[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 162 (Monday, August 22, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52237-52239]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21053]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 30798; Amdt. No. 3439]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final Rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule establishes, amends, suspends, or revokes Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums
and Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports.
These regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or
revised criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National
Airspace System, such as the commissioning of new navigational
facilities, adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements.
These changes are designed to provide safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective August 22, 2011. The compliance date for
each

SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of August 22, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:

For Examination

    1. FAA Rules Docket, FAA Headquarters Building, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located;
    3. The National Flight Procedures Office, 6500 South MacArthur
Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    Availability--All SIAPs are available online free of charge. Visit
http://nfdc.faa.gov to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and
Takeoff Minimums and ODP copies may be obtained from:
    1. FAA Public Inquiry Center (APA-200), FAA Headquarters Building,
800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; or
    2. The FAA Regional Office of the region in which the affected
airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harry J. Hodges, Flight Procedure
Standards Branch (AFS-420) Flight Technologies and Programs Division,
Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the
appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data
Center (FDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated
by reference in the amendment under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and
Sec.  97.20 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
    The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a
special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register
expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory
text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts
printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP contained in FAA form documents is
unnecessary. This amendment provides the affected CFR sections and
specifies the types of SIAP and the corresponding effective dates. This
amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the procedure
and the amendment number.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP as amended in the transmittal. For safety and
timeliness of change considerations, this amendment incorporates only
specific changes contained for each SIAP as modified by FDC/P-NOTAMs.
    The SIAPs, as modified by FDC P-NOTAM, and contained in this
amendment are based on the criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for
Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to
SIAPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific conditions
existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in this rule
have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an emergency
action of immediate flight safety relating directly to published
aeronautical charts. The circumstances which created the need for all
these SIAP amendments requires making them effective in less than 30
days.
    Because of the close and immediate relationship between these SIAPs
and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public procedure
before adopting these SIAPs are impracticable and contrary to the
public interest and, where applicable, that good cause exists for
making these SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.

Conclusion

    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.
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. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air Traffic Control, Airports, Incorporation by reference, and
Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 5, 2011.
John M. Allen,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal regulations, part 97, 14 CFR part 97, is amended by
amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, effective at 0901 UTC
on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114, 40120,
44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:
    By amending: Sec.  97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or
TACAN; Sec.  97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; Sec.
97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; Sec.  97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV;
Sec.  97.31 RADAR SIAPs; Sec.  97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and Sec.  97.35 COPTER
SIAPs, Identified as follows:

* * *Effective Upon Publication

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       AIRAC Date               State                 City                   Airport           FDC No.      FDC Date                Subject
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
22-Sep-11...............  MN                RED WING...............  RED WING RGNL.........       1/3885      7/21/11  RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Amdt 2
22-Sep-11...............  WA                RICHLAND...............  RICHLAND..............       1/4363      7/13/11  LOC RWY 19, Amdt 7

22-Sep-11...............  NY                ISLIP..................  LONG ISLAND MAC ARTHUR       1/5760      7/21/11  ILS OR LOC RWY 24, Amdt 4
22-Sep-11...............  NY                WHITE PLAINS...........  WESTCHESTER COUNTY....       1/5895      7/28/11  RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 16, Orig-A
22-Sep-11...............  IL                BELLEVILLE.............  SCOTT AFB/MID AMERICA.       1/7157      7/28/11  ILS OR LOC/DME RWY 14L, Orig-C
22-Sep-11...............  IL                BELLEVILLE.............  SCOTT AFB/MID AMERICA.       1/7158      7/28/11  ILS OR LOC RWY 32R, Orig-C
22-Sep-11...............  IL                BELLEVILLE.............  SCOTT AFB/MID AMERICA.       1/7159      7/28/11  RNAV (GPS) RWY 32L, Orig-B
22-Sep-11...............  IL                BELLEVILLE.............  SCOTT AFB/MID AMERICA.       1/7160      7/28/11  ILS OR LOC RWY 14R, Orig-C
22-Sep-11...............  IL                BELLEVILLE.............  SCOTT AFB/MID AMERICA.       1/7161      7/28/11  RNAV (GPS) RWY 14R, Orig-B
22-Sep-11...............  MI                ANN ARBOR..............  ANN ARBOR MUNI........       1/7560       8/2/11  VOR RWY 24, Amdt 13B
22-Sep-11...............  MI                ANN ARBOR..............  ANN ARBOR MUNI........       1/7561       8/2/11  VOR RWY 6, Amdt 13B
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2011-21053 Filed 8-19-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 160 (Wednesday, August 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 50272]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20464]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. P-1744-039]

PacifiCorp; Notice of Intent To File License Application, Filing
of Pre-Application Document, Approving Use of the Alternative Licensing
Process, and Requesting Cooperating Agency Status

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent To File License Application and
Request to Use the Alternative Licensing Process.
    b. Project No.: 1744-039.
    c. Date Filed: June 1, 2015.
    d. Submitted By: PacifiCorp.
    e. Name of Project: Weber Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: On the Weber River, in Weber, Davis, and Morgan
Counties, Utah. The project occupies 11.4 acres of United States lands
administered by the U.S. Forest Service.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 of the Commission's regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Eve Davies, PacifiCorp, 1407 West
North Temple, Ste. 110, Salt Lake City, UT 84116;<PHONE_NUMBER>;
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Claire McGrath at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. PacifiCorp filed its request to use the Alternative Licensing
Process on June 1, 2015. PacifiCorp provided public notices of its
request on May 29 and May 31, 2015. On July 10, 2015, PacifiCorp
provided a subsequent public notice of its request, which included the
required statement that comments on the request to use the ALP must be
filed with the Commission within 30 days of the notice. In a letter
dated August 13, 2015, the Director of the Division of Hydropower
Licensing approved PacifiCorp's request to use the Alternative
Licensing Process.
    k. Cooperating agencies: Federal, state, local, and tribal agencies
with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to
environmental issues that wish to cooperate in the preparation of the
environmental document should follow the instructions for filing such
requests described in paragraph o below. Cooperating agencies should
note the Commission's policy that agencies that cooperate in the
preparation of the environmental document cannot also intervene. See 94
FERC ] 61,076 (2001).
    l. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act and the joint agency regulations thereunder at 50 CFR, Part
402. We are also initiating consultation with the Utah State Historic
Preservation Officer, as required by section 106, National Historic
Preservation Act, and the implementing regulations of the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    m. With this notice, we are designating PacifiCorp as the
Commission's non-federal representative for carrying out informal
consultation pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act; and
consultation pursuant to section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act.
    n. PacifiCorp filed a Pre-Application Document (PAD; including a
proposed process plan and schedule) with the Commission, pursuant to 18
CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    o. Deadline for filing requests for cooperating agency status: 60
days from the date of this notice.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
requests for cooperating agency status using the Commission's eFiling
system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. For assistance,
please contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866)
208-3676 (toll free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY). In lieu of electronic
filing, please send a paper copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The
first page of any filing should include docket number P-1744-039.
    p. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
(http://www.ferc.gov), using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at
the address in paragraph h.
    q. The licensee states its unequivocal intent to submit an
application for a new license for Project No.1744-039. Pursuant to 18
CFR 16.8, 16.9, and 16.10 each application for a new license and any
competing license applications must be filed with the Commission at
least 24 months prior to the expiration of the existing license. All
applications for license for this project must be filed by May 31,
2018.
    r. Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.

    Dated: August 13, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-20464 Filed 8-18-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 43 (Monday, March 6, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 13838]
[FR Doc No: 2023-04468]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2023-0098]

Notice of Publication of Vessel Traffic Services National
Standards for Operating COMDTINST 16630.3B

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces the publication of the Vessel
Traffic Services National Standards of Operating Commandant Instruction
(COMDTINST) 16630.3B. This instruction replaces the Vessel Traffic
Services National Standards of Operating Procedures COMDTINST
M16630.3A. This instruction provides programmatic guidance to all Coast
Guard Sectors and Vessel Traffic Services.

ADDRESSES: You can find a copy of the COMDTINST 16630.3B posted in the
docket by searching docket number USCG-2023-0098 at https://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this document
call or email Darin Mathis, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The Coast Guard announces the publication and availability of the
COMDTINST 16630.3B. This COMDTINST includes information on the use of
communications, surveillance equipment and Captain of the Port or VTS
specific regulatory authority. We have posted a copy of the COMDTINST
16630.3B in the docket where indicated under the ADDRESSES section.
    Section 70001 of Title 46, United States Code, delegated to the
Coast Guard in Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170,
Revision No. 01.3, requires the Coast Guard to establish a national
policy which is inclusive of local variances and publish such policy in
the Federal Register. This Federal Register notice is intended to meet
this requirement.
    This notice is issued under authority of 46 U.S.C. 70001.

    Dated: February 28, 2023.
Michael D. Emerson,
Director, Marine Transportation System, U.S. Coast Guard.
[FR Doc. 2023-04468 Filed 3-3-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 22, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 17283]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05801]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 34859; File No. 812-15406]

Pender Real Estate Credit Fund and Pender Capital Management, LLC

March 16, 2023.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'' or ``SEC'').

ACTION: Notice.

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

    Notice of an application for an order pursuant to section 6(c) of
the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an exemption from
sections 18(a)(2), 18(c), and 18(i) of the Act, pursuant to sections
6(c) and 23(c) of the Act for certain exemptions from rule 23c-3 under
the Act, and pursuant to section 17(d) of the Act and rule 17d-1
thereunder.
    Summary of Application: Applicants request an order to permit
certain registered closed-end management investment companies to issue
multiple classes of shares and to impose early withdrawal charges and
asset-based distribution and/or service fees.
    Applicants: Pender Real Estate Credit Fund and Pender Capital
Management, LLC.
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on November 8, 2022, and
amended on January 6, 2023 and January 30, 2023.
    Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by emailing
the SEC's Secretary at [email protected] and serving the
Applicants with a copy of the request by email, if an email address is
listed for the relevant Applicant below, or personally or by mail, if a
physical address is listed for the relevant Applicant below.
    Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m.
on April 10, 2023, and should be accompanied by proof of service on
applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate
of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing requests should
state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts bearing upon the
desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason for the request,
and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing
may request notification by emailing the Commission's Secretary at
[email protected].

ADDRESSES: The Commission: [email protected]. Applicants:
Joshua B. Deringer, [email protected], Veena K. Jain,
[email protected], and Cory Johnson,
[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven I. Amchan, Senior Counsel, or
Terri G. Jordan, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER> (Division of
Investment Management, Chief Counsel's Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For Applicants' representations, legal
analysis, and condition, please refer to Applicants' second amended and
restated application, dated January 30, 2023, which may be obtained via
the Commission's website by searching for the file number at the top of
this document, or for an Applicant using the Company name search field,
on the SEC's EDGAR system. The SEC's EDGAR system may be searched at,
at http://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/legacy/companysearch.html. You
may also call the SEC's Public Reference Room at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-05801 Filed 3-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 99 (Monday, May 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32320-32321]
[FR Doc No: 2016-12046]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #2

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER16-533-001.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.

    Description: Compliance filing: 2016-05-17 CTS Compliance Filing to
be effective 3/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 5/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160517-5157.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-534-001.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Compliance filing: 2016-05-17_CTS Compliance Filing to
be effective 3/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 5/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160517-5159.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1410-001.
    Applicants: Torofino Trading LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to the Application for
Market-Based Rate Authority to be effective 5/31/2016.
    Filed Date: 5/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160517-5131.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1440-001.
    Applicants: Roswell Solar, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Roswell Solar, LLC's Amendment to
Application for Market-Based Rates to be effective 6/15/2016.
    Filed Date: 5/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160517-5099.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1719-000.
    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: SDGE Annual Filing of
Revised Costs and Accruals for PBOPs to be effective 1/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 5/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160517-5096.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1720-000.
    Applicants: Invenergy Energy Management LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: Application for Market-Based
Rate Authorization to be effective 7/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 5/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160517-5105.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1720-001.
    Applicants: Invenergy Energy Management LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Supplement to May 17, 2016 Market-
Based Rate Application to be effective 7/1/2016.
    Filed Date: 5/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160517-5139.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1721-000.
    Applicants: Public Service Company of New Mexico.
    Description: Initial rate filing: Transmission Construction and
Interconnection Agreement with Tri-State to be effective 4/28/2016.
    Filed Date: 5/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160517-5116.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1722-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc., Fitchburg Gas and Electric Light
Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Fitchburg Gas and Electric
Light Company Request for Updated Depreciation Rates to be effective 5/
1/2016.
    Filed Date: 5/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160517-5130.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1723-000.
    Applicants: Southwestern Electric Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: AECC East Fayetteville
Delivery Point Agreement to be effective 4/21/2016.
    Filed Date: 5/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160517-5140.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/7/16.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1724-000.
    Applicants: Paulding Wind Farm III LLC.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: MBR Application to be
effective 7/17/2016.
    Filed Date: 5/17/16.
    Accession Number: 20160517-5158.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/7/16.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: May 17, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-12046 Filed 5-20-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 214 (Tuesday, November 5, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59651-59652]
[FR Doc No: 2019-24084]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2016-0005]

Preparations for the 38th Session of the UN Sub-Committee of
Experts on the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and
Labelling of Chemicals (UNSCEGHS)

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice is to advise interested persons that on Tuesday,
November 12, 2019, OSHA will conduct a public meeting to discuss
proposals in preparation for the 38th session of the United Nations
Sub-Committee of Experts on the Globally Harmonized System of
Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (UNSCEGHS) to be held
December 11 through December 13, 2019, in Geneva, Switzerland. OSHA,
along with the U.S. Interagency Globally Harmonized System of
Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) Coordinating Group,
plans to consider the comments and information gathered at this public
meeting when developing the U.S. Government positions for the UNSCEGHS
meeting. OSHA also will give an update on the Regulatory Cooperation
Council (RCC).

DATES: The PHMSA public meeting will be held on November 12, 2019, 9:00
a.m. to 12:00 p.m., ET. The OSHA public meeting will be held November
12, 2019, 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., ET.

ADDRESSES: Both meetings will be held at the DOT Headquarters
Conference Center, West Building, Conference Room 8, 9, 10, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

    Written Comments: Interested parties may submit comments by
November 11, 2019, on the Working and Informal Papers for the 38th
session of the UNSCEGHS to the docket established for International/
Globally Harmonized System (GHS) efforts at: http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. OSHA-2016-0005.
    Registration To Attend and/or To Participate in the Meeting: DOT
requests that attendees pre-register for these meetings by completing
the form at: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/RNTWXG8.
    Attendees may use the same form to pre-register for both meetings.
Failure to pre-register may delay your access into the DOT Headquarters
building. Additionally, if you are attending in person, arrive early to
allow time for security checks necessary to access the building.
Conference call-in and ``Skype meeting'' capability will be provided
for both meetings. Information on how to access the conference call and
``Skype meeting'' will be posted when available at: https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/international-program/international-program-overview
under Upcoming Events. This information will also be posted on OSHA's
Hazard Communication website on the international tab at: https://www.osha.gov/dsg/hazcom/hazcom_international.html#meeting-notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    At the Department of Transportation: Please contact Mr. Steven Webb
or Mr. Aaron Wiener, Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, Department
of Transportation, Washington, DC 20590, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    At the Department of Labor: Please contact Ms. Maureen Ruskin, OSHA
Directorate of Standards and Guidance, Department of Labor, Washington,
DC 20210, telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On Tuesday, November 12, 2019, the
Department of Transportation (DOT), Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration (PHMSA) will conduct a public meeting (See 84 FR
11865, 2019-05892) to discuss proposals in preparation for the 56th
session of the United Nations Sub-Committee of Experts on the Transport
of Dangerous Goods (UNSCE TDG) to be held December 2 through December
11, 2019, in Geneva, Switzerland. During this meeting, PHMSA is also
requesting comments relative to potential new work items that may be
considered for inclusion in its international agenda. PHMSA will also
provide an update on recent actions to enhance transparency and
stakeholder interaction through improvements to the international
standards portion of its website.

The OSHA Meeting

    OSHA is hosting an open informal public meeting of the U.S.
Interagency GHS Coordinating Group to provide interested groups and
individuals with an update on GHS-related issues and an opportunity to
express their views orally and in writing for consideration in
developing U.S. Government positions for the upcoming UNSCEGHS meeting.
    General topics on the agenda include:

 Review of Working Papers
 Correspondence Group updates
 Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC) update

    Information on the work of the UNSCEGHS including meeting agendas,
reports, and documents from previous sessions can be found on the
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Transport
Division website located at the following web address: http://www.unece.org/trans/danger/publi/ghs/ghs_welcome_e.html.
    The UNSCEGHS bases its decisions on Working Papers. The Working
Papers for the 38th session of the UNSCEGHS are located at: https://www.unece.org/fr/trans/main/dgdb/dgsubc4/c42019.html.
    Informal Papers submitted to the UNSCEGHS provide information for
the Sub-Committee and are used either as a mechanism to provide
information to the Sub-Committee or as the basis for future Working
Papers. Informal Papers for the 38th session of the UNSCEGHS are
located at: https://www.unece.org/fr/trans/main/dgdb/dgsubc4/c4inf38.html.

The PHMSA Meeting

    The Federal Register notice and additional detailed information
relating to PHMSA's public meeting will be available upon publication
at: http://www.regulations.gov (Docket No. PHMSA-2018-0113, Notice No.
2018-23), and on the PHMSA website at: https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/international-program/international-program-overview.
    The primary purpose of PHMSA's meeting is to prepare for the 56th
session of the UNSCE TDG. This session of the UNSCE will consider
proposals for the 21st Revised Edition of the United Nations
Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (Model
Regulations), which may be implemented into relevant domestic,
regional, and international regulations from January 1, 2021. Copies of
working documents, informal documents, and the meeting agenda may be
obtained from the United Nations (UN) Transport Division's website at:
https://www.unece.org/trans/main/dgdb/dgsubc3/c32019.html and https://www.unece.org/trans/main/dgdb/dgsubc3/c3inf56.html.
    During this meeting, PHMSA is also soliciting input relative to
preparing for the 56th session of the UNSCE TDG as well as potential
new work items which may be considered for inclusion in its
international agenda. Following the 56th session of the UNSCE TDG, a
copy of the Sub-Committee's report will be available at the UN
Transport Division's website at: http://www.unece.org/trans/main/dgdb/dgsubc3/c3rep.html.
    Additional information regarding the UNSCE TDG and related matters
can be found on PHMSA's website at: https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/international-program/international-program-overview.

Authority and Signature

    Loren Sweatt, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Occupational
Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Labor, authorized the preparation
of this notice under the authority granted by sections 4, 6, and 8 of
the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 653, 655,
657), and Secretary's Order 1-2012 (77 FR 3912), (Jan. 25, 2012).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on October 28, 2019.
Loren Sweatt,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety
and Health.
[FR Doc. 2019-24084 Filed 11-4-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


California and Idaho Irrigation Canal Tour for Acrolein

(Meeting Summaries)

Acrolein is an aquatic herbicide used to control various weed species in
irrigation conveyance systems, primarily in the West, where off-farm
sources for irrigation water are well developed and important to
agriculture.  The EPA risk assessment and risk management team for
acrolein traveled to California and Idaho to discuss the use of acrolein
and to gain a better understanding of the use and need for this
chemical.

California Air Resources Board Meeting- (4/9/08)

Attendees:

CA Air Resources Board (ARB)

CA Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR)

US EPA Office of Pesticide Programs (HQ/OPP)

US EPA Region 9

On Wednesday, April 9, 2008, personnel from the Agency (SRRD, HED, EFED
and BEAD) traveled to Sacramento, CA to meet with representatives from
the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and California Department of
Pesticide Regulation (DPR) to discuss three recent air quality studies
measuring acrolein in and around irrigation canals.  CARB conducts
ambient air monitoring in California to assess air pollution exposures
to citizens.  CARB recently developed a method for measuring acrolein
concentrations in air from automobile/diesel exhaust, manufacturing and
forest fires.   DPR requested that CARB measure air concentrations of
acrolein resulting from herbicide applications to irrigation canals.

Two of the CARB studies were cited in the Acrolein Human Health Risk
Assessment and showed canal side air concentrations above the EPA’s
level of concern.  CARB personnel presented the results of the third
study along with aerial photographs showing the proximity of residential
areas to canals.    It was interesting to note that in one of the air
monitoring studies conducted, elevated levels of acrolein were detected
at a significance distance downstream from the original application
site.  The distance traveled by the “slug”, which is volume of
treated water that moves downstream within the canal, should have
allowed the acrolein to dissipate along the way.  Confounding factors
such as nearby diesel exhaust may have contributed to these high levels.

HQ EPA (OPP), CARB and DPR personnel had an interesting discussion
regarding endpoints.  OPP’s endpoint is an irritation endpoint based
on a human study.   DPR’s endpoint is similar, but lower than OPP’s.
 Cal EPA is also looking at acrolein as a possible ozone depleting
chemical within the region; more specifically in the San Joaquin Valley.

California Department of Pesticide Regulation and County Agricultural
Commissioners Meeting- (4/9/08)

Attendees:

Syed M. Ali- CA State Water Resources Control Board

Megan Bloodworth, Jose Bueno, Ada Ann Scott- CA Department of Pesticide
Regulation

Eric Smith, Rick Strider- CA Department of Pesticide Regulation
(Enforcement)

Linda O’Connell- CA Department of Pesticide Regulation (Worker Safety)

Randy Segawa- CA Department of Pesticide Regulation (Environmental
Monitoring)

David Robinson, Sean Runyon- Merced County Ag. Commissioners Office

Jerry Prieto, Jr., Karen Francone- Fresno County Ag. Commissioners
Office

R David Jones, Kris Garber, Becky Daiss, John Pates, Laura Parsons,
Derek Berwald- US EPA Office of Pesticide Programs (HQ/OPP)

Patti TenBrook, Cindy Wire- US EPA (Region 9)

Marilou S. Lagasca- Kern County Agricultural Commissioner

On Wednesday, April 9, 2008, personnel from the Agency (SRRD, HED, EFED
and BEAD) traveled to Merced, CA to meet with representatives from
several County Agricultural Commissioner offices to discuss the use of
acrolein in and around irrigation canals.

The County Agricultural Commissioner’s role is to enforce the
pesticide label restrictions on a local level.  As part of this role,
they are responsible for granting applications for restricted use
pesticides.  They also collect agricultural information and incident
data, which is then entered into a database.  This allows them a better
understanding of sensitive areas within their local jurisdiction in the
event that an application of a pesticide needs to take place.  This
involves a listing of species, such as endangered species, within the
proposed application site where an application of acrolein would not be
permissible.

When granting applications for restricted use pesticides, such as
acrolein, a Notice of Intent (NOI) must be submitted to the county
office and a pre-site inspection completed before an application can be
approved.  For sensitive sites, such as schools, buffer zones have been
established for certain counties and are determined independently by
each county commissioner.  Such is the case for restricted use
pesticides in Kern and Fresno County where there is an 1/8 mile buffer
zone in place.  In regards to the application, there is always an
official on site to observe and make certain that the application is
made at the requested site.  Additionally, agricultural commissioners
can also regulate to disallow an application such as along a public
right-of-way.

From 1983-2006 there have been 14 illnesses reported from the use of
acrolein.  Incident data has also shown that there have been reports of
some fish kills.  One instance happened in northern CA where ornamental
fish were killed, but the incident could have been avoided if the farmer
had heeded the warning/notice from the county that acrolein applications
were taking place.  Another instance involved a leaky gate where
acrolein was allowed to flow into a natural body of water resulting in
fish kills.  However, it should be noted that organic farmers and others
are notified prior to an application of acrolein; therefore, it is up to
the discretion of the irrigation district and farmers whether to take
water or not during this time period.

Seasonal distribution of water within the canal ends @July 31st, whereby
the use of groundwater wells is the common practice to deliver the
necessary remaining water to canal customers for their agricultural
needs.

California Acrolein Tour Irrigation Districts Meeting- (4/9/08)

Attendees:

Wes Croxen- Baker Petrolite

David Weisenberger- Banta-Carbona Irrigation District

R David Jones, Laura Parsons, Derek Berwald, Kris Garber, John Pates,
Becky Daiss- US EPA Office of Pesticide Programs (HQ/OPP)

Patti TenBrook, Cindy Wire- US EPA Region 9

John Mallyon- James Irrigation District

Terry Sutton, Sheridan Nicholas- Kern Delta Water District

Bob Acker, Tom Valenta- Merced Irrigation District

Ed Tobias, Walt Ward, Michael Niemi- Modesto Irrigation District

Kevin King- Oakdale Irrigation District

Yates Brooks, Ildo Martins- San Luis Water District

Jim Atherstone, Jeff Shields- South San Joaquin Irrigation District

Debbie Liebersbach, Keith Larson- Turlock Irrigation District

On Wednesday, April 9, 2008, personnel from the Agency (SRRD, HED, EFED
and BEAD) traveled to Modesto, CA to meet with managers from several
California Irrigation Districts to discuss enforcement issues, general
use practices, alternative use options and view a typical irrigation
canal.

Irrigation districts managers are responsible for managing the districts
where applications are made.  When applications are being made, signs
are placed in the general area where acrolein is being applied in the
canal to let any unexpected passerby know to stay clear of the area.
The majority of canals are located on private property, but contain
rights-of-ways to allow access to the canals for maintenance purposes
and are considered off-limits to the public.  No other postings are made
on the canals, but advisories are listed in the paper to warn of
upcoming applications.  Also, many of the canal systems are located in
close proximity to residential establishments.  However, the Agency was
informed that no acrolein applications are made near these types of
settings (dwellings).

Since Sago pond weed is a common problem within the canal system,
acrolein is the preferred chemical of choice. Only a few other chemicals
can be used as aquatic herbicides within the irrigation canal system,
such as xylene, but offer little long term help, require higher rates of
application, or are more toxic than acrolein.  Chaining is another
alternative but is not a suitable method due to the expense in labor and
equipment costs as well as the risk of accidental injury from overturned
tractors and/or trucks.  The vastness of the canal system makes this
practice inefficient.

After having the opportunity of viewing one of the canals, it was quite
evident how important the conveyance system is to the agricultural
community.  Still, there remain many questions as to how to adequately
address bystander protection.

Boise Project Board of Control Meeting- (4/10/08)

Attendees:

Lynn Harmon- American Falls District

Dale Carpenter- Baker Petrolite

Dennis Heaps- Black Canyon Irrigation District

Bob Carter, Tim Page, Paul J. Deveau- Boise Project Board of Control

Dirk Helder, Kris Garber, Derek Berwald, Laura Parsons, R David Jones,
John Pates, Becky Daiss- US EPA Office of Pesticide Programs (HQ/OPP)

Sandy Halstead- US EPA Region 10

Bob Spencer- Idaho State Department of Agriculture

Norm Semanko- Idaho Water Users Association

John P. Anderson- Meridian Irrigation District

Billy Thompson, Michael Knight- Minidoka Irrigation District

John P. Anderson- Nampa Irrigation District

Ted Diehl, Larry Pennington- North Side Canal Company

Brian Olmstead- Twin Falls Canal Company

On Thursday, April 10, 2008, personnel from the Agency (SRRD, HED, EFED
and BEAD) traveled to Boise, ID to meet with irrigation district
personnel from across Idaho to discuss various weed control methods,
view irrigation water delivery systems and observe a mock application of
acrolein.

Discussions between the Agency and the irrigation personnel enabled a
more in-depth understanding of canal irrigation methods as well as
acrolein application and chemical management.  Over 750,000 of 2.5
million acres in Idaho are for agricultural use and part of the canal
conveyance system.  Acrolein is a vital tool for keeping the canals at
an optimum flow rate in order to deliver necessary water to farmers on
the lower end of the canal system.

Irrigation personnel discussed several various methods of aquatic weed
control and explained the challenges for each method.  Shading is
another method that was contemplated for the purpose of weed control,
but it was agreed that the practice wouldn’t be feasible or work in
respect to the vastness of the conveyance system.  The idea of
introducing grass carp into the canal as a form of weed control was also
considered, but it was deemed to be labor intensive and costly.  The
Boise Project Board of Control also demonstrated the method of bank
thinning with the use of machinery that trimmed weeds from the canal
bank in an effort to control overgrowth.  However, it too is costly and
time consuming.  Interestingly, it was reported that the Twin Falls
Canal Co., in one year, uses the chaining method (basically a form of
dredging) on 1,500 miles of canal.  This process takes around the year
work to accomplish and is costly to maintain on a limited budget. In the
past, this method was accomplished by the use of horses up until 1980.

Copper compounds can be used for algal control, and used in between
acrolein applications, but are not effective for weed control such as
Sago Pond Weed or American Pond Weed on a regular basis.  Xylene is
sometimes used but not preferred due to the necessary amounts needed for
application purposes.  Therefore, acrolein is almost exclusively the
chemical of choice due to its overall effectiveness.  The day also
included a mock application of acrolein so that EPA personnel could see
the safety precautions taken with applications.   Different stops of the
tour were the point at which the Boise River is diverted into the
irrigation system and the end of the canal system where the water flows
into a protected wetland.   The Idaho managers have many years of
experience with aquatic weed control and were generous with their time
and knowledge of the irrigation system in Idaho.


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 230 (Tuesday, December 1, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75162-75163]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30469]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Safety Advisory 2015-06]

Locomotive Alerters Resetting Without Direct Engineer Action

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT)

ACTION: Notice of Safety Advisory.

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

SUMMARY: FRA is issuing Safety Advisory 2015-06 to notify freight
railroads of the circumstances of a head-on collision at Hoxie, AR, and
the risks automated inputs that reset alerter warning timing cycles
pose. A small number of Union Pacific Railroad (UP) locomotives were
equipped with alerters that the horn sequencer reset without direct
engineer action, reducing the alerters' effectiveness. UP has
appropriately modified its locomotives to resolve the issue and FRA is
not aware of any other locomotives equipped with alerters that
automatically reset without direct engineer action. However, all
freight railroads should review the operation of their locomotives
equipped with alerters, and modify them as necessary, to ensure no
system resets the alerter warning timing cycle without direct engineer
action.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Gary Fairbanks, Staff Director,
Motive Power and Equipment Division, Office of Railroad Safety, FRA,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER>; or
Mr. Michael Masci, Trial Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, FRA, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background, Including Accident Summary and Regulatory Context

Locomotive Alerter Functioning

    A locomotive alerter is a safety feature installed on a locomotive
to ensure the locomotive engineer remains alert while operating the
locomotive. The alerter monitors the engineer's interactions with the
locomotive and initially produces an alarm in the cab when no control
actions are taken to reset the alerter warning timing cycle within a
certain length of time. Because over-the-road locomotive operations
often do not require frequent engineer actions (control inputs),
alerter systems are also equipped with a manual reset button that
allows the engineer to reset the warning timing cycle directly. If no
control action or manual reset occurs after the alarm sounds, the
alerter system will initiate a penalty brake application and reduce
locomotive power to idle to stop the locomotive.
    Horn activation is a locomotive control action that will reset the
alerter warning timing cycle, but when automated (using a horn
sequencer) it can also interfere with the alerter's normal
functionality. On many locomotives, there are two distinct ways to
activate the horn: (1) During ordinary operation, the engineer holds a
manual horn controller in the ``on'' position to activate it, and then
releases the controller to silence it; and (2) when approaching a
crossing, the engineer activates a separate switch (often a foot pedal)
to initiate an automatic horn sequencer (sounding the long-long-short-
long sequence FRA's regulations require for public highway-rail grade
crossings, see Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 222.21(a)).
The simple presence of a horn sequencer is not a safety issue. The horn
sequencer is a convenient tool, because of the frequent need to sound
the long-long-short-long horn sequence for public highway-rail grade
crossings. However, when the horn sequencer enables the alerter warning
timing cycle to reset without direct engineer action, it acts to delay
the alerter's safety functionality and reduce its effectiveness, which
could have serious safety consequences.

Accident Summary and Testing

    The head-on collision at Hoxie highlights the importance of this
issue.\1\ On August 17, 2014, at approximately 2:28 a.m. (CDT), a
southbound UP freight train passed an approach and then a stop
indication and collided with a northbound UP freight train while
transitioning from double-main track to single-main track at Control
Point Y 229 on the UP Hoxie Subdivision in Hoxie. The collision
resulted in two crewmember fatalities. The event recorder on the lead
southbound locomotive was destroyed, but the event recorder and a
camera on a trailing locomotive enabled the National Transportation
Safety Board (NTSB) to recreate certain key events leading up to the
moment of impact. Four minutes and 53 seconds before impact, the
engineer activated the horn sequencer, which continued to cycle for 4
minutes and 6 seconds, at which time he deactivated it after passing a
grade crossing at Hickory (Milepost (MP) 227.84)). During the time the
horn sequencer was operating, the engineer made one throttle change,
but took no action after passing an approach signal at MP 227.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This section provides a brief summary of the circumstances
surrounding the collision, based on the NTSB and FRA preliminary
findings to date. The probable cause and contributing factors, if
any, have not yet been established. Therefore, nothing in this
safety advisory is intended to attribute a cause to this incident,
or place responsibility for this accident on the acts or omissions
of any person or entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given the recorded speed of the train, there were two intervals
during horn sequencer operation when the alerter could have sounded,
alerted the crew, and initiated a penalty brake application if no
response was given. The evidence available does not rule out the
possibility that the engineer was manually resetting the alerter on the
lead locomotive. However, if the locomotive was set up the same as the
trailing locomotive, which is likely, the alerter would not have
reached its intended timing cycle limit before the actual impact,
regardless whether the automatic activation of the horn sequencer reset
the timing cycle. The interval from deactivation of the horn sequencer
to impact was 44 seconds, or 9 seconds shorter than the alerter warning
timing cycle interval of 53 seconds at the impact speed of 45 mph, so
no alarm or penalty brake application could have occurred in this
interval.
    FRA cannot determine whether an alerter activation would have
prevented the Hoxie collision. Yet, if the alerter had alarmed during
the minutes leading up to the collision, it could have provided an
opportunity to prevent or mitigate this accident. FRA tests of another
locomotive in the same series verified that the horn sequencer
installed in these locomotives reset the alerter warning timing cycle
after each sounding of the horn, even though all but the first horn
blast were initiated automatically. This series of 40 locomotives,
which were built over 20 years ago, were factory-equipped with a stand-
alone horn sequencer, wired to reset the alerter with every sounding of
the horn, including the sounding of the horn by the horn sequencer.
    UP has appropriately modified this series of locomotives to address
this issue. FRA did not specifically regulate the manner of the
alerter's interaction with the horn sequencer when the locomotives were
manufactured. As discussed below, freight locomotives of

this age will not fall under FRA's alerter regulations until January 1,
2017.

FRA Regulations

    FRA safety regulations addressing alerters on freight locomotives
are found at 49 CFR 229.140. See 77 FR 21312 (April 9, 2012). Section
229.140 requires all controlling locomotives that are placed in service
for the first time on or after June 10, 2013, and operated at speeds in
excess of 25 mph to be equipped with an alerter. This section also
requires all controlling locomotives operated at speeds in excess of 25
mph on or after January 1, 2017, to be equipped with an alerter,
regardless of when they were first placed in service.
    This section prohibits automatic systems from resetting the
locomotive alerter. Specifically, 49 CFR 229.140(b)(3) requires
movement of the engineer's horn activation handle to reset the alerter
warning timing cycle. Using a horn sequencer to reset the alerter with
each sounding of the horn (one for each of the long-long-short-long
sequence) does not satisfy 49 CFR 229.140(b)(3), because all but the
first horn blast are initiated automatically. This section requires
engineers to take direct action, either by operation of certain
controls or actuation of the manual reset, to restart the alerter
warning timing cycle. Further, under 49 CFR 229.140(e), the alerter
must be functioning and operating as intended when the locomotive is
used. FRA addresses failures to comply with these regulatory
requirements through inspections and enforcement activities.
    Recommended Action: In light of the discussion above, and because
many older locomotives, including locomotives from smaller
manufacturers and remanufacturers are still in service, FRA recommends
that all freight railroads check the operation of their locomotives
equipped with alerters to ensure that no system resets the alerter
warning timing cycle without direct engineer action. This review should
include, but not be limited to, the operation of horn sequencer
circuitry, if equipped. Railroads should modify any such systems they
find to ensure that no system interferes with the alerter warning
timing cycle. In particular, FRA recommends that railroads that may
have installed alerters prior to June 10, 2013, review the design of
those systems and modify them as necessary, before January 1, 2017, to
ensure safety and compliance with 49 CFR 229.140(b)(3).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 25, 2015.
Patrick T. Warren,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety.
[FR Doc. 2015-30469 Filed 11-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 247 (Tuesday, December 24, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77790-77791]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30596]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Petition for Exemption From the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard; General Motors Corporation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full General Motors Corporation's (GM)
petition for an exemption of the Cadillac SRX vehicle line in
accordance with 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard. This petition is granted because the agency has
determined that the antitheft device to be placed on the line as
standard equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and
deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking
requirements of 49 CFR Part 541, Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard (Theft Prevention Standard).

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2015 model year (MY).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah Mazyck, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy, and Consumer Standards, NHTSA, W43-
443, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Mazyck's
phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Her fax number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated August 16, 2013, GM
requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft
Prevention Standard for the Cadillac SRX vehicle line beginning with MY
2015. The petition requested an exemption from parts-marking pursuant
to 49 CFR 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard, based
on the installation of an antitheft device as standard equipment for
the entire vehicle line.
    Under 49 CFR Part 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to
grant an exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its
petition, GM provided a detailed description and diagram of the
identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft
device for the Cadillac SRX vehicle line. GM will install the PASS-Key
III+ antitheft device as standard equipment on the vehicle line. The
PASS-Key III+ is a passive, transponder-based, electronic immobilizer
device. The major components of the device consist of the PASS-Key III+
controller module, engine control module, electronically-coded ignition
key, radio frequency receiver and passive antenna module. GM stated
that the device will provide protection against unauthorized use (i.e.,
starting and engine fueling), but will not provide any visible or
audible indication of unauthorized vehicle entry (i.e., flashing lights
or horn alarm). GM's submission is considered a complete petition as
required by 49 CFR 543.7 in that it meets the general requirements
contained in 543.5 and the specific content requirements of 543.6.
    The PASS-Key III+ device is designed to be active at all times
without direct intervention by the vehicle operator. The device is
fully armed immediately after the ignition has been turned off and the
key removed.
    GM stated that the PASS-Key III+ uses a special ignition key and
decoder module. The ignition key contains electronics molded into the
key head, providing billions of possible electronic combinations. The
electronics receive energy and data from the antenna module. Upon
receipt of the data, the key will calculate a response to the data
using an internal encryption algorithm and transmit the response back
to the vehicle. The antenna module translates the radio frequency
signal received from the key into a digital signal and passes the
signal on to the controller module. The controller module compares the
received response to an internally calculated value. If the values
match, the key is recognized as valid and a password is then
transmitted through a serial data link to the engine control module to
enable fueling and vehicle starting. A secondary data challenge and
response process using another encryption algorithm must be validated
by the engine controller to allow continued operation. If an invalid
key code is received, the PASS-Key III+ controller module will send a
``Disable Password'' to the engine control module and starting,
ignition, and fuel will be inhibited.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, GM
provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed
device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device, GM
conducted tests based on its own specified standards. GM provided
information on the specific tests it uses to validate the integrity,
durability and reliability of the PASS-Key III+ device and believes
that the device is reliable and durable since the components must
operate as designed after each test. GM also stated that the design and
assembly processes of the PASS-Key III+ subsystem and components are
validated for 10 years of vehicle life and 150,000 miles of
performance.
    GM stated that the PASS-Key III+ device has been designed to
enhance the functionality and theft protection provided by its first,
second and third generation PASS-Key, PASS-Key II, and PASS-Key III
devices. GM also referenced data provided by the American Automobile
Manufacturers Association (AAMA) in support of the effectiveness of
GM's PASS-Key devices in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft.
Specifically, GM stated that the AAMA's comments referencing the
agency's Preliminary Report on ``Auto Theft and Recovery Effects of the
Anti-Car Theft Act of 1992 and the Motor Vehicle Theft Law Enforcement
Act of 1984'', (Docket 97-042; Notice 1), showed that between MYs 1987
and 1993, the Chevrolet Camaro and Pontiac Firebird vehicle lines
experienced a significant theft rate reduction after installation of a
Pass-Key like antitheft device as standard equipment on the vehicle
lines.
    GM also noted that theft data have indicated a decline in theft
rates for vehicle lines equipped with comparable devices that have
received full exemptions from the parts-marking requirements. GM stated
that the theft data, as provided by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation's National Crime Information Center and compiled by the
agency, show that theft rates are lower for exempted GM models equipped
with the PASS-Key like systems than the theft rates for earlier models
with similar appearance and construction that were parts-marked. Based
on the performance of the PASS-Key, PASS-Key II, and PASS-Key III
devices on other GM models, and the advanced technology utilized in
PASS-Key III+, GM believes that the PASS-Key III+ device will be more
effective in deterring theft than the parts-marking requirements of 49
CFR Part 541.
    Additionally, GM stated that the PASS-Key III+ is installed as
standard equipment on the Cadillac CTS vehicle line. GM informed the
agency that its Cadillac CTS vehicle line has been equipped with the
device since introduction of its MY 2003 vehicles. GM was granted an
exemption from the parts-marking requirements by the agency for the
Cadillac CTS vehicle line beginning with the 2011 MY (See 74 FR

62385, November 27, 2009). The average theft rate for the Cadillac CTS
vehicle line, based on NHTSA's theft data, using 3 MYs theft data (MYs
2009-Preliminary 2011) is 1.3508.
    GM further stated that it believes that PASS-Key III+ devices will
be more effective in deterring theft than the parts-marking
requirements and that the agency should find that inclusion of the
PASS-Key III+ device on the Cadillac SRX vehicle line is sufficient to
qualify it for full exemption from the parts-marking requirements.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants
a petition for exemption from the parts-marking requirements of Part
541, either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of Part 541. The agency
finds that GM has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device for the Cadillac SRX vehicle line is likely to be as
effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance
with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.
This conclusion is based on the information GM provided about its
device.
    The agency concludes that the device will provide four of the five
types of performance listed in Sec.  543.6(a)(3): promoting activation;
preventing defeat or circumvention of the device by unauthorized
persons; preventing operation of the vehicle by unauthorized entrants;
and ensuring the reliability and durability of the device.
    GM's proposed device lacks an audible or visible alarm. Therefore,
this device cannot perform one of the functions listed in 49 CFR Part
543.6(a)(3), that is, to call attention to unauthorized attempts to
enter or move the vehicle. Based on comparison of the reduction in the
theft rates of Chevrolet Corvettes using a passive antitheft device
along with an audible/visible alarm system to the reduction in theft
rates for the Chevrolet Camaro and the Pontiac Firebird models equipped
with a passive antitheft device without an alarm, GM finds that the
lack of an alarm or attention-attracting device does not compromise the
theft deterrent performance of a device such as the PASS-Key III+
device. In these instances, the agency has concluded that the lack of
an audible or visible alarm has not prevented these antitheft devices
from being effective protection against theft.
    Based on the evidence submitted by GM, the agency believes that the
antitheft device for the Cadillac SRX vehicle line is likely to be as
effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance
with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full GM's
petition for exemption for the Cadillac SRX vehicle line from the
parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR Part 541, beginning with the 2015
model year vehicles. The agency notes that 49 CFR Part 541, Appendix A-
1, identifies those lines that are exempted from the Theft Prevention
Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR part 543.7(f) contains
publication requirements incident to the disposition of all Part 543
petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of future product
nameplates, the beginning model year for which the petition is granted
and a general description of the antitheft device is necessary in order
to notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle lines exempted from
the parts marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.
    If GM decides not to use the exemption for this line, it must
formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line must
be fully marked according to the requirements under 49 CFR parts 541.5
and 541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if GM wishes in the future to modify the device on
which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit a
petition to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d) states that a Part 543
exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted under
this part and equipped with the antitheft device on which the line's
exemption is based. Further, Part 543.9(c)(2) provides for the
submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use of
an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in
that exemption.''
    The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that Part
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself.
The agency did not intend in drafting Part 543 to require the
submission of a modification petition for every change to the
components or design of an antitheft device. The significance of many
such changes could be de minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the
manufacturer contemplates making any changes, the effects of which
might be characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency
before preparing and submitting a petition to modify.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR
1.50.

Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2013-30596 Filed 12-23-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 118 (Friday, June 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 35345]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15106]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Effectiveness of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status

Oak Grove Management Company LLC........................     EG15-58-000
Sandow Power Company LLC................................     EG15-59-000
Solar Star Colorado III, LLC............................     EG15-60-000
Bear Mountain Limited...................................     EG15-61-000
Chalk Cliff Limited.....................................     EG15-62-000
McKittrick Limited......................................     EG15-63-000
Live Oak Limited........................................     EG15-64-000
NTE Carolinas, LLC......................................     EG15-65-000
NTE Ohio, LLC...........................................     EG15-66-000
Arbuckle Mountain Wind Farm LLC.........................     EG15-67-000
Waverly Wind Farm LLC...................................     EG15-68-000
Benson Power, LLC.......................................     EG15-69-000
CPV Biomass Holdings, LLC...............................     EG15-70-000

    Take notice that during the month of May 2015, the status of the
above-captioned entities as Exempt Wholesale Generators became
effective by operation of the Commission's regulations. 18 CFR
366.7(a).

    Dated: June 15, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-15106 Filed 6-18-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P