[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 24, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17821-17822]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08479]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 5670-001]

San Diego County Water Authority; Notice of Application Accepted
for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, Protests,
Recommendations, and Terms and Conditions

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Amendment of Conduit Exemption.
    b. Project No.: 5670-001.
    c. Date filed: April 3, 2018.
    d. Applicant: San Diego County Water Authority.
    e. Name of Project: Alvarado Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: The project is located within Alvarado Water Treatment
Plant in the city of San Diego, San Diego County, California. The land
on which all the project facilities are located is owned by the
applicant.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Brent Fountain, Engineer, 4677 Overland
Avenue, San Diego, California 92123, phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Christopher Chaney,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
[email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing responsive documents: Due to the small size
of the proposed project, as well as the resource agency consultation
letters filed with the application, the 60-day timeframe specified in
18 CFR 4.34(b) for filing all comments, motions to intervene, protests,
recommendations, terms and conditions, and prescriptions is shortened
to 30 days from the issuance date of this notice. All reply comments
must be filed with the Commission within 45 days from the issuance date
of this notice.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, and protests using the Commission's
eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without
prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact
information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact
FERC Online Support at [email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (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-5670-001.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person on the official service list for the
project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, it must also serve a
copy of the document on that resource agency.
    k. Description of Project: The proposed amendment consists of the
rehabilitation of the existing hydroelectric facility by: (1) Replacing
the two existing, 1-megawatt (MW) turbine/generating units with a
single, 1.7 MW-rated turbine/generating unit, switchgear, and generator
protection panels; and (2) installing a flow control bypass line to
provide flow to the water treatment plant when the project is offline.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE, Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed on
the Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number, P-5670, in the docket number
field to access the document. You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of
new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects.
For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
[email protected], for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
and .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
deadline date for the particular application.
    n. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title COMMENTS, PROTEST, MOTION TO
INTERVENE, REPLY COMMENTS, RECOMMENDATIONS, TERMS AND CONDITIONS, or
PRESCRIPTIONS; (2) set forth in the heading, the name of the applicant
and the project number of the application to which the filing responds;
(3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person
protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the
requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions
to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary basis and
otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may
obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of
any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each
representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application. If an intervener files comments or documents

with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect
the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also
serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all
other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by
proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by
the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b)
and 385.2010.

    Dated: April 18, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-08479 Filed 4-23-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 3, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31054-31055]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14268]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2018-0621]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone: Red, White and Tahoe Blue Fireworks, Incline
Village, NV

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone for Red, White
and Tahoe Blue Fireworks display in the Captain of the Port, San
Francisco area of responsibility during the dates and times noted
below. This action is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels,
spectators and participants from hazards associated with fireworks.
During the enforcement period, unauthorized persons or vessels are
prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring in the
safety zone, unless authorized by the Patrol Commander (PATCOM).

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.1191, Table 1, Item number 19,
will be enforced from 7:30 a.m. on July 3, 2018 through 10:30 p.m. on
July, 4, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notice of enforcement, call or email Lieutenant Junior Grade Emily
Rowan, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Francisco; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>
or email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce a safety zone
during the loading and transit of the fireworks support pontoon vessel
and fireworks barge, until completion of the fireworks display. From
7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. on July 3, 2018, the fireworks support pontoon
vessel will be loaded at Ivgid Boat Launch in the vicinity of Incline
Beach, near Incline Village, NV and will transit from Ivgid Boat Launch
to the display location at approximate position 39[deg]14'13'' N,
119[deg]57'01'' W (NAD 83), the safety zone will encompass the
navigable waters around and under the fireworks support pontoon vessel
within a radius of 100 feet. From 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on July 3,
2018 the fireworks barge will be loaded at approximate position
39[deg]14'13'' N, 119[deg]57' 01'' W (NAD 83) where it will remain
until the commencement of the fireworks display. Upon the commencement
of the 18-minute fireworks display, scheduled to start at approximately
9:30 p.m. on July 4, 2018, the safety zone will increase in size to
encompass the navigable waters around and under the fireworks barges
within a radius of 1,000 feet at approximate position 39[deg]14'13'' N,
119[deg]57'01'' W (NAD 83) for the Red, White, and Tahoe Blue
Fireworks, Incline Village, NV in 33 CFR 165.1191, Table 1, Item number
19. This safety zone will be in effect from 7:30 a.m. on July 3, 2018
until 10:30 p.m. on July 4, 2018.
    Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.1191, unauthorized persons or
vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or
anchoring in the safety zone during all applicable effective dates and
times, unless authorized to do so by the PATCOM. Additionally, each
person who receives notice of a lawful order or direction issued by an
official patrol vessel shall obey the order or direction. The PATCOM is
empowered to forbid entry into and control the regulated area. The
PATCOM shall be designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector San
Francisco. The PATCOM may, upon request, allow the transit of
commercial vessels through regulated areas when it is safe to do so.
    This notice of enforcement is issued under authority of 33 CFR
165.1191 and 5 U.S.C. 552 (a). In addition to this notice of
enforcement in the Federal Register, the Coast Guard will provide the
maritime community with extensive advance notification of the safety
zone and its enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners.
    If the Captain of the Port determines that the regulated area need
not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice of
enforcement, a Broadcast Notice to Mariners may be used to grant
general permission to enter the regulated area.

    Dated: June 27, 2018.
Anthony J. Ceraolo,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, San Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2018-14268 Filed 7-2-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 9, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 8827]
[FR Doc No: 2021-02599]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment on Surplus Property Land
Swap and Release at the Jack Edwards National Airport, Gulf Shores,
Alabama

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is being given that the FAA is considering a request
from the Gulf Shores Airport Authority to release and exchange 5 acres of airport property, previously released for non-
aeronautical use, for 5.75 acres of adjacent property to be
used for non-aeronautical business development.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 11, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this notice may be mailed or delivered in
triplicate to the FAA to the following address: Jackson Airports
District Office Attn: Graham Coffelt, Program Manager, 100 West Cross
Street, Suite B Jackson, MS 39208-2307.
    In addition, one copy of any comments submitted to the FAA must be
mailed or delivered to Gulf Shores Airport Authority, Attn: Mr. Scott
Fuller, 3190 Airport Drive Gulf Shores, AL 36542.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Graham Coffelt, Program Manager,
Jackson Airports District Office, 100 West Cross Street, Suite B,
Jackson, MS 39208-2307,<PHONE_NUMBER>. The land release request may be
reviewed in person at this same location.

    Issued in Jackson, Mississippi, on February 3, 2021.
Rans D. Black,
Manager, Jackson Airports District Office, Southern Region.
[FR Doc. 2021-02599 Filed 2-8-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 18 (Thursday, January 27, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4833-4835]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1804]

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

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

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

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 18 / Thursday, January 27, 2011 /
Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0038]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zones; Cruise Ships, Port of San Diego, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR 165.1108, Security
Zones; Cruise Ships, Port of San Diego, California, by providing a
common description of all security zones created by this section to
encompass only navigable waters within a 100 yard radius around any
cruise ship that is located within the San Diego port area landward of
the sea buoys bounding the Port of San Diego. This notice of proposed
rulemaking is necessary to provide for the safety of the cruise ship,
vessels, and users of the waterway. Entry into these security zones
will be prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the
Port (COTP) San Diego, or his designated representative.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before February 28, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2011-0038 using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand Delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or e-mail Commander Michael B. Dolan, Prevention, Coast
Guard Sector San Diego, Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

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

Submitting Comments

    If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking (USCG-2011-0038), indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. You may submit your comments and material
online (via http://www.regulations.gov) or by fax, mail, or hand
delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a
comment online via http://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered
received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment.
If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered
as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the
Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you include your name and
a mailing address, an e-mail address, or a telephone number in the body
of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``submit a comment'' box, which will then become
highlighted in blue. In the ``Document Type'' drop down menu select
``Proposed Rule'' and insert ``USCG-2011-0038'' in the ``Keyword'' box.
Click ``Search'' then click on the balloon shape in the ``Actions''
column. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit
them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable
for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and
would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a
stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all
comments and material received during the comment period and may change
the rule based on your comments.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
click on the ``read comments'' box, which will then become highlighted
in blue. In the ``Keyword'' box insert ``USCG-2011-0038'' and click
``Search.'' Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' in the ``Actions'' column.
You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on
the ground floor of the Department of Transportation West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We have an
agreement with the Department of Transportation to use the Docket
Management Facility.

Privacy Act

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

Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. You may submit a
request for one using one of the four methods specified under
ADDRESSES. Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be
beneficial. If we

determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

Basis and Purpose

    Based on experience with actual security zone enforcement
operations, the COTP San Diego has concluded that a security zone
encompassing all navigable waters, extending from the surface to the
sea floor, within a 100 yard radius around any cruise ship that is
within the San Diego port area inside the sea buoys bounding the Port
of San Diego would provide for the safety of the cruise ship, vessels,
and users of the waterway.

Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a permanent security zone
regulation. The security zones created by this rule will encompass all
navigable waters, extending from the surface to the sea floor, within a
100 yard radius around any cruise ship that is within the San Diego
port area inside the sea buoys bounding the Port of San Diego. These
security zones are necessary to provide for the safety of the cruise
ship, vessels, and users of the waterway. Entry into these zones will
be prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port
(COTP) San Diego, or his designated representative.
    Paragraph (b)(2) of the existing 33 CFR 165.1108 includes reference
to the shore area. The COTP has determined that security zones for
moored cruise ships in San Diego Harbor need not include any shore
area, as passenger terminals used for cruise ship operations are
regulated under regulations in 33 CFR part 105 issued under authority
of the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-295).
The Coast Guard has issued a temporary final rule that suspends Sec.
165.1108 (b)(2) through June 20, 2011, while this rulemaking is
conducted. See 75 FR 82243, December 30, 2010.
    This rule would revise both 33 CFR 165.1108 (b) and (c). In
addition to clarifying the area covered by security zones created by
Sec.  165.1108 (b), this proposed rule would simplify the regulation by
not distinguishing between anchored cruise ships, moored cruise ships
and cruise ships underway. Also, we propose to revise paragraph (c) to
make it clearer that persons and vessels may not enter these security
zones without first obtaining permission of the Captain of the Port San
Diego.

Regulatory Analyses

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
    It is not ``significant'' under the regulatory policies and
procedures of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). We expect the
economic impact of this rule to be so minimal that full Regulatory
Evaluation is unnecessary. Most of the entities likely to be affected
are pleasure craft engaged in recreational activities and sightseeing.
In addition, due to National Security interests, the implementation of
this security zone regulation is necessary for the protection of the
United States and its people. The size of the zones is the minimum
necessary to provide adequate protection for cruise ships.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields,
and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit
or anchor in San Diego Bay within a 100-yard radius of cruise ships
covered by this rule.
    This security zone regulation will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities because vessel traffic
can pass safely around the zones.

Assistance for Small Entities

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

Collection of Information

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

Federalism

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

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

Taking of Private Property

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

Civil Justice Reform

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

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,

Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

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

Energy Effects

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

Technical Standards

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

Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. A preliminary
environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination is
available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. This proposed
rule involves the establishment of security zones. We seek any comments
or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

    2. In Sec.  165.1108, revise paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as
follows:

Sec.  165.1108  Security Zones; Moored Cruise Ships, Port of San Diego,
California.

* * * * *
    (b) Location. The following areas are security zones: All navigable
waters, extending from the surface to the sea floor, within a 100-yard
radius around any cruise ship that is located within the San Diego port
area landward of the sea buoys bounding the Port of San Diego.
    (c) Regulations. Under regulations in 33 CFR part 165, subpart D, a
person or vessel may not enter into or remain in the security zones
created by this section unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of
the Port, San Diego (COTP) or a COTP designated representative. Persons
desiring to transit these security zones may contact the COTP at
telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER> or on VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) to
seek permission to transit the area. If permission is granted, all
persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of the Captain of
the Port or his or her designated representative.
* * * * *

    Dated: January 20, 2011.
T.H. Farris,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2011-1804 Filed 1-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 168 (Wednesday, August 31, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53537-53538]
[FR Doc No: 2022-18833]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Release From Federal Surplus Property and Grant
Assurance Obligations at Francis S. Gabreski Airport (FOK),
Southampton, New York

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of request to release airport land.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to rule and invites public comment on the
application for a release of approximately 0.12 acres of federally
obligated airport property at Francis S. Gabreski Airport, Southampton,
New York, from both the Federal Surplus Property obligations contained
in the July 12, 1972 Quitclaim Deed, and the Grant Assurance
obligations. This acreage is composed of one parcel of land that was
transferred from the United States of America to the County of Suffolk
under the provisions of the Federal Property and Administrative
Services Act of 1949 and the Surplus Property Act of 1944. The release
will allow the airport to enter into a long-term non-aeronautical lease
with the Suffolk County Water Authority (SCWA) for a water booster pump
station. The proposed use of land after the release will be compatible
with the airport and will not interfere with the airport or its
operation.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 30, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Comments on this application may be
submitted to Robert Costa, Federal Aviation Administration, New York
Airports District Office via phone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or at the email
address [email protected]. Comments on this application may also be
mailed or delivered to the FAA at the following address: Evelyn
Martinez, Manager, Federal Aviation Administration, New York Airports
District Office, Federal Register Comment, 1 Aviation Plaza, Jamaica,
New York 11434.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the Wendell H. Ford
Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR 21),
Public Law 106-181 (Apr. 5, 2000; 114 Stat. 61), this notice must be
published in the Federal Register 30 days before the Secretary may
waive any condition imposed on a federally obligated airport by surplus
property conveyance deeds or grant agreements. The following is a brief
overview of the request.
    The County of Suffolk requested a release from surplus property and
grant assurance obligations to allow a land-use change in use for other
than aeronautical purposes of approximately 0.12 acres of airport
property at Francis S. Gabreski Airport. Specifically, the release
request seeks approval to allow for the permanent non-aeronautical use
of the property, a long-term non-aeronautical lease with the Suffolk
County Water Authority (SCWA) for a water booster pump station; and the
release of the 0.12 acres of property, transferred via the
aforementioned Quitclaim Deed, from the National Emergency Use
Provision (NEUP). The NEUP allows the United States of America the
right to make use of the land during any national emergency as declared
by the President or Congress. FAA approval of this request, with
respect to the aforementioned 0.12 acres, is contingent on the
Department of Defense's concurrence that the 0.12 acres is no longer
required for aeronautical purposes.
    The airport will retain ownership of the 0.12 acres and will
receive fair market value rent for the length of the agreement. The
rental income will be devoted to airport operations and capital
projects. The proposed use of the property will not interfere with the
airport or its operation; and will thereby, serve the interests of
civil aviation.

    Issued in Jamaica, New York, on August 24, 2022.
Evelyn Martinez,
Manager, New York Airports District Office.
[FR Doc. 2022-18833 Filed 8-30-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 219 (Wednesday, November 15, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52927-52933]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24688]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0545]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Infant Formula Requirements

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing an
opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain
information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and
to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This
notice invites comments on the information collection provisions of our
infant formula regulations, including infant formula labeling, quality
control procedures, notification requirements, and recordkeeping. The
notice also invites comment on a pilot electronic form that allows
manufacturers of infant formula to submit reports and notifications in
a standardized format.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection
of information by January 16, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before January 16, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
midnight Eastern Time at the end of January 16, 2018. Comments received
by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be
considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service
acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2013-N-0545 for ``Agency Information Collection Activities;
Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Infant Formula Requirements.''
Received comments, those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will
be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as
``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on

https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the Dockets
Management Staff. If you do not wish your name and contact information
to be made publicly available, you can provide this information on the
cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and you must identify
this information as ``confidential.'' Any information marked as
``confidential'' will not be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR
10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more information about
FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September
18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ila S. Mizrachi, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601
Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information,
before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with
this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection
of information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, we invite
comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions,
including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the
accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on respondents, including through the use of
automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of
information technology.
Infant Formula Requirements--21 CFR parts 106 and 107
OMB Control Number 0910-0256--Extension
    Statutory requirements for infant formula under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) are intended to protect the
health of infants and include a number of reporting and recordkeeping
requirements. Among other things, section 412 of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 350a) requires manufacturers of infant formula to establish and
adhere to quality control procedures, notify us when a batch of infant
formula that has left the manufacturers' control may be adulterated or
misbranded, and keep records of distribution. We have issued
regulations to implement the FD&C Act's requirements for infant formula
in parts 106 and 107 (21 CFR parts 106 and 107). We also regulate the
labeling of infant formula under the authority of section 403 of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 343). Under our labeling regulations for infant
formula in part 107, the label of an infant formula must include
nutrient information and directions for use. The purpose of these
labeling requirements is to ensure that consumers have the information
they need to prepare and use infant formula appropriately.
    We have developed an electronic form (Form FDA 3978) that infant
formula manufacturers will be able to use to electronically submit
reports and notifications in a standardized format to FDA.
Manufacturers that prefer to submit paper submissions in a format of
their own choosing will still have the option to do so, however. Form
FDA 3978 prompts a respondent to include reports and notifications in a
standard electronic format and helps the respondent organize their
submission to include only the information needed for our review. Draft
screenshots of Form FDA 3978 and instructions are available for comment
at http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/FoodFacilityRegistration/InfantFormula/default.htm.
    Description of Respondents: Respondents to this information
collection are manufacturers of infant formula.
    We estimate the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                 Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Number of
  Row No.     FD&C Act or 21      Number of     responses per   Total annual    Average  burden     Total hours
                CFR section      respondents     respondent       responses      per  response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1..........  Reports; Section               5              13              65  10...............             650
              412(d) of the
              FD&C Act.
2..........  Notifications;                 1               1               1  4................               4
              Sec.
              106.120(b).
3..........  Reports for                    3               2               6  4................              24
              Exempt Infant
              Formula; Sec.
              107.50(b)(3)
              and (4).
4..........  Notifications                  1               1               1  4................               4
              for Exempt
              Infant
              Formula;Sec.
              107.50(e)(2).
5..........  Requirements for               4               9              36  20...............             720
              Quality Factors
              Growth
              Monitoring
              Study
              Exemption; Sec.
                106.96(c).
6..........  Requirements for               1              34              34  12...............             408
              Quality
              Factors--PER
              Exemption; Sec.
                106.96(g).
7..........  New Infant                     4               9              36  0.50 (30 minutes)              18
              Formula
              Registration;
              Sec.   106.110.
8..........  New Infant                     4               9              36  10...............             360
              Formula
              Submission;
              Sec.   106.120.
                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Total........  ..............  ..............  ..............  .................           2,188
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

    In compiling these estimates, we consulted our records of the
number of infant formula submissions received in the past. All infant
formula submissions may be provided to us in electronic format. The
hours per response reporting estimates are based on our experience with
similar programs and information received from industry.
    We estimate that we will receive 13 reports from 5 manufacturers
annually under section 412(d) of the FD&C Act, for a total annual
response of 65 reports. Each report is estimated to take 10 hours per
response for a total of 650 hours. We also estimate that we receive one
notification under Sec.  106.120(b). The notification is expected to
take 4 hours per response, for a total of 4 hours.
    For exempt infant formula, we estimate that we receive two reports
from three manufacturers annually under Sec.  107.50(b)(3) and (4), for
a total annual response of six reports. Each report is estimated to
take 4 hours per response for a total of 24 hours. We also estimate
that we receive one notification annually under Sec.  107.50(e)(2) and
that the notification takes 4 hours to prepare.
    We estimate that 4 firms submit 36 exemptions annually and that
each exemption will take 20 hours to assemble. Therefore, we calculate
36 exemptions x 20 hours = 720 hours as the estimated burden for Sec.
106.96(c), as presented in row 5 of table 1.
    We estimate that the infant formula industry annually submits 35
Protein Efficiency Ratio (PER) submissions. For the submission of the
PER exemption, we estimate that the infant formula industry submits 34
exemptions per year and that each exemption takes supporting staff 12
hours to prepare. Therefore, we calculate 34 exemptions x 12 hours per
exemption = 408 hours to fulfill the requirements of Sec.  106.96(g),
as shown in row 6 of table 1.
    We estimate that four firms each use one senior scientist or
regulatory affairs professional who needs 30 minutes to gather and
record the required information for an infant formula registration
pursuant to Sec.  106.110. We estimate that the industry annually
registers 35 new infant formulas, or an average of 9 registrations per
firm. Therefore, we calculate the annual burden as 36 registrations x
0.5 hour per registration = 17.5 (rounded to 18) hours, as shown in row
7 of table 1.
    We estimate that four firms each use one senior scientist or
regulatory affairs professional who needs 10 hours to gather and record
information needed for infant formula submissions pursuant to Sec.
106.120. This estimate includes the time needed to gather and record
the information the manufacturer uses to request an exemption under
Sec.  106.91(b)(1)(ii), which provides that the manufacturer includes
the scientific evidence that the manufacturer is relying on to
demonstrate that the stability of the new infant formula will likely
not differ from the stability of formula with similar composition,
processing, and packaging for which there are extensive stability data.
We estimate that 4 firms make submissions for 36 new infant formulas,
or an average of 9 submissions per firm. Therefore, to comply with
Sec.  106.120, we calculate the annual burden as 36 submissions x 10
hours per submission = 360 hours, as shown in row 8 of table 1. Thus,
the total annual reporting burden is 2,188 hours.

                             Table 2--Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden \1\ \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Number of                     Average burden
   Row No.    Activity; 21 CFR     Number of      records per    Total annual          per          Total hours
                   section       recordkeepers   recordkeeper       records       recordkeeping
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...........  Controls to                   21               1              21  1.5 (90 minutes)              32
               prevent
               adulteration
               caused by
               facilities--tes
               ting for
               radiological
               contaminants
               \3\; Sec.
               106.20(f)(3).
2...........  Controls to                   21               1              21  0.08 (5 minutes)               2
               prevent
               adulteration
               caused by
               facilities--rec
               ordkeeping of
               testing for
               radiological
               contaminants\2\
               ; Sec.  Sec.
               106.20(f)(4)
               and
               106.100(f)(1).
3...........  Controls to                    5              52             260  0.08 (5 minutes)              21
               prevent
               adulteration
               caused by
               facilities--tes
               ting for
               bacteriological
               contaminants
               Sec.
               106.20(f)(3).
4...........  Controls to                    5              52             260  0.08 (5 minutes)              21
               prevent
               adulteration
               caused by
               facilities--rec
               ordkeeping of
               testing for
               bacteriological
               contaminants
               Sec.  Sec.
               106.20(f)(4)
               and 106.100(f).
5...........  Controls to                    5              52             260  0.22 (13                      57
               prevent                                                           minutes).
               adulteration by
               equipment or
               utensils; Sec.
               Sec.
               106.30(d) and
               106.100(f)(2).
6...........  Controls to                    5              52             260  0.22 (13                      57
               prevent                                                           minutes).
               adulteration by
               equipment or
               utensils; Sec.
               Sec.
               106.30(e)(3)(ii
               i) and
               106.100(f)(3).
7...........  Controls to                    5              52             260  0.20 (12                      52
               prevent                                                           minutes).
               adulteration by
               equipment or
               utensils; Sec.
               Sec.
               106.30(f) and
               106.100(f)(4).

8...........  Controls to                    5               1               5  520.............           2,600
               prevent
               adulteration
               due to
               automatic
               (mechanical or
               electronic)
               equipment; Sec.
                Sec.
               106.35(c) and
               106.100(f)(5).
9...........  Controls to                    5               2              10  640.............           6,400
               prevent
               adulteration
               due to
               automatic
               (mechanical or
               electronic)
               equipment Sec.
               Sec.
               106.35(c) and
               106.100(f)(5).
10..........  Controls to                    5              52             260  0.17 (10                      44
               prevent                                                           minutes).
               adulteration
               caused by
               ingredients,
               containers, and
               closures; Sec.
               Sec.
               106.40(d) and
               106.100(f)(6).
11..........  Controls to                    5              52             260  0.23 (14                      60
               prevent                                                           minutes).
               adulteration
               during
               manufacturing;
               Sec.  Sec.
               106.50(a)(1)
               and 106.100(e).
12..........  Controls to                    5              52             260  0.25 (15                      65
               prevent                                                           minutes).
               adulteration
               from
               microorganisms;
               Sec.  Sec.
               106.55(d) and
               106.100(e)(5)(i
               i) and (f)(7).
13..........  Controls to                    1              12              12  0.25 (15                       3
               prevent                                                           minutes).
               adulteration
               during
               packaging and
               labeling of
               infant formula;
               Sec.
               106.60(c).
14..........  General quality                4               1               4  2...............               8
               control--testin
               g; Sec.
               106.91(b)(1),
               (2), and (3).
15..........  General quality                4              52             208  0.15 (9 minutes)              31
               control; Sec.
               Sec.
               106.91(b)(1)
               and(d), and
               106.100(e)(5)(i
               ).
16..........  General quality                4              52             208  0.15 (9 minutes)              31
               control; Sec.
               Sec.
               106.91(b)(2)
               and (d), and
               106.100(e)(5)(i
               ).
17..........  General quality                4              52             208  0.15 (9 minutes)              31
               control; Sec.
               Sec.
               106.91(b)(3)
               and (d), and
               106.100(e)(5)(i
               ).
18..........  Audit plans and                5               1               5  8...............              40
               procedures;
               ongoing review
               and updating of
               audits; Sec.
               106.94.
19..........  Audit plans and                5              52             260  4...............           1,040
               procedures --
               regular audits;
               Sec.   106.94.
20..........  Requirements for               1               1               1  16..............              16
               quality factors
               for infant
               formulas--writt
               en study
               report; Sec.
               Sec.
               106.96(b) and
               (d),
               106.100(p)(1)
               and (q)(1), and
               106.121.
21..........  Requirements for             112               6             672  0.50 (30                     336
               quality factors                                                   minutes).
               for infant
               formulas--anthr
               opometric data;
               Sec.  Sec.
               106.96(b)(2)
               and (d), and
               106.100(p)(1).
22..........  Requirements for             112               6             672  0.25 (15                     168
               quality factors                                                   minutes).
               for infant
               formulas--formu
               la intake Sec.
               Sec.
               106.96(b)(3)
               and (d), and
               106.100(p)(1).
23..........  Requirements for             112               6             672  0.08 (5 minutes)              54
               quality factors
               for infant
               formulas--data
               plotting; Sec.
               Sec.
               106.96(b)(4)
               and (d), and
               106.100(p)(1).
24..........  Requirements for             112               6             672  0.08 (5 minutes)              54
               quality factors
               for infant
               formulas--data
               comparison;
               Sec.  Sec.
               106.96(b)(5)
               and (d), and
               106.100(p)(1).

25..........  Requirements for               1               1               1  8...............               8
               quality
               factors--per
               data
               collection;
               Sec.
               106.96(f).
26..........  Requirements for               1               1               1  1...............               1
               quality
               factors--per
               written report;
               Sec.
               106.96(f).
27..........  Records; Sec.                  5              10              50  400.............          20,000
               106.100.
28..........  Records for                    3              10              30  300.............           9,000
               Exempt Infant
               Formula; Sec.
               107.50(c)(3).
                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Total........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ................          40,232
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.
\2\ Where necessary, numbers have been rounded to the nearest whole number.
\3\ This testing only occurs every 4 years.

    We estimate that 21 infant formula plants will test at least every
4 years for radiological contaminants. In addition, we estimate that
collecting water for all testing in Sec.  106.20(f)(3) takes between 1
and 2 hours. We estimate that water collection takes an average of 1.5
hours and that water collection occurs separately for each type of
testing. We estimate that performing the test will take 1.5 hours per
test, every 4 years. Therefore, 1.5 hours per plant x 21 plants = 31.5
(rounded to 32) total hours, every 4 years, as seen in row 1 of table
2. Furthermore, Sec. Sec.  106.20(f)(4) and 106.100(f)(1) require firms
to make and retain records of the frequency and results of water
testing. For the 21 plants that are estimated not to currently test for
radiological contaminants, this burden is estimated to be 5 minutes per
record every 4 years. Therefore, 0.08 hour per record x 21 plants =
1.68 (rounded to 2) hours, every 4 years for the maintenance of records
of radiological testing, as seen on row 2 of table 2.
    We estimate that five infant formula plants will test weekly for
bacteriological contaminants. We estimate that performing the test will
take 5 minutes per test once a week. Annually, this burden is 0.08
hours x 52 weeks = 4.16 hours per year, per plant, and 4.16 hours per
plant x 5 plants = 20.8 (rounded to 21) total annual hours, as seen on
row 3 of table 2. Furthermore, for the five plants that are estimated
to not currently test weekly for bacteriological contaminants, this
burden is estimated to be 5 minutes per record, every week. Therefore,
0.08 hour per record x 52 weeks = 4.16 hours per plant for the
maintenance of records of bacteriological testing. Accordingly, 4.16
hours x 5 plants = 20.8 (rounded to 21) annual hours, as seen on row 4
of table 2.
    Sections 106.30(d) and 106.100(f)(2) require that records of
calibrating certain instruments be made and retained. We estimate that
one senior validation engineer for each of the five plants will need to
spend about 13 minutes per week to satisfy the ongoing calibration
recordkeeping requirements. Therefore, 5 recordkeepers x 52 weeks = 260
records; 260 records x 0.22 hour per record = 57 hours as the annual
burden, as presented in row 5 of table 2.
    Sections 106.30(e)(3)(iii) and 106.100(f)(3)) require the
recordkeeping of the temperatures of each cold storage compartment. We
estimate that five plants will each require one senior validation
engineer about 13 minutes per week of recordkeeping. Therefore, 5
recordkeepers x 52 weeks = 260 records; 260 records x 0.22 hours per
record = 57 hours as the annual burden, as presented in row 6 of table
2.
    Sections 106.30(f) and 106.100(f)(4) require the recordkeeping of
ongoing sanitation efforts. We estimate that five plants will each
require one senior validation engineer about 12 minutes per week of
recordkeeping. Therefore, 5 recordkeepers x 52 weeks = 260 records; 260
records x 0.20 hours per record = 52 hours as the annual burden, as
presented in row 7 of table 2.
    For Sec. Sec.  106.35(c) and 106.100(f)(5), we estimate that one
senior validation engineer per plant needs 10 hours per week of
recordkeeping, with the annual burden for this provision being 520
hours per plant x 5 plants = 2,600 annual hours, as shown in row 8 of
table 2. In addition, an infant formula manufacturer revalidates its
systems when it makes changes to automatic equipment. We estimate that
such changes occur twice a year, and that on each of the two occasions,
a team of four senior validation engineers per plant needs to work full
time for 4 weeks (4 weeks x 40 hours per week = 160 work hours per
person) to provide revalidation of the plant's automated systems
sufficient to comply with this section. The annual burden for four
senior validation engineers each working 160 hours twice a year is
1,280 hours ((160 hours x 2 revalidations) x 4 engineers = 1,280 total
work hours) per plant. Therefore, 640 hours x 5 plants x 2 times per
year = 6,400 hours as the annual burden, as shown on row 9 of table 2.
    Sections 106.40(d) and 106.100(f)(6) require written specifications
for ingredients, containers, and closures. We estimate that one senior
validation engineer per plant needs about 10 minutes a week to fulfill
the recordkeeping requirements. Therefore, 5 recordkeepers x 52 weeks =
260 records and 260 records x 0.17 hour = 44 hours as the annual
burden, as shown in row 10 of table 2.
    We estimate that five plants will change a master manufacturing
order and that one senior validation engineer for each of the five
plants spends about 14 minutes per week on recordkeeping pertaining to
the master manufacturing order, as required by Sec. Sec.  106.50(a)(1)
and 106.100(e). Thus, 5 recordkeepers x 52 weeks = 260 records; 260
records x 0.23 hour = 60 hours as the annual burden, as shown in row 11
of table 2.
    Sections 106.55(d), 106.100(e)(5)(ii), and 106.100(f)(7)) require
recordkeeping of the testing of infant formula for microorganisms. We
estimate that five plants each need one senior validation engineer to
spend 15 minutes per week on recordkeeping pertaining to
microbiological testing. Thus, 5 recordkeepers x 52 weeks = 260
records; 260 records x 0.25 hour per record = 65 hours as the annual
burden, as shown in row 12 of table 2.

    Section 106.60 establishes requirements for the recordkeeping and
labeling of mixed-lot packages of infant formula. Section 106.60(c)
requires infant formula diverters to label infant formula packaging
(such as packing cases) to facilitate product tracing and to keep
specific records of the distribution of these mixed lot cases. We
estimate that one worker needs 15 minutes, once a month (0.25 x 12
months) to accomplish this, for an annual burden of 3 hours, as shown
in row 13 of table 2.
    Sections 106.91(b)(1), (2), and (3) provide ongoing stability
testing requirements. We estimate that the stability testing
requirements has a burden of 2 hours per plant. Therefore, 2 hours x 4
plants = 8 hours as the annual burden to fulfill the testing
requirements, as shown in row 14 of table 2.
    Sections 106.91(d) and 106.100(e)(5)(i) provide for recordkeeping
of tests required under Sec.  106.91(b)(1), (2), and (3). We estimate
that one senior validation engineer per plant will spend about 9
minutes per week of recordkeeping to be in compliance. Thus, 4
recordkeepers x 52 weeks = 208 records; 208 records x 0.15 hour per
record = 31.2 (rounded to 31) hours for the annual burden, as shown in
rows 15, 16, and 17 of table 2.
    We estimate that the ongoing review and updating of audit plans
requires a senior validation engineer 8 hours per year, per plant.
Therefore, 8 hours x 5 plants = 40 hours for the annual burden, as
shown in row 18 of table 2.
    We estimate that a manufacturer chooses to audit once per week. We
estimate each weekly audit requires a senior validation engineer 4
hours, or 52 weeks x 4 hours = 208 hours per plant. Therefore, burden
for updating audit plans is calculated as 208 hours x 5 plants = 1,040
hours for the annual burden, as shown in row 19 of table 2.
    We estimate that, as a result of the regulations, the industry as a
whole performs one additional growth study per year, in accordance with
Sec.  106.96. The regulations require that several pieces of data be
collected and maintained for each infant in the growth study. We
estimate that the data collection associated with the growth study is
assembled into a written report and kept as a record in compliance with
Sec. Sec.  106.96(d) and 106.100(p)(1). Thus, we estimate that one
additional growth study report is generated, and that this report
requires one senior scientist to work 16 hours to compile the data into
a study report. Therefore, one growth study report x 16 hours = 16
hours for the annual burden for compliance with Sec. Sec.  106.96(b)
and (d), 106.100(p)(1) and (q)(1), and 106.121 as shown in row 20 of
table 2.
    A study conducted according to the requirements of Sec.
106.96(b)(2) must include the collection of anthropometric measurements
of physical growth and information on formula intake, and Sec. Sec.
106.96(d) and 106.100(p)(1) require that the anthropometric
measurements be made six times during the growth study. We estimate
that in a growth study of 112 infants, 2 nurses or other health
professionals with similar experience need 15 minutes per infant at
each of the required 6 times to collect and record the required
anthropometric measurements. Therefore, 2 nurses x 0.25 hours = 0.50
hour per infant, per visit, and 0.50 hour x 6 visits = 3 hours per
infant. For 112 infants in the study, 3 hours x 112 infants = 336 hours
for the annual burden, as shown in row 21 of table 2. In addition, we
estimate that one nurse needs 15 minutes per infant to collect and
record the formula intake information. That is, 0.25 hour x 6 visits =
1.5 hour per infant, and 1.5 hour per infant x 112 infants = 168 hours
for the annual burden, as shown in row 22 of table 2.
    Section 106.96(b)(4) requires plotting each infant's anthropometric
measurements on the Centers for Disease Control-recommended World
Health Organization Child Growth Standards. We estimate that it takes 5
minutes per infant to record the anthropometric data on the growth
chart at each study visit. Therefore, 112 infants x 6 data plots = 672
data plots, and 672 data plots x 0.08 hour per comparison = 53.75 hours
(rounded to 54) for the annual burden, as shown in row 23 of table 2.
    Section 106.96(b)(5) requires that data on formula intake by the
test group be compared to the intake of a concurrent control group. We
estimate that one nurse or other health care professional with similar
experience needs 5 minutes per infant for each of the six times
anthropometric data are collected. Therefore, 6 comparisons of data x
112 infants = 672 data comparisons and 672 data comparisons x 0.08 hour
per comparison = 53.75 hours (rounded to 54) for the annual burden, as
shown in row 24 of table 2.
    Section 106.96(f) provides that a manufacturer meets the quality
factor of sufficient biological quality of the protein by establishing
the biological quality of the protein in the infant formula when fed as
the sole source of nutrition using an appropriate modification of the
PER rat bioassay. Under Sec.  106.96(g)(1), a manufacturer of infant
formula may be exempt from this requirement if the manufacturer
requests an exemption and provides assurances, as required under Sec.
106.121, that changes made by the manufacturer to an existing infant
formula are limited to changing the type of packaging. A manufacturer
may also be exempt from this requirement under Sec.  106.100(g)(2), if
the manufacturer requests an exemption and provides assurances, as
required under Sec.  106.121, that demonstrate to FDA's satisfaction
that the change to an existing formula does not affect the
bioavailability of the protein. Finally, a manufacturer of infant
formula may be exempt from this requirement under Sec.  106.96(g)(3) if
the manufacturer requests an exemption and provides assurances, as
required under Sec.  106.121(i), that demonstrate that an alternative
method to the PER that is based on sound scientific principles is
available to show that the formula supports the quality factor for the
biological quality of the protein. We estimate that the infant formula
industry submits a total of 35 PER submissions: 34 exemption requests
and the results of 1 PER study.
    A PER study conducted according to the Association of Analytical
Communities Official Method 960.48 is 28 days in duration. We estimate
that there will be 10 rats in the control and test groups (20 rats
total) and that food consumption and body weight will be measured at
day 0 and at 7-day intervals during the 28-day study period (a total of
5 records per rat). We further estimate that measuring and recording
food consumption and body weight will take 5 minutes per rat.
Therefore, 20 rats x 5 records = 100 records; 100 records x 0.08 hour
minutes per record = 8 hours to fulfill the requirements of Sec.
106.96(f). Further, we estimate that a report based on the PER study
will be generated and that this study report will take a senior
scientist 1 hour to generate. Therefore, a total of 9 hours will be
required to fulfill the requirements for Sec.  106.96(f): 8 hours for
the PER study and data collection, and 1 hour for the development of a
report based on the PER study, as shown in rows 25 and 26 of table 2.
    We estimate that five firms will expend approximately 20,000 hours
per year to fully satisfy the recordkeeping requirements in Sec.
106.100 and that three firms will expend approximately 9,000 hours per
year to fully satisfy the recordkeeping requirements in Sec.
107.50(c)(3). Thus, the total recordkeeping burden is 40,232 hours.

                           Table 3--Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Number of
                                     Number of      disclosures    Total annual   Average burden
         21 CFR section             respondents         per         disclosures   per disclosure    Total hours
                                                    respondent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nutrient labeling; 21 CFR                      5              13              65               8             520
 107.10(a) and 107.20...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
  information.

    We estimate compliance with our labeling requirements in Sec. Sec.
107.10(a) and 107.20 requires 520 hours annually by five manufacturers.

    Dated: November 8, 2017.
Anna K. Abram,
Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning, Legislation, and Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2017-24688 Filed 11-14-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


MEMORANDUM

Subject:	Auto Loan Rates for Use in the OMEGA ICBT

From:		Todd Sherwood, ASD, Office of Transportation and Air Quality

To:		Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), DOCKET EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0827

Date:		November 15, 2016

An Internet search was conducted to determine the average auto loan rates across the United States in recent months. The purpose being to support the loan terms used as inputs to the Benefit-Cost Analysis supporting the Proposed Determination. The search generated a wide variety of results as shown in the attachments. As a result, we chose to use a value of 4.25% for each of three loan periods (4, 5 and 6 year loans).

Attachments


[Federal Register: April 1, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 62)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 16329-16330]
[DOCID:fr01ap10-2]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0928; Airspace Docket No. 09-ASW-28]

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Killeen, TX

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class E airspace for Killeen, TX, adding
additional controlled airspace to accommodate Area Navigation (RNAV)
Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAPs) at the renamed Skylark
Field Airport, Killeen, TX. The FAA is taking this action to enhance
the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) operations at
the airport.

DATES: Effective Date 0901 UTC, June 3, 2010. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR Part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On January 25, 2010, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking to amend Class E airspace for Killeen,
TX, reconfiguring controlled airspace at Skylark Field Airport (75 FR
3877) Docket No. FAA-2009-0928. Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received. Class E airspace
designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9T
signed August 27, 2009, and effective September 15, 2009, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1. The Class E airspace
designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in
the Order.

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Part 71 by amending Class E airspace for the Killeen, TX area, adding
additional controlled airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the
surface to accommodate SIAPs at Skylark Field Airport, and changing the
airport[min]s name from Killeen Municipal Airport. Adjustments to the
geographic coordinates and reclassification of the Iresh Nondirectional
Radio Beacon (NDB) to the Iresh Locator Outer Marker (LOM) also will be
made in accordance with the FAA's National Aeronautical Charting
Office. With the exception of these changes, this action is the same as
that published in the NPRM. This action is necessary for the safety and
management of IFR operations at the airport.
    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.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends controlled airspace at Skylark Field Airport, Killeen, TX.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9T, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, signed August 27, 2009, and effective September 15,
2009 is amended as follows:
* * * * *

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface.

* * * * *

ASW TX E5 Killeen, TX [Amended]

Robert Gray Army Airfield (AAF), TX
    (Lat. 31[deg]04[min]02[sec] N., long. 97[deg]49[min]44[sec] W.)
Hood Army Airfield (AAF), TX
    (Lat. 31[deg]08[min]19[sec] N., long. 97[deg]42[min]52[sec] W.)
Gray VOR/DME
    (Lat. 31[deg]01[min]58[sec] N., long. 97[deg]48[min]50[sec] W.)
Skylark Field Airport, TX
    (Lat. 31[deg]05[min]09[sec] N., long. 97[deg]41[min]11[sec] W.)
Iresh LOM
    (Lat. 31[deg]01[min]27[sec] N., long. 97[deg]42[min]29[sec] W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7.6-mile radius of Robert Gray AAF and within a 6.3-mile
radius of Hood AAF and within 1.8 miles each side of the 037[deg]
radial of the Gray VOR/DME extending from the 7.6-mile radius to
14.6 miles northeast of the airfield, and within 1.8 miles each side
of the 217[deg] radial of the Gray VOR/DME extending from the 7.6-
mile radius to 14.6 miles southwest of the airfield, and within 1.7
miles each side of the 064[deg] radial of the Gray VOR/DME extending
from the 7.6-mile radius to 13.9 miles northeast of the airfield,
and within 1.7 miles each side of the 244[deg] radial of the Gray
VOR/DME extending from the 7.6-mile radius to 13.9 miles southwest
of the airfield, and within 2 miles each side of the 150[deg]
bearing from Robert Gray AAF extending from the 7.6-mile radius to
11.6 miles southeast of the airfield, and within 2 miles each side
of the 339[deg] bearing from Robert Gray AAF extending from the 7.6-
mile radius to 10.3 miles north of the airfield, and within a 6.5-
mile radius of Skylark Field Airport and within 4 miles each side of
the 197[deg] bearing from the Skylark Field Airport extending from
the 6.5-mile radius to 9.6 miles south of the airport and within 2.1
miles each side of the 197[deg] bearing from the Iresh LOM extending
from the 6.5-mile radius to 10.1 miles south of the airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on March 16, 2010.
Anthony D. Roetzel,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2010-6796 Filed 3-31-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P