDE # 2. Although EPA originally planned to use both HDE # 1 and HDE # 2 approximately 25 percent of the time for compliance testing, EPA determined that it will be using HDE # 2 approximately 50 percent for compliance testing.

HDE # 2 test cell requires the additional equipment outlined in this section. In cases where there is an equipment cost solely for HDE # 2 one half of the cost was assessed to the heavy duty fees as this cell will be used for compliance purposes half of the time. The new costs for these items are:

heavy duty engine cell controller replacement $ 150,000 analytical/ sampling system $ 365,000 selective catalytic reduction ( SCR) load controller $ 60,000 Therefore, instead of $ 1,150,000 being recovered by EPA for these pieces of equipment as proposed, EPA will now only recover $ 575,000.

In cases where there was an equipment cost common to both HDE # 1 and HDE # 2 onequarter of the cost was assessed to determine the recoverable portion. The new costs for these items are:

diesel engine cell cooling control $ 7,500 NOx and PM $ 187,500 The total recoverable cost for this section is $ 1,930,000 $ 770,000. The non recoverable costs total $ 1,100,000.

The Critical Regulatory Development Test Capability This capability is not immediately or directly necessary for the current MVECP. Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, we did not include these costs for conducting the MVECP.

The Advanced Technology Division ( ATD) is responsible for all automotive technology research and development programs to improve fuel economy and to reduce vehicle and fuel emissions from mobile sources. The major focus of the division is the development of new and emerging technologies such as Clean Car ( Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles), low NOx diesel Page 50 engines, and alternative fuel technologies. ATD is also responsible for climate change policies and strategies related to vehicle efficiency and fuels.

The total non recoverable cost for this category is $ 3,000,000. The total Lab Modernization Equipment Costs are $ 14,130,000 of which $ 10,030,000 are recoverable. The recoverable annual cost, when amortized over 10 years is $ 1,003,000.

Building and Facilities Costs for NVFEL ( Worksheet # 11)

The building and facilities costs that are described in this worksheet are non recurring facilities expenditures which include but are not limited to: the purchase of the laboratory building, the office building expansion, furniture and necessary repairs and improvements to both buildings which are listed on Worksheet # 11.

These costs are amortized over their useful life on a straight line basis. Useful lives were extracted from IRS Publication 946, Appendix B The IRS Publication 946, Appendix B, gives the recovery periods for types of assets. It is a standard document that most accountants use as a resource recovery period information. which gives descriptions of different types of assets and their useful lives. For example in Appendix B 1 office furniture shows a useful life of 10 years. The recoverable portion of the Building and Facilities costs were calculated using square footage as a common unit of measure since none of these projects are directly allocable to compliance and confirmatory testing. The grand total of costs incurred is $ 21,427,000 with an amortized annual recoverable cost of $ 236,559.

Core Testing Operations ( Worksheet # 12)

Core Testing Operations consists of three groupings: 1. Testing Support Services 2 Laboratory Maintenance Contracts 3. Vehicle and Engine Procurement The recoverable portions of these groups are allocated to light duty, heavy duty and Other industries using the FTE allocation method, by applying a percentage to the total cost of each group. ( The light duty cost is further allocated to ICI, Cert & FE, and In use in the LOD Summary Sheet using the ratio of test allocation method) The percentage applied is the number of LOD FTE that work directly on compliance testing to the number of direct LOD FTE. The percentages allocable to LDV, HD HW, and Other fee categories are 79 percent, 14 percent, and 8 percent, respectively. Please note that there are no Core Testing Operations costs for LOD for the highway motorcycle and nonroad CI categories because LOD does not currently test vehicles and engines from these industries.

Testing Support Services repairs equipment and tests fuels and gases. Testing Support Services has total costs of $ 782,800. Based on interviews with Senior managers we determined that 50 percent of testing support services benefit the Compliance/ Development Testing Group ( CDTG). Page 51 Of that amount 70 percent is related to compliance and confirmatory testing, and the remaining 30 percent is for regulatory development testing work ( we have only included the 70 percent of the 50 percent in our cost analysis). The total recoverable cost of these services is $ 273,980. These cost incurred are based on the FY 2001 budget.

Laboratory Maintenance Contracts are utilized for the upkeep of laboratory equipment. The total costs for Laboratory Maintenance Contracts is $ 266,300. Based on interviews with Senior managers we determined 50 percent of laboratory maintenance contracts benefit the CDTG. Of that amount, 70 percent is related to compliance and confirmatory testing, and the remaining 30 percent is for regulatory development testing work ( we have only include the 70 percent of the 50 percent in our cost analysis). The total recoverable cost of these services is $ 93,205.

Vehicle and Engine Procurement is all compliance and confirmatory testing related, thus fully recoverable. Total vehicle procurement is $ 1,000,000. The procurement cost of Heavy duty highway ( HD HW) engines for recall testing is based on an estimate obtained from a contractor who performs these type of services. The procurement of HD HW engines would cost ~ $ 25,000 for the first engine in an engine family and $ 22,000 for each additional engine. Tests can be performed on two engine families annually, five engines per engine family. The procurement costs for vehicles is $ 1,000,000 and for engines is $ 225,360. The procurement costs are 100 percent recoverable at $ 1,225,360. The vehicle and engine procurement costs are directly allocated to the light duty and heavy duty highway engine categories.

The Core Testing Operations total costs is $ 2,274,460, of which $ 1,592,545 is recoverable.

CCD Programs ( Worksheet # 13)

The CCD programs sheet lists direct program costs that CCD expects to fund. The worksheet lists the compliance related programs that are recoverable through fees and is divided into five parts, which are described below.

The first group of recoverable areas is Light Duty Compliance; it includes all of CCD's light duty compliance budget items. The first item is the certification and fuel economy information system ( CFEIS) which collects manufacturer and EPA emissions test data for certification purposes. Also included in this section are coast down audits and fuel economy audits that will be conducted to confirm the data submitted by manufacturers for certification. Highway testing and industry workshops are recoverable costs as both the printing and the workshops cover material that will clarify EPA regulations for manufacturers.

The next section under Light duty Compliance is Motorcycle Compliance. CCD is planning to supplement its motorcycle compliance program by conducting some in use tests. The tests will either be conducted at a contracted facility or at the NVFEL test facility. The total for this program will cover the procurement of the in use, highway motorcycles from members of the public, the testing of the highway motorcycles, and the computer support needed to establish and Page 52 maintain the databases for storing the test data.

The next three sections of recoverable costs listed in Worksheet # 13 are Heavy Duty Highway Engine ( HD HW) Compliance, Nonroad CI ( NR CI) Engine Compliance and Other Compliance. The first item in each of the categories is computer hardware and software costs for the FTE that work on the programs. The rest of the budget items are the same for the Heavy Duty Highway Engine Compliance and Nonroad CI Engine Compliance and will be described together a further discussion of these programs is in the description of Worksheet # 16, below. In use on vehicle testing is the contract cost of testing HD HW and NR CI engines to determine in use emissions. The next item is the cost of equipment that will measure real on road field operating emissions. CCD is planning to purchase commercial emission detection units that can monitor engine emissions during use. The last item under the Engine Compliance categories is the new HD and NR Compliance Program which will be a more robust compliance program for testing new and inuse heavy duty and nonroad CI engines. The estimated total cost of the program is given in Worksheet # 16 and is discussed later in this methodology. The enhanced engine program cost is split evenly between the HD HW and NR CI engine categories because the testing will be evenly split between the categories. The total cost was estimated assuming that testing would take place at a contracted facility.

CCD Labor ( Worksheet # 14)

Worksheet # 14 illustrates the CCD labor breakdown of recoverable and non recoverable FTE. Column number 1 of Worksheet # 14 shows the fraction of time that each employee works at the EPA, for example, 1 means a full time FTE who works 40 hours a week, .5 means a person who works 20 hours a week for the EPA. As discussed above, Senior management and employees were interviewed to determine what amount of each employee's time was spent directly on recoverable and non recoverable programs and whether the employee worked directly on programs or indirectly support the direct FTE. Senior Management also indicated what portion of each person's time was spent working in each industry.

Direct, recoverable FTE are those employees who work directly on certification, selective enforcement auditing , in use or fuel economy audits or other compliance activities. Also counted as direct, recoverable FTE are certain CCD group managers and employees who work with manufacturers to input data into CFEIS and IO staff who work directly with compliance issues. If a group manager's recoverable time could not be determined directly, it was calculated based on the overall percent of the direct recoverable FTE in the manager's staff.

The CCD Labor table shows a total of 73.8 FTE in CCD. The top part of the table shows the FTE that work in Ann Arbor, MI. The bottom part of the table shows those that work in Washington, DC. The total FTE that work directly on recoverable subject matter is 42.58, while the number that work directly on non recoverable subject matter is 22.47. The indirect FTE that support both recoverable and non recoverable programs is 8.7. The number of indirect FTE that supported recoverable programs was determined by multiplying the number of indirect FTE by the fraction of CCD direct recoverable FTE to the number of CCD direct FTE. Page 53 Senior ( SEEP Employee) Cost  CCD ( Worksheet # 15)

The Senior Cost Summary shows the percentage of time worked by individual SEEP employees. The average cost for individual CCD SEEP employees is $ 29,800. This number was determined by dividing the CCD SEEP budget by the number of seeps. The recoverable, direct total is determined using the percentage of time each individual employee works directly on recoverable programs, shown in the second column. The indirect number of Senior employees was determined by multiplying the number of indirect FTE by the fraction of recoverable FTE in the program. The recoverable total for SEEP employees is $ 220,929 for AA and $ 104,573 for DC.

Large Engine Highway and Nonroad Compliance Program ( Worksheet # 16)

This worksheet describes an engine compliance program that EPA plans to implement. This new program will help to identify engine families or test groups that may fail to meet EPA's large engine highway and nonroad CI engine standards. Listed on the page are aspects of the program that include Confirmatory Testing for Certification, Selective Enforcement Audits, and In Use Dyno Testing programs. The number of tests planned for highway and nonroad CI engines is listed with the price per test and the total cost for each compliance activity. The test prices are determined by using projected contractor prices.

The CCD Staff column is the number of people needed to plan and oversee the testing. The labor cost for the required staff is included in the CCD Labor worksheet.

VI. Conclusion When a manufacturer decides to market a vehicle or engine in the United States, EPA is required to provide certain services to assure that manufacturers meet emission compliance regulations. In doing so, EPA incurs costs that are recoverable as authorized by the CAA and the IOAA.

Upon examining the costs incurred by EPA in conducting MVECP activities, an updated fee schedule was proposed. The methodology process described in this document sets forth a userfee program that is equitable and reasonable. As a result EPA's goal of making the MVECP fee program as self sustaining as possible will be accomplished. Page 54 Appendix A Acronyms ASD Assessment and Standards Division ATD Advanced Technology Division ATG Advanced Technology Group CAA Clean Air Act CAAA Clean Air Act as Amended CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy CCD Certification and Compliance Division CDTG Compliance Development & Testing Group Cert Certification CFEIS Certification and Fuel Economy Information System CFO Chief Financial Officer CI Compression Ignition DOD Deputy Office Director Dyno Dynamometer EPA Environmental Protection Agency EPCA Energy Policy and Conservation Act EPG Engines Programs Group FE Fuel Economy FMD Financial Management Division FSG Facilities Services Group Page 55 FTE Full Time Equivalent FTP Federal Testing Procedure FY Fiscal Year HC Hydrocarbons HD Heavy duty HDE Heavy duty Engine HDV Heavy duty Vehicle HW Highway ( on highway)

ICI Independent Commercial Importer IMG Information Management Group IO Immediate Office IOAA Independent Office of Appropriations Act LD Light duty LDV Light duty Vehicle LOD Laboratory Operations Division LNS Laboratory Network System K Thousand( s)

MVECP Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Program MC Motorcycle MY Model Year NOx Oxides of Nitrogen NPRMNotice of Proposed Rulemaking Page 56 NR Nonroad NVFEL National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory O& M Operations and Maintenance OAR Office of Air and Radiation OBD On board Diagnostics OCFO Office of the Chief Financial Officer OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer OMS Office of Mobile Sources OPG Outreach Programs Group ORVR On board Vapor Recovery OTAQ Office of Transportation and Air Quality PC& B Personnel, Compensation & Benefits PMN Program Management Network PNGV Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles PLT Production Line Testing RFG Reformulated Gasoline SEA Selective Enforcement Audit SEEP Senior Environmental Employee Program ( also used to describe the actual employee)

SI Spark Ignition TRPD Transportation and Regional Programs Division VPG Vehicle Programs Group Page 57 Page 58 Appendix B Definitions Amortize  to provide a gradual extinguishment by contributing periodic payments; liquidate gradually. EPA usually divides a significant, one time cost over a 10 year period of time;

Direct Costs   expenses that can be specifically identified with an output or specifically identifiable to a particular program such as the cost in administering activities associated with the Mobile Source Compliance Program MVECP.

Direct FTE percent of Total   is the percentage used in allocating certain overhead costs across the various industries that are being charged fees. It is calculated separately for the Laboratory Operations Division and Certification and Compliance Division. The numerator signifies how many direct recoverable FTE perform work for the industry we are charging fees. The denominator is the total number of direct recoverable FTEs, which can be found in worksheet # 5,7,13 and 15.

FTE  Full Time Equivalent is a unit of measure to equate a full year's worth of work for one employee.

Full Cost  The full cost of programs includes both those costs specifically identifiable with each particular program ( direct costs) and those costs which collectively support many programs ( indirect costs).

Indirect Costs   are expenses common to multiple outputs but cannot be specifically identified with any particular output. Those costs which collectively support the many programs. Some examples of indirect costs are facilities, computer support, transportation, travel, etc.

Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Programs ( MVECP) OTAQ program that incorporates all activities involved the certification and compliance assurance of vehicles and engines.

Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Programs Fees Program  a user fee program that charges manufacturers for direct and indirect services related to the MVECP.

Non recoverable Costs   are expenses that serve an independent public social interest. Such costs are not included in the MVECP yet contributes to cleaning the air.

Personnel Compensation and Benefits ( PC & B) are all costs associated with the EPA Labor force ( salary, health benefits, pension, etc). The rate for PC& B used is $ 99,580 per FTE. This is the average PC& B cost for the Office of Air and Radiation Recoverable Costs   are expenses associated with providing a unique service to a specified set of customers for the Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Program ( MVECP). Page 59 Senior Environmental Employee Program ( SEEP)   an employee program that EPA participates in which the agency contracts the work of qualified retired persons.

C:\ dmautop\ temp\ dwcgi 28060 1080965095 53430000. wpd December 20, 2001


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 209 (Tuesday, October 29, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57820-57822]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23539]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2019-0803]
RIN 1625-AA11

Regulated Navigation Area; Saint Simons Sound, GA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary regulated
navigation area (RNA) for the navigable waters in Saint Simons Sound,
GA, as set out in the regulatory text at the end of this document.
Entry of vessels greater than 500 gross tons into this area is
prohibited, unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port
(COTP) Savannah. The RNA is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and
the marine environment from potential hazards created by salvage and
pollution response operations taking place near the grounded freight
vessel GOLDEN RAY.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from October 29,
2019 through January 29, 2021. For the purposes of enforcement, actual
notice will be used from September 19, 2019 through October 29, 2019.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2019-0794 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LT Lauren Bloch, Marine Safety Unit Savannah Office of
Waterways Management, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension
232, or email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
RNA Regulated Navigation Area
COTP Captain of the Port
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because the freight vessel GOLDEN RAY
capsized and grounded in Saint Simons Sound, GA on September 8, 2019.
Immediate action is needed to aid in the directing of vessel traffic
through the Port of Brunswick in the vicinity of the M/V GOLDEN RAY. It
is impracticable to publish an NPRM because we must establish this RNA
by September 19, 2019.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable because immediate action is needed to
respond to the potential hazards associated with operations in response
to the M/V GOLDEN RAY casualty.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The COTP Savannah has determined
that an RNA is needed to allow vessels greater than 500 gross tons to
transit safely through the area. This rule is needed to protect
personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable waters
within the RNA during salvage and pollution operations in response to
the M/V GOLDEN RAY casualty.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes an RNA on September 19, 2019. The RNA will
cover all navigable waters in Saint Simons Sound, GA bounded by a line
drawn from a point located at 31[deg]07'48.84'' N, 081[deg]23'30.67''
W, thence to 31[deg]07'29.38'' N, 081[deg]23'37.15'' W, thence to
31[deg]07'51.43'' N, 081[deg]16'23.57'' W, thence to 31[deg]08'07.28''
N, 081[deg]24'48.08'' W, thence to 31[deg]07'22.87'' N,
081[deg]24'38.78'' W, thence to 31[deg]07'40'' N, 081[deg]25'01'' W. No
vessel greater than 500 gross tons may enter the RNA without the prior
approval of the COTP Savannah. Upon approval from the COTP each vessel
will be provided an authorized timeframe to transit the RNA. Only one-
way traffic is allowed through the RNA at all times. When transiting
through the RNA all vessels greater than 500 gross tons must have one
assist tug, establish and maintain communications with the designated
representative of the COTP via VHF-FM radio on channel 13, and not
exceed a speed of 8 knots, unless greater speeds are required to
maintain bare steerage. Any vessel unable to meet these operating
limitations may, with good cause, seek authorization from the COTP
Savannah to deviate from these requirements.
    The RNA is intended to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine
environment in these navigable waters and provide a safe working
environment for personnel and vessels responding to the M/V GOLDEN RAY
casualty.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the RNA size,
location, notice, duration and provided exceptions. Vessel traffic will
be able to safely transit through this RNA which would impact a small
designated area of Saint Simons Sound, GA; the size and location of
this RNA is limited to an area in the immediate vicinity of the
grounded M/V GOLDEN RAY. The Coast Guard will provide mariners notice
of the RNA through a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM radio
channel 16. Additionally, the RNA is limited in duration. It will
remain in effect until the COTP Savannah determines the M/V GOLDEN RAY
is no longer a hazard to the safety of persons and vessels transiting
the area. Lastly, this RNA will allow vessels to seek permission from
the COTP to enter the area.

B. Impact on Small Entities

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

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please call or email the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have
determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves an RNA for the navigable waters in
Saint Simons Sound, GA bounded by a line drawn from a point located at
31[deg]07'48.84'' N, 081[deg]23'30.67'' W, thence to 31[deg]07'29.38''
N, 081[deg]23'37.15'' W, thence to 31[deg]07'51.43'' N,
081[deg]16'23.57'' W, thence to 31[deg]08'07.28'' N, 081[deg]24'48.08''
W, thence to 31[deg]07'22.87'' N, 081[deg]24'38.78'' W, thence to
31[deg]07'40'' N, 081[deg]25'01'' W. It is categorically excluded from
further review under paragraph L[60a] in Table 3-1 of U.S. Coast Guard
Environmental Planning Implementing Procedures.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T07-0803 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T07-0803   Regulated navigation area; Saint Simons Sound, GA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a regulated navigation area
(RNA): All navigable waters of Saint Simons Sound, GA bounded by a line
drawn from a point located at 31[deg]07'48.84'' N, 081[deg]23'30.67''
W, thence to 31[deg]07'29.38'' N, 081[deg]23'37.15'' W, thence to
31[deg]07'51.43'' N, 081[deg]16'23.57'' W, thence to 31[deg]08'07.28''
N, 081[deg]24'48.08'' W, thence to 31[deg]07'22.87'' N,
081[deg]24'38.78'' W, thence to 31[deg]07'40'' N, 081[deg]25'01'' W.
All coordinates are North American Datum 1983 (NAD 83).
    (b) Definition. As used in this section, designated representative
of the Captain of the Port Savannah (COTP) is any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant or petty officer, or federal, state, local
agency, who has been designated by the COTP Savannah to assist in the
patrol or enforcement of the regulated area.
    (c) Regulations. In addition to the general RNA regulations in
Sec.  165.13, the regulations in paragraphs (c)(1) through (8) of this
section apply to the RNA described in paragraph (a) of this section.
    (1) All vessels greater than 500 gross tons intending to transit
through the RNA must seek prior approval from the COTP Savannah at
least 24-hours in advance of the vessel's arrival to, or departure
from, the Port of Brunswick. The COTP Savannah can be contacted via
telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>. The COTP Savannah's designated
representative can be contacted on VHF-FM radio channel 13. Upon

approval to enter the RNA, the COTP Savannah will provide an approved
timeframe a vessel may enter the RNA.
    (2) Only one-way traffic is authorized within the RNA at all times.
    (3) All vessels greater than 500 gross tons must obtain one assist
tug while transiting within the RNA.
    (4) All vessels greater than 500 gross tons must check in with the
designated representative via VHF-FM Channel 13 prior to transiting
within the RNA and maintain communications with the designated
representative while transiting through the RNA.
    (5) While transiting within the RNA all vessels greater than 500
gross tons may not exceed a speed of 8 knots, unless greater speeds are
required to maintain bare steerage.
    (6) Any vessel unable to meet these operating limitations may, upon
showing good cause, seek authorization from the COTP Savannah to
deviate from the requirements in this section.
    (7) The operator of any vessel transiting in RNA must comply with
all lawful directions given by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative.
    (8) The inland navigation rules in 33 CFR subchapter E remain in
effect within the RNA and must be followed at all times.

    Dated: September 19, 2019.
Eric C. Jones,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2019-23539 Filed 10-28-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 79 (Wednesday, April 24, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17149-17150]
[FR Doc No: 2019-08214]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP19-151-000]

Enable Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Request Under Blanket
Authorization

    Take notice that on April 8, 2019, Enable Gas Transmission, LLC
(Enable), 910 Louisiana St., Ste. 48040, Houston, Texas 77002, filed in
Docket No. CP19-151-000 a prior notice request pursuant to sections
157.205 and 157.211 of the Commission's regulations under the Natural
Gas Act (NGA), and Enable's blanket certificate issued in Docket Nos.
CP82-384-000 and CP82-384-001, seeking authorization to modify its 4-
inch-diameter lateral line connected to its 12-inch-diameter Line OT-27
in Sequoyah County, Oklahoma. Enable proposes to install a new delivery
meter and appurtenant facilities that are designed to measure a maximum
of 6,000 Dekatherms per day at 700-psig. Enable states that the
facilities will constitute a bypass of Arkansas Oklahoma Gas
Corporation, a Local Distribution Company, and that the purpose of the
new meter is to provide natural gas service to Roland Development
Authority (Roland). Enable avers that Roland will construct, own, and
operate a lateral line to receive the gas delivery service to its
facility from Enable's measurement facility. Enable estimates the cost
of the Project to be $325,000, all as more fully set forth in the
application which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number
excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected] or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Lisa
Yoho, Senior Director, Regulatory and FERC Compliance, Enable Gas
Transmission, LLC, 910 Louisiana Street, Ste. 48040, Houston, Texas,
77002, by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
[email protected].
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 60 days after
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to section 157.205 of
the regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205), a protest to the
request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the
proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day
after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed and
not withdrawn within 30 days after the allowed time for filing a
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for
authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules (18 CFR 157.9),
within 90 days of this Notice, the Commission staff will either:
Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's
public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of
Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and
state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary
reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations
within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's EA.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters,

will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or
issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental
documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek
court review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests, and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and seven copies of the protest or intervention to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426.

    Dated: April 17, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-08214 Filed 4-23-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P