[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 146 (Friday, July 29, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45424-45428]
[FR Doc No: 2011-19143]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2011-0419; FRL-9445-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Determinations of Attainment of the 1997 Fine Particle
Standard for the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle, Johnstown, Lancaster,
York, and Reading Nonattainment Areas

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to determine that the
Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle (Harrisburg), Johnstown, Lancaster, York,
and Reading fine particle (PM2.5) nonattainment areas (the
Areas) in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania have attained the 1997
annual PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)
by the applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010. These
determinations are based upon complete, quality assured, and certified
ambient air monitoring data that show the Areas monitored attainment of
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the 2007-2009 monitoring
period. EPA is finding these Areas to be in attainment in accordance
with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This rule is effective on September 27, 2011 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by August 29, 2011.
If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rules in the Federal Register and inform the public
that the rules will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2011-0419 by one of the following methods:
    A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2011-0419, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2011-0419. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Gaige,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
    This supplementary information section is arranged as follows:

I. What actions are EPA taking?
II. What is the background of these actions?
III. What is EPA's analysis of the relevant air quality data?
IV. What are the effects of these actions?
V. Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What actions are EPA taking?

    In accordance with section 179(c)(1) of the CAA, EPA is determining
that the Harrisburg, Johnstown, Lancaster, York, and Reading
PM2.5 nonattainment areas have attained the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of April 5,
2010 and in accordance with EPA's PM2.5 Implementation Rule
of April 25, 2007 (72 FR 20664). These determinations are based upon
complete, quality assured, and certified ambient air monitoring data
from 2007-2009 that show the Areas monitored attainment of the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS during this monitoring period.

II. What is the background for these actions?

    On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 36852), EPA established a health-based
PM2.5 NAAQS at 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\)
based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations (hereafter referred to as ``the annual PM2.5
NAAQS'' or ``the annual standard''). At that time, EPA also established
a 24-hour standard of 65 [mu]g/m\3\ (the ``1997 24-hour standard'').
See 40 CFR 50.7. On January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944), EPA published its air
quality designations and classifications for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS based upon air quality monitoring data for calendar years 2001-
2003. These designations became effective on April 5, 2005. The
Harrisburg, Johnstown, Lancaster, York, and Reading areas were
designated nonattainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
during this designations process. See 40 CFR 81.339. The Harrisburg
nonattainment area consists

of Cumberland, Dauphin, and Lebanon Counties. The Johnstown
nonattainment area consists of Cambria County and the part of Indiana
County which includes the Townships of West Wheatfield, Center, East
Wheatfield, and Armagh Borough and Homer City Borough. The Lancaster
nonattainment area consists of Lancaster County. The York nonattainment
area consists of York County. The Reading nonattainment area consists
of Berks County.
    On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), EPA retained the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS at 15 [mu]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of
annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, and promulgated a 24-hour
standard of 35 [mu]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average of the 98th
percentile of 24-hour concentrations (the ``2006 24-hour standard'').
On November 13, 2009, EPA designated the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle-
York Area, the Johnstown Area, and the Lancaster Area as nonattainment
for the 2006 24-hour standard (74 FR 58688). The Air Quality Control
Region (AQCR) 151 Northeast Pennsylvania-Upper Delaware Valley
Interstate area which includes Berks County (Reading) is designated as
attainment for the 2006 24-hour standard (74 FR 58688). In that action,
EPA also clarified that the designations for these Areas were
attainment for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5 standard. Today's
actions, however, do not address the 1997 or the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 standard.
    In response to legal challenges of the annual standard promulgated
in 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
(D.C. Circuit) remanded this standard to EPA for further consideration.
See American Farm Bureau Federation and National Pork Producers
Council, et al. v. EPA, 559 F.3d 512 (D.C. Circuit 2009). However,
given that the 1997 and 2006 annual PM2.5 standards are
essentially identical, attainment of the 1997 annual standard would
also indicate attainment of the remanded 2006 annual standard.
    EPA previously made clean data determinations related to the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS for each of these Areas pursuant to 40
CFR 51.1004(c). A clean data determination was made for the Harrisburg
Area on August 25, 2008 (73 FR 49949) and clean data determinations
were made for the Johnstown, Lancaster, York, and Reading Areas on
September 25, 2009 (74 FR 48863) and remain in effect.
    Under CAA section 179(c), EPA is required to make a determination
that a nonattainment area has attained by its attainment date, and
publish that determination in the Federal Register. The determination
of attainment is not equivalent to a redesignation, and the state must
still meet the statutory requirements for redesignation in order for
the Areas to be redesignated to attainment. Complete, quality assured,
certified PM2.5 air quality monitoring data recorded in the
EPA Air Quality System (AQS) database for 2007 through 2009, show that
the Harrisburg, Johnstown, Lancaster, York, and Reading, PA Areas
attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date.

III. What is EPA's analysis of the relevant air quality data?

    EPA has reviewed the ambient air monitoring data for
PM2.5, consistent with the requirements contained in 40 CFR
part 50 and recorded in the EPA AQS database for the Harrisburg,
Johnstown, Lancaster, York, and Reading nonattainment areas for the
monitoring period from 2007 through 2009. On the basis of that review,
EPA has concluded that the areas attained the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS based on data for the 2007-2009 monitoring
period.
    Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 50.7, the annual primary and
secondary PM2.5 standards are met when the annual arithmetic
mean concentration, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix N, is less than or equal to 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\. The values
calculated in accordance with 40 CFR part 50 Appendix N are referred to
as design values, and these values are used to determine if an area is
attaining the NAAQS. According to the PM2.5 implementation
rule, the attainment date for these areas is April 5, 2010 and
monitoring data from the period 2007 through 2009 is used to determine
if the areas attained by April 5, 2010.
    EPA's review of the data indicate that the Harrisburg, Johnstown,
Lancaster, York, and Reading nonattainment areas attained the annual
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. The
data, presented in Tables 1 through 5, are available at http://www.epa.gov/air/airtrends/values.html and can be found under the
heading: Design Values 2007-2009, PM2.5 Design Values.
    Table 1 shows the PM2.5 design values for each monitor
in the Harrisburg Area for the years 2007-2009. All 2007-2009 design
values are below 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ and all monitors meet the data
completeness requirements. Therefore, the Harrisburg Area attained the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its attainment date.

                                                      Table 1--Annual PM2.5 Values, Harrisburg Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Certified
                                                                                2007 Mean       2008 Mean       2009 Mean     design value
                State                           County                  Monitor ID         ([mu]g/m\3\)    ([mu]g/m\3\)    ([mu]g/m\3\)      2007-2009
                                                                                ([mu]g/m\3\)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania.........................  Cumberland..............  420410101..............            13.7            13.0            11.1            12.6
                                       Dauphin.................  420430401..............            14.3            13.2            12.2            13.2
                                       Lebanon.................  No monitor.............  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 2 shows the PM2.5 design values for each monitor
in the Johnstown Area for the years 2007-2009. All 2007-2009 design
values are below 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ and all monitors meet the data
completeness requirements. Therefore, the Johnstown Area attained the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its attainment date.

                                                      Table 2--Annual PM2.5 Values, Johnstown Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Certified
                                                                                2007 Mean       2008 Mean       2009 Mean     design value
                State                           County                  Monitor ID         ([mu]g/m\3\)    ([mu]g/m\3\)    ([mu]g/m\3\)      2007-2009
                                                                                ([mu]g/m\3\)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania.........................  Cambria.................  420210011..............            14.4            13.9            11.9            13.4

                                       Indiana (part)..........  No monitor.............  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 3 shows the PM2.5 design values for each monitor
in the Lancaster Area for the years 2007-2009. All 2007-2009 design
values are below 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ and all monitors meet the data
completeness requirements. Therefore, the Lancaster Area attained the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its attainment date.

                                                      Table 3--Annual PM2.5 Values, Lancaster Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Certified
                                                                                2007 Mean       2008 Mean       2009 Mean     design value
                State                           County                  Monitor ID         ([mu]g/m\3\)    ([mu]g/m\3\)    ([mu]g/m\3\)      2007-2009
                                                                                ([mu]g/m\3\)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania.........................  Lancaster...............  420710007..............            15.4            13.9            12.2            13.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 4 shows the PM2.5 design values for each monitor
in the York Area for the years 2007-2009. All 2007-2009 design values
are below 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ and all monitors meet the data completeness
requirements. Therefore, the York Area attained the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS by its attainment date.

                                                         Table 4--Annual PM2.5 Values, York Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Certified
                                                                                2007 Mean       2008 Mean       2009 Mean     design value
                State                           County                  Monitor ID         ([mu]g/m\3\)    ([mu]g/m\3\)    ([mu]g/m\3\)      2007-2009
                                                                                ([mu]g/m\3\)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania.........................  York....................  421330008..............            15.8            13.6            11.7            13.7
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 5 shows the PM2.5 design values for each monitor
in the Reading Area for the years 2007-2009. All 2007-2009 design
values are below 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ and all monitors meet the data
completeness requirements. Therefore, the Reading Area attained the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its attainment date.

                                                       Table 5--Annual PM2.5 Values, Reading Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Certified
                                                                                2007 Mean       2008 Mean       2009 Mean     design value
                State                           County                  Monitor ID         ([mu]g/m\3\)    ([mu]g/m\3\)    ([mu]g/m\3\)      2007-2009
                                                                                ([mu]g/m\3\)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania.........................  Berks...................  420110011..............            14.3            12.5            10.9            12.6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. What are the effects of these actions?

    EPA is determining that the Harrisburg, Johnstown, Lancaster, York,
and Reading Areas have attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
by the applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010. Therefore, EPA has
met the requirement pursuant to the CAA section 179(c) to make a
determination based on the Areas' air quality data that the Areas
attained the standard by the attainment date. Also, since the
Harrisburg, Johnstown, Lancaster, York, and Reading Areas have attained
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date, the Areas are not subject to the consequences of failure to
attain.
    These actions do not constitute a redesignation to attainment under
section 107(d)(3) of the CAA. The designation status of the Harrisburg,
Johnstown, Lancaster, York, and Reading Areas will remain nonattainment
for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS until such time as EPA
determines that the areas meet the CAA requirements for redesignation
to attainment. Further, these actions do not involve approving
maintenance plans for the Areas as required under section 175A of the
CAA, nor do they find that the Areas have met all other requirements
for redesignation. The designation status of the Harrisburg, Johnstown,
Lancaster, York, and Reading Areas will remain nonattainment for the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS until such time as EPA determines
that the Areas meet the CAA requirements for redesignation to
attainment and take action to redesignate the Harrisburg, Johnstown,
Lancaster, York, and Reading Areas.

V. Final Action

    Pursuant to section 179(c) of the CAA, EPA is determining that the
Harrisburg, Johnstown, Lancaster, York, and Reading Areas attained the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of
April 5, 2010. EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal
because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial action and
anticipates no adverse comment.

However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal Register,
EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal
to determine these areas attained the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS by the applicable attainment date if adverse comments are filed.
This rule will be effective on September 27, 2011 without further
notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by August 29, 2011. If EPA
receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take
effect. EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so
at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of these rules and if that provision
may be severed from the remainder of the rules, EPA may adopt as final
those provisions of the rules that are not the subject of an adverse
comment.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    This action merely makes attainment determinations based on air
quality data and does not impose any additional requirements. For that
reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition these PM2.5 NAAQS attainment determinations
do not have Tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to
apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it
will not impose substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or
preempt Tribal law.

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing these actions and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rules in the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. These actions are not ``major rules'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of these actions must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals
for the appropriate circuit by September 27, 2011. Filing a petition
for reconsideration by the Administrator of these final rules does not
affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review
nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review
may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. Parties with objections to these direct final rules are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for these actions published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of these direct final rules, so that EPA
can withdraw these direct final rules and address the comment in the
proposed rulemakings. These actions, to determine that the Harrisburg,
Johnstown, Lancaster, York, and Reading Areas attained the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of April 5,
2010, may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Incorporation by reference, Particulate matter.

    Dated: July 18, 2011.:
W.C. Early,
Acting, Regional Administrator, Region III.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart NN--Pennsylvania

0
2. Section 52.2056 is added to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2056  Determinations of attainment.

    (a) Based upon EPA's review of the air quality data for the 3-year
period 2007 to 2009, EPA determined that the Harrisburg-Lebanon-
Carlisle (Harrisburg) fine particle (PM2.5) nonattainment
area attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS) by the applicable attainment date of April 5,
2010. Therefore, EPA has met the requirement pursuant to CAA section
179(c) to determine, based on the area's air quality as of the
attainment date, whether the area attained the standard. EPA also
determined that the Harrisburg PM2.5 nonattainment area is
not subject to the consequences of failing to attain pursuant to
section 179(d).
    (b) Based upon EPA's review of the air quality data for the 3-year
period 2007 to 2009, EPA determined that the Johnstown fine particle
(PM2.5) nonattainment area attained the 1997 annual
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) by the
applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010. Therefore, EPA has met the
requirement pursuant to CAA section 179(c) to determine, based on the
area's air quality as of the attainment date, whether the area attained
the standard. EPA also determined that the Johnstown PM2.5
nonattainment area is not subject

to the consequences of failing to attain pursuant to section 179(d).
    (c) Based upon EPA's review of the air quality data for the 3-year
period 2007 to 2009, EPA determined that the Lancaster fine particle
(PM2.5) nonattainment area attained the 1997 annual
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) by the
applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010. Therefore, EPA has met the
requirement pursuant to CAA section 179(c) to determine, based on the
area's air quality as of the attainment date, whether the area attained
the standard. EPA also determined that the Lancaster PM2.5
nonattainment area is not subject to the consequences of failing to
attain pursuant to section 179(d).
    (d) Based upon EPA's review of the air quality data for the 3-year
period 2007 to 2009, EPA determined that the York fine particle
(PM2.5) nonattainment area attained the 1997 annual
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) by the
applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010. Therefore, EPA has met the
requirement pursuant to CAA section 179(c) to determine, based on the
area's air quality as of the attainment date, whether the area attained
the standard. EPA also determined that the York PM2.5
nonattainment area is not subject to the consequences of failing to
attain pursuant to section 179(d).
    (e) Based upon EPA's review of the air quality data for the 3-year
period 2007 to 2009, EPA determined that the Reading fine particle
(PM2.5) nonattainment area attained the 1997 annual
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) by the
applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010. Therefore, EPA has met the
requirement pursuant to CAA section 179(c) to determine, based on the
area's air quality as of the attainment date, whether the area attained
the standard. EPA also determined that the Reading PM2.5
nonattainment area is not subject to the consequences of failing to
attain pursuant to section 179(d).

[FR Doc. 2011-19143 Filed 7-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 7, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48046-48048]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18986]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0666]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Kuoni Destination Management Fireworks; San Diego,
CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone on the navigable
waters of the San Diego Bay in support of the Kuoni Destination
Management Fireworks Display on August 6, 2013. This temporary safety
zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the participants, crew,
spectators, participating vessels, and other vessels and users of the
waterway. Persons and vessels are prohibited from entering into,
transiting through, or anchoring within this safety zone unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port or his designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8:30 p.m. to 9:15 p.m. on August 6,
2013.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
[USCG-2013-0666]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also
visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Petty Officer First Class Bryan Gollogly, Waterways
Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, Coast Guard; telephone
619-278-7656, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have
questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Barbara
Hairston, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Regulatory History and Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing an NPRM with respect to this rule
because doing so would be impracticable. The final details for this
event were not received by the Coast Guard with sufficient time to
publish an NPRM. Thus, delaying this rule to wait for a comment period
to run would be impracticable because it would inhibit the Coast
Guard's ability to protect the public from the potential hazards
associated with fireworks displays. Immediate action is required to
ensure the safety zone is in place to protect participants, crew,
spectators, participating vessels, and other vessels and users of the
waterway during the event.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The Ports and Waterways Safety Act gives the Coast Guard authority
to create and enforce safety zones. The Coast Guard is establishing a
temporary safety zone on the navigable waters of the San Diego Bay for
the Kuoni Destination Management fireworks event on August 6, 2013.
This safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the
participants, crew, spectators, sponsor vessels, and other users of the
waterway.

C. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone that will be enforced
on August 6, 2013, from 8:30 p.m. to 9:15 p.m. The limits of the safety
zone will be the navigable waters of San Diego Bay within 500 feet of
the tug and barge, located approximately 550 feet off of the San Diego
Broadway Pier at position: 32[deg]42'56.20'' N, 117[deg]10'39.36'' W.
    This safety zone is necessary to ensure unauthorized personnel and
vessels remain safe by keeping clear during the fireworks show. Persons
and vessels would be prohibited from entering into, transiting through,
or anchoring within this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain
of the Port, or his designated representative.
    Before the effective period, the Coast Guard will publish a Coast
Guard District Eleven Local Notice to Mariners information on the event
and associated safety zone. Immediately before and during the fireworks
event, Coast Guard Sector San Diego Joint Harbor Operations Center will
issue Broadcast Notice to Mariners on the location and enforcement of
the safety zone.
    Vessels will be able to transit the surrounding area and may be
authorized to transit through the safety zone with the permission of
the Captain of the Port of the designated representative. Before
activating the zones, the Coast Guard will notify mariners by
appropriate means including but not limited to Local Notice to Mariners
and Broadcast Notice to Mariners.

D. Regulatory Analyses

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

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. This determination is
based on the size, duration and location of the safety zone. The safety
zone is relatively small in size, less than half a mile across, short
in duration, 45 minutes long, and traffic would be allowed to pass
through the zone with the permission of the Captain of the Port.
Additionally, before the effective period, the Coast Guard will publish
a Local Notice to Mariners.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    (1) 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 the impacted portion of the San Diego Bay on
August 6, 2013, between 8:30 p.m. and 9:15 p.m.
    (2) This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: The
safety zone will only be in effect for forty five minutes late in the
evening when vessel traffic is low. Vessel traffic can safely transit
around the safety zone while the zone is in effect.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
    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.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and determined
that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

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

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

8. Taking of Private Property

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

9. Civil Justice Reform

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

10. Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and

does not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that
may disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

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

12. Energy Effects

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

13. Technical Standards

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

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this 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 determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves establishment of a safety zone. This
rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph
34(g) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental
analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical
Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-583 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-583  Safety Zone; Kuoni Destination Management Fireworks;
San Diego, CA.

    (a) Location. The limits of the safety zone will include all the
navigable waters within 500 feet of the nearest point of the fireworks
barge in approximate position 32[deg]42'56.20'' N 117[deg]10'39.36'' W.
    (b) Enforcement Period. This section will be enforced from 8:30
p.m. to 9:15 p.m. on August 6, 2013.
    (c) Definitions. The following definition applies to this section:
Designated representative means any commissioned, warrant, or petty
officer of the Coast Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary,
and local, state, and federal law enforcement vessels who have been
authorized to act on the behalf of the Captain of the Port.
    (d) Regulations. (1) Entry into, transit through or anchoring
within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain
of the Port of San Diego or his designated representative.
    (2) All persons and vessels shall comply to the instructions of the
Coast Guard Captain of the Port of his designated representative.
    (3) Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel by
siren, radio, a flashing light, or other means, the operator of a
vessel shall proceed as directed.
    (4) The Coast Guard may be assisted by other federal, state, or
local agencies.

    Dated: July 25, 2013.
S.M. Mahoney,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2013-18986 Filed 8-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: March 18, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 53)]
[Notices]
[Page 14462-14464]
[DOCID:fr18mr08-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings  1

March 10, 2008.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC08-49-000.
    Applicants: Southaven Power, LLC; Kelson Energy III LLC.
    Description: Southaven Power, LLC and Kelson Energy III LLC submit
an application for order authorizing disposition of jurisdictional
facilities.
    Filed Date: 02/26/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080305-0049.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, March 18, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: EC08-50-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc.; Entergy Nuclear Generation
Company; Entergy Nuclear Fitzpatrick, LLC; Entergy Nuclear Indian Point
2, LLC; Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC; Entergy Nuclear Palisades,
LLC; Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC; Entergy Power Ventures, L.P.;
Entergy Nuclear Power Marketing, LLC; EWO Marketing, LP; Warren Power,
LLC; EAM Nelson Holding, LLC; Entergy Power, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Nuclear Generation Company et al. submit the
Joint Application for authorization to acquire securities.
    Filed Date: 03/04/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-0017.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, March 25, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: EC08-51-000.
    Applicants: IPP Energy LLC; Standard Binghamton LLC.
    Description: Standard Binghamton LLC et al. submits a Joint
Application for Authorization under section 203 of the Federal Power
Act.
    Filed Date: 03/04/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-0030.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, March 25, 2008.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:
    Docket Numbers: EG08-48-000.
    Applicants: Standard Binghamton LLC.
    Description: Standard Binghamton LLC submits a notice of self-
certification of exempt wholesale generator status under EG08-48.
    Filed Date: 03/04/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-0026.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, March 25, 2008.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER96-1088-046; ER02-2199-011; ER03-54-011; ER03-56-
011; ER01-1114-012; ER97-2758-019.
    Applicants: WPS Energy Services, Inc.; WPS Empire State, Inc.; WPS
Beaver Falls Generation, Inc.; WPS Syracuse Generation, LLC; WPS
Westwood Generation, DDC; Advantage Energy, Inc.
    Description: Application by Integrys Northeast Companies for
Category 1 Status and Alternatives Request for Category 2 Exempt
pursuant to Paragraph 868 or Order 697 re WPS Energy Services Inc et
al.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-0016.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, March 21, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER03-478-021; ER08-387-003; ER06-200-014; ER07-254-
006; ER03-1326-014; ER07-460-005; ER05-534-015; ER05-365-015; ER05-
1262-014; ER06-1093-010; ER03-296-017; ER01-3121-016; ER02-418-015;
ER03-416-018; ER05-332-015; ER07-287-008; ER07-242-008; ER03-951-017;
ER04-94-015; ER02-417-015; ER07-1378-005; ER05-1146-015; ER05-481-015;
ER07-240-009; ER07-195-006; ER02-2085-010.
    Applicants: PPM Energy; Atlantic Renewables Projects II LLC; Big
Horn Wind Project LLC; Casselman Windpower, LLC; Colorado Green
Holdings, LLC; Dillon Wind LLC; Eastern Desert Power LLC; Elk River
Windfarm LLC; Flat Rock Windpower LLC; Flat Rock Windpower II LLC;
Flying Cloud Power Partners, LLC; Klamath Energy LLC; Klamath
Generation LLC; Klondike Wind Power LLC; Klondike Wind Power II LLC;
Klondike Wind Power III LLC; MinnDakota Wind LLC; Moraine Wind LLC;
Mountain View Power Partners III, LLC; Phoenix Wind Power LLC;
Providence Heights Wind, LLC; Shiloh I Wind Project, LLC; Trimont Wind
I LLC; Twin Buttes Wind LLC; Locust Ridge Wind Farm, LLC; Northern Iowa
Windpower II, LLC.
    Description: PPM Energy Inc et al. notify FERC of a change in
status resulting from the completion of the transaction authorized by
FERC in its order issued on 1/24/08.
    Filed Date: 02/28/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-0018.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, March 20, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER03-478-022; ER08-387-004; ER06-200-015; ER07-254-
007; ER03-1326-015; ER07-460-006; ER05-534-016; ER05-365-016; ER05-
1262-015; ER06-1093-011; ER03-296-018; ER01-3121-017; ER02-418-016;
ER03-416-019; ER05-332-016; ER07-287-009; ER07-242-009; ER03-951-018;
ER04-94-016; ER02-417-016; ER07-1378-006; ER05-1146-016; ER05-481-016;
ER07-240-010; ER07-195-007; ER02-2085-011.
    Applicants: PPM Energy; Atlantic Renewables Projects II LLC; Big
Horn Wind Project LLC; Casselman Windpower, LLC; Colorado Green
Holdings, LLC; Dillon Wind LLC; Eastern Desert Power LLC; Elk River
Windfarm LLC; Flat Rock Windpower LLC; Flat Rock Windpower II LLC;
Flying Cloud Power Partners, LLC; Klamath Energy LLC; Klamath
Generation LLC; Klondike Wind Power LLC; Klondike Wind Power II LLC;
Klondike Wind Power III LLC; MinnDakota Wind LLC; Moraine Wind LLC;
Mountain View Power Partners III, LLC; Phoenix Wind Power LLC;
Providence Heights Wind, LLC; Shiloh I Wind Project, LLC; Trimont Wind
I LLC; Twin Buttes Wind LLC; Locust Ridge Wind Farm, LLC; Northern Iowa
Windpower II, LLC.
    Description: The Iberdrola Companies submit a Notice of Change with
respect to the acquisition of an interest in MinnDakota Wind LLC that
they inadvertently failed to file with the 10/25/07 et al. submittals.
    Filed Date: 03/03/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-0019.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 24, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER03-1094-003; ER07-955-001.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Co submits workpapers
showing the monthly amounts paid, revenue receipt dates and the monthly
interest calculations for each month re its Refund Report.
    Filed Date: 03/04/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080307-0083.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, March 25, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER05-6-104; EL04-135-107; EL02-111-124; EL03-212-
120.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operation Inc
et al. submits the Joint Operating Agreement between the Midwest
Independent Transmission System Operation Inc and PJM Interconnection,
LLC to comply with the 30 day compliance filing etc.
    Filed Date: 03/03/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-0023.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 24, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-738-010; ER06-739-010; ER03-983-009; ER07-501-
006; ER02-537-013; ER07-758-005.
    Applicants: Fox Energy Company LLC; Birchwood Power Partners, L.P.;
Inland Empire Energy Center, L.L.C.; Shady Hills Power Company, L.L.C.;
Cogen Technologies Linden Ventures, L.P.; East Coast Power Linden
Holding, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of East Coast Power Linden
Holding, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 03/05/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080307-5042.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 26, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-546-012; ER07-938-001.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.
    Description: ISO New England Inc submits Report on Seasonal
Resources to comply with FERC's 4/16/07 Order.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080305-0040.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, March 21, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-194-002.
    Applicants: Duquesne Light Company.
    Description: Duquesne Light Company 45-day compliance filing
responding to FERC's 1/17/08 Order.
    Filed Date: 03/03/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-5035.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 24, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-495-001.
    Applicants: Kimberly-Clark Corporation.
    Description: Kimberly-Clark Corp submits an Amendment to the
Petition for Acceptance of Initial Rate Schedule, Waivers and Blanket
Authority.
    Filed Date: 03/05/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-0045.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 26, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-503-001.
    Applicants: MidAmerican Energy Company.
    Description: MidAmerican Energy Company submits Substitute Original
Issue Sheet 3 and 4.
    Filed Date: 03/05/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080307-0073.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 26, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-563-001.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection LLC submits an executed
interconnection service agreement with Shaffer Mountain Wind LLC et
al., designated as Original Service Agreement 1843 under ER08-563.
    Filed Date: 02/29/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-0022.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, March 21, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-635-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, LLC submits an executed service
agreement for network integration transmission service.
    Filed Date: 03/04/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-0044.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, March 25, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-636-000.
    Applicants: Standard Binghamton LLC.
    Description: Stand Binghamton LLC submits a Petition for Acceptance
of Initial Rate Schedule, Waivers and Blanket Authority.
    Filed Date: 03/04/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-0043.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, March 25, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-637-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc
et al. submits proposed revisions to its Open Access Transmission and
Energy Markets Tariff, to be effective 6/1/08.
    Filed Date: 03/04/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-0047.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, March 25, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-638-000.
    Applicants: Crafton LLC.
    Description: Crafton LLC submits petition for acceptance of FERC
Electric Tariff, Original Volume 1, waivers and blanket authority.
    Filed Date: 03/05/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080307-0075.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 26, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-639-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator Inc
submits a notice of cancellation of Service Agreement 5 to FERC
Electric Tariff, Third Revised Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 03/05/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080307-0076.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 26, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-640-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection LLC submits an executed
interconnection construction service agreement with Conectiv Atlantic
Generation, LLC etc.
    Filed Date: 03/05/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080307-0077.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, March 26, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-642-000.
    Applicants: ENDEAVOR POWER PARTNERS, LLC.
    Description: Endeavor Power Partners, LLC submits a notice of
termination of FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 03/04/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-0046.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, March 25, 2008.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
securities filings:
    Docket Numbers: ES08-26-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM supplements its Application by submitting revised
2006 to 2008 computations of interest coverage to replace the
computations of interest coverage originally submitted.
    Filed Date: 03/05/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080307-5012.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 17, 2008.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following open access
transmission tariff filings:
    Docket Numbers: OA07-25-002.
    Applicants: DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC.
    Description: Duke Energy Carolinas LLC submits its open access
tariff compliance filing.
    Filed Date: 03/03/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-0025.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 24, 2008.

    Docket Numbers: OA07-50-001.
    Applicants: Alcoa Power Generating Inc.--Yadkin.
    Description: Alcoa Power Generating, Inc submits its clean and
blacklined Open Access Transmission Tariff sheets containing the
requested revisions.
    Filed Date: 03/03/2008.
    Accession Number: 20080306-0027.

    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, March 24, 2008.

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

 Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-5365 Filed 3-17-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 54 (Tuesday, March 20, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12234-12236]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05564]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82875; File No. SR-CBOE-2018-022]

 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Cboe Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change to Rule
6.56, Compression Forums

March 14, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on March 8, 2018, Cboe Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or ``Cboe
Options'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The Exchange
filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' proposed rule change
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 6.56. The text of the proposed
rule change is provided below.

(additions are italicized; deletions are [bracketed])

* * * * *

Cboe Exchange, Inc. Rules

* * * * *

Rule 6.56. Compression Forums

    (a) Procedure.
    (1) Prior to 4:30 p.m. Chicago time on the second to last business
day of each calendar week; the second, third, and fourth to last
business day of each calendar month; and the second, third, fourth,
fifth, and sixth to last business day of each calendar quarter, in a
manner and format determined by the Exchange, a Trading Permit Holder
may provide the Exchange with a list of open SPX options positions that
it would like to close through the compression forum for that calendar
month (``compression-list positions''). Trading Permit Holders may also
permit their Clearing Trading Permit Holders or the Clearing
Corporation to submit a list of these positions to the Exchange on
their behalf.
    (2) Prior to the open of Regular Trading Hours on the last business
day of each calendar week; each of the last three business days of each
calendar month; and each of the last five business days of each
calendar quarter, [second to last business day, and third to last
business day of each calendar month,] the Exchange will make available
to all Trading Permit Holders a list including the size of the
offsetting compression-list positions (including all possible
combinations of offsetting multi-leg positions) in each series (and
multi-leg position) for which both long and short compression-list
positions have been submitted to the Exchange (``compression-list
positions file'').
    (3)-(5) No change.
    (6) The Exchange will make available an open outcry ``compression
forum'' in which all Trading Permit Holders may participate on the last
business day of each calendar week, each of the last three business
days of every calendar month, and each of the last five business days
of every calendar quarter, at a location on the trading floor
determined by the Exchange. The compression forum will be held for four
(4) hours during Regular Trading Hours on the last business day of each
calendar week, each of the last three business days of every calendar
month, and each of the last five business days of every calendar
quarter, unless [or three (3) hours if] any of those days is an
abbreviated trading day, as[t times] determined by the Exchange, in
which case the compression forum will be held for three (3) hours.
    (b)-(c) (No change).
* * * * *
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's website (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend rule 6.56 (Compression Forums) to
increase the number of compression forums that are held on the
Exchange.
    Currently, compression forums are held on each of the last three
business days of every calendar month.\5\ In addition to holding
compression forums on each of the last three business days of every
calendar month, the Exchange seeks to hold compression forums on the
last business day of every calendar week and each of the last five
business days of every calendar quarter. In order to increase the
frequency of compression forums the Exchange also proposes to increase
the frequency with which TPHs submit compression-list positions to the
Exchange and the frequency with which the Exchange generates the
compression-list positions file. The Exchange notes that it is not
proposing any modification to the type of information TPHs submit to
the Exchange pursuant to Rule 6.56 nor modifying the manner by which
the Exchange generates files and information pursuant to Rule 6.56.
Rather, the Exchange is simply increasing the frequency with which TPHs
may submit compression-list positions, the frequency with which the
Exchange generates the compression-list positions file, and the number
of compression forums that will be held on the Exchange. The Exchange
believes that more frequent compression forums will further encourage
the closing of positions, which, once closed, may serve to alleviate
the capital requirement constraints on TPHs and improve overall market
liquidity by freeing capital currently tied up in certain SPX
positions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Rule 6.56(a)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to implement this rule change on March 22,
2018, in order to allow a compression forum to be held on March 23rd
and each of the last five business days of March.

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act'') and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to the Exchange and, in particular,
the requirements of Section 6(b) of the Act.\6\ Specifically, the
Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \7\ requirements that the rules of an exchange be
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest. Additionally,
the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Section 6(b)(5) \8\ requirement that the rules of an exchange not be
designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers, issuers,
brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the proposed rule change will increase the number of
compression forums that are held and thereby further encourage the
closing of positions, which, in general, helps to protect investors and
the public interest because closing positions via the compression
process serves to alleviate the adverse impact of bank capital
requirements.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    Cboe Options does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed change would
encourage the closing of positions, which, once closed, may serve to
alleviate the capital requirement constraints on TPHs and improve
overall market liquidity by freeing capital currently tied up in
certain SPX positions. The Exchange does not believe that the proposed
rule changes will impose any burden on intermarket competition that is
not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act
because the proposed rule change applies only to the trading of SPX
options, which are exclusively-listed on Cboe Options. To the extent
that the proposed changes make the Exchange a more attractive
marketplace for market participants at other exchanges, such market
participants are eligible to participant through Cboe Options TPHs.
Furthermore, participation in compression forums is completely
voluntary and open to all TPHs.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \9\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\10\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) \12\ thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \10\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The
Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \13\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\14\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposed
rule change may become operative on March 22, 2018 to allow for the
compression forum to be held on March 23, 2018, in addition to each of
the last five business days of March as the calendar quarter ends. The
Commission notes that the proposal is not modifying the information
that TPHs submit or the information that the Exchange prepares, but
rather adds a few additional days on which compression forums will be
held and correspondingly increases as the number of opportunities for
TPHs to submit positions and receive compression lists from the
Exchange in connection with those compression forums. Therefore, the
Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is
consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day operative delay
and designates the proposal operative on March 22, 2018.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \15\ For purposes only of waving the 30-day operative delay, the
Commission has considered the purposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission will institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2018-022 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2018-022. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent

amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the Commission, and all written
communications relating to the proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from
the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for website viewing and printing in the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549 on official
business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of
the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do
not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
CBOE-2018-022 and should be submitted on or before April 10, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-05564 Filed 3-19-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


IMPORTANT NOTE TO USER:

This OMB form has been recreated in WP6.0 by OPPTS staff. The margins and lines are NOT block protected, so you must fill the form with caution, paying attention to any shifting of the existing text. The following tips should make this a simple task:

 Fill in the spaces by using the type over command. Otherwise you'll have to delete a space for each letter you add.

 Use the same font ( Times New Roman 8pt).

 Do not change table lines ( although you can delete an extra space line to provide more space elsewhere.

 It is not recommended that you convert this form to WP5.1, some of these features are not available in WP5.1, so the text will scramble.

If you have any problems or questions, please call your RID Desk Officer @ 260 2706. PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION Please read the instructions before completing this form. For additional forms or assistance in completing this form, contact your agency's Paperwork Clearance Officer. Send two copies of this form, the collection instrument to be reviewed, the Supporting Statement and any additional documentation to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW Washington, DC 20503.

1. Agency/ Subagency originating request EPA/ OW/ OWM 2. OMB control number b. G None a 2040  0180 3. Type of information collection ( check one) a. G New collection b. G Revision of a currently approved collection c. X Extension of a currently approved collection d. Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired e. G Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired f. G Existing collection in use without an OMB control number 4. Type of review requested ( check one) a. X Regular b. G Emergency  Approval requested by: / / c. G Delegated 5. Small entities Will this information collection have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? G Yes X No 6. Requested expiration date a. X Three years from approval date b. Other Specify:

7. Title: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Great Lakes Water Quality Guidance 8. Agency form number( s) 1639.05 9. Keywords: Great Lakes Critical Programs Act, water quality, pollutants, NPDES permits 10. Abstract: The primary objective of the Clean Water Act ( CWA) is " to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the nation's waters" ( Section 101( a)). CWA Section 402 establishes the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) permit program to regulate the discharge of any pollutant or combination of pollutants from point sources into the waters of the United States. CWA Section 402( a), as amended, authorizes the EPA Administrator to issue permits for the discharge of pollutants if those discharges meet the following requirements:   All applicable requirements of CWA Sections 301, 302, 306, 307, 308, and 403; and   Any conditions the Administrator determines are necessary to carry out the provisions and objectives of the CWA. Section 101 of the Great Lakes Critical Programs Act ( CPA) amends Section 118 of the CWA and directs EPA to publish water quality guidance for the Great Lakes System. Provisions of the Guidance are codified in 40 CFR Part 132. The Guidance establishes minimum water quality criteria, implementation procedures, and antidegradation provisions for the Great Lakes System. Permitting authorities currently require dischargers to provide information such as the name, location, and description of facilities to identify the facilities that require permits. EPA and authorized NPDES States store much of this basic information in the Permit Compliance System ( PCS) database. PCS provides EPA with a nationwide inventory of NPDES permit holders. EPA Headquarters uses the information contained in the PCS to develop reports on permit issuance, backlogs, and compliance rates. The Agency also uses the information to respond to public and Congressional inquiries, develop and guide its policies, formulate its budgets, assist States in acquiring authority for permitting programs, and manage its programs to ensure national consistency in permitting. NPDES permit applications and requests for supplemental information currently require information about wastewater treatment systems, pollutants, discharge rates and volumes, whole effluent toxicity testing and other data. Additional information collection requirements that may be necessary to implement State, Tribal, or EPA promulgated provisions consistent with the final Guidance include: 1) monitoring ( pollutant specific and whole effluent toxicity or WET); 2) pollutant minimization programs; 3) antidegradation policy/ demonstrations; and, 4) regulatory relief options ( e. g., variances from water quality criteria). This information may be used to ensure compliance with provisions consistent with the Guidance and re evaluate existing permit conditions and monitoring requirements. Data on discharges is entered into STORET and PCS, EPA's databases for ambient water quality data and NPDES permits, respectively. Results of water quality criteria testing will be entered into an EPA Information Clearinghouse database.

11. Affected public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Individuals or households d. Farms b. P Business or other for profit e. X Federal Government c. Not for profit institutions f. X State, Local or Tribal Government 12. Obligation to respond ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. G Voluntary b. G Required to obtain or retain benefits c. X Mandatory 13. Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden a. Number of respondents: 2,710 b. Total annual responses 1,044 1. Percentage of these responses collected electronically 0 % c. Total hours requested 28,797 d. Current OMB inventory 122,863_____ e. Difference ( 94,066) f. Explanation of difference 1. Program Change 2. Adjustment ______________ ( 94,066)_____ 14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden ( in thousands of dollars) a. Total annualized capital/ startup costs $ 0 b. Total annual costs ( O& M) $ 0 c. Total annualized cost requested $ 0 d. Current OMB inventory $ 0 e. Difference $ 0____________ f. Explanation of difference 1. Program change 2. Adjustment 15. Purpose of information collection ( Mark Primary With " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. __ Application for benefits e. X Program planning or management b. __ Program evaluation f. __ Research c. __ X_ General purpose statistics g. P Regulatory or compliance d. __ Audit 16. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting a. X Recordkeeping b. Q Third party disclosure c. X Reporting 1. Q On occasion 2. Q Weekly 3. Q Monthly 4. Q Quarterly 5. Q Semi annually 6. Q Annually 7. Q Biannually 8. X Other ( describe) Varies depending on discharger's effluent characteristics 17. Statistical methods Does this information collection employ statistical methods?

Q Yes X No 18. Agency contact Name: Lynn Stabenfeldt, US EPA, Office of Water Phone: 202. 564.0602 19. Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions On behalf of this Federal agency, 1 certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with' 5 CFR 1320.9.

NOTE: The text of 5 CFR 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3), appear at the end of the instructions. The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth in the instructions.

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

( a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

( b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

© It reduces burden on small entities;

( d) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to respondents;

( e) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

( f) It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

( g) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3): ( I) Why the information is being collected' ( ii) Use of information; ( iii) Burden estimate; ( iv) Nature of response ( voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory); ( v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and ( vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

( h) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected ( see note in Item 19 of the instructions);

( I) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and ( j) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement.

Signature of Program Official James H. Hanlon, Director Office of Wastewater Management Office of Water Date Signature of Senior Official or designee Oscar Morales, Director Collection Strategies Division Office of Environmental Information Date OMB 83 I 10/ 95 Certification Requirement for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions 5 CFR 1320.9 reads " As part of the agency submission to OMB of a proposed collection of information, the agency ( through the head of the agency, the Senior Official or their designee) shall certify ( and provide a record supporting such certification) that the proposed collection of information

"( a) is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including that the information to be collected will have practical utility;

"( b) is not unnecessarily duplicative of information otherwise reasonably accessible to the agency;

"( c) reduces to the extent practicable and appropriate the burden on persons who shall provide information to or for the agency, including with respect to small entities, as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act 5 U. S. C § 601( 6)), the use of such techniques as:

"( 1) establishing differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to those who are to respond; "( 2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements; or collection of information , or any part thereof; "( 3) an exemption from coverage of the collection of information, or any part thereof;

"( d) is written using plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology and is understandable to those who are to respond;

"( e) is to be implemented in ways consistent and compatible, to the maximum extent practicable, with the existing reporting and recordkeeping practices of those who are to respond;

"( f) indicates for each recordkeeping requirement the length of time persons are required to maintain the records specified;

"( g) informs potential respondents of the information called for under § 1320.8( b)( 3); [ see below]

"( h) has been developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected, including the processing of the information in a manner which shall enhance, where appropriate, the utility of the information to agencies and the public;

"( I) uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology appropriate to the purpose for which the information is to be collected; and "( j) to the maximum extent practicable, uses appropriate information technology to reduce burden and improve data quality, agency efficiency and responsiveness to the public."

NOTE: 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3) requires that each collection of information:

"( 3) informs and provides reasonable notice to the potential persons to whom the collection of information is addressed of: "( I) the reasons the information is planned to be and/ or has been used to further the proper performance of the functions of the agency; "( ii) the way such information is planned to be and/ or has been used to further the proper performance of the functions of the agency; "( iii) an estimate, to the extent practicable, of the average burden of the collection ( together with a request that the public direct to the agency any comments concerning the accuracy of this burden estimate and any suggestions for reducing this burden); "( iv) whether responses to the collection of information are voluntary, required to obtain or retain a benefit ( citing authority), or mandatory ( citing authority); "( v) the nature and extent of confidentiality to be provided, if any ( citing authority); and "( vi) the fact that any agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number."

OMB 83 I ( Instructions) 10/ 95


[Federal Register: September 24, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 184)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 48702]
[DOCID:fr24se09-21]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2009-0293; FRL-8961-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Indiana; Lead (Pb) Maintenance Plan Update for Marion County

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a request submitted by the Indiana
Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) on April 1, 2009, to
revise the Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP) for lead (Pb). The
State has submitted an update to its Pb maintenance plan for Marion
County for continued attainment of the 1.5 micrograms per cubic meter
([mu]g/m\3\) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) promulgated
in 1978. This update satisfies section 175A of the Clean Air Act (CAA),
and is in accordance with EPA's May 10, 2000 approval of the State's
Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for the Marion County Pb
nonattainment areas. Additionally, this Pb maintenance plan satisfies
the requirements for maintenance plans contained in the September 4,
1992 EPA memorandum entitled ``Procedures for Processing Requests to
Redesignate Areas to Attainment.''

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 26, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2009-0293, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal
holidays.
    Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Final
Rules section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how
to submit comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andy Chang, Environmental Engineer,
Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State's SIP submittal as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no
further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the
direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received
will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed
rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For
additional information, see the direct final rule which is located in
the Rules section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: September 14, 2009.
Walter W. Kovalick, Jr.,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. E9-22918 Filed 9-23-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 24 (Wednesday, February 5, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6985-6986]
[FR Doc No: 2014-02473]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment on Airport Closure;
Cleveland Hardwick Field (HDI), Cleveland, TN

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of permanent closure of Cleveland Hardwick Field Airport
(HDI) and release of land request.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) received written
notice, dated January 8, 2014, from the City of Cleveland, Tennessee
requesting the release of land and the permanent closure of Cleveland
Hardwick Field (HDI). The notice was in excess of 30 days before the
closure in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 46319(a). The FAA hereby publishes
the intent of the City of Cleveland's notice of permanent closure of
Cleveland Hardwick Field Airport in accordance with U.S.C. 46319(b).

DATES: Effective Date: The permanent closure date of the airport is
effective as of March 14, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Wilson, Community Planner,
Federal Aviation Administration, Memphis Airports District Office, 2600
Thousand Oaks Boulevard, Suite 2250, Memphis, Tennessee 38118, 901-322-
8185.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 8, 2014, The City of Cleveland,
Tennessee, sponsor of Cleveland Hardwick Field Airport (HDI), informed
the FAA of its intent to finalize the closure. The airport sponsor
wishes to complete the release of airport land by March 14, 2014.
Cleveland Hardwick Field (HDI) located in Cleveland, Tennessee is a
single runway, general aviation airport located in eastern Tennessee.
Cleveland Hardwick Field is constrained by residential properties and
several commercial establishments.

The current runway length at HDI is 3,300 ft. and does not accommodate
larger aircraft. The airport sponsor identified the need for a new
airport facility with a 5,500 ft. runway able to accept larger category
aircraft types. The City of Cleveland, Tennessee subsequently developed
a replacement airport known as the Cleveland Regional Jetport (RZR)
located approximately 5 miles from HDI. The closed facility, comprised
of approximately 62 acres will be parceled and sold. All flight
operations and tenants have been relocated to the newly opened
Cleveland Regional Jetport (RZR).
    Per U.S.C. 46319(a), a public agency may not permanently close an
airport listed in the National Plan of Integrated Airports Systems
(NPIAS) under section 47103 without providing notice to the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration at least 30 days
before the date of closure. The FAA recognizes the letter dated January
8, 2014 from the City of Cleveland, Tennessee as meeting the 30 day
requirement.
    Questions may be directed to the individual named above under the
heading, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Issued in Memphis, Tennessee on January 30, 2014.
Paul Friedman,
Assistant Manager, Memphis Airports District Office.
[FR Doc. 2014-02473 Filed 2-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:

I am writing as an individual consumer to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The Proposed Rule raises a number of significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. The Proposed Rule asks about a hundred different questions I might want to respond to. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on many of these issues, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited. I have already spent many hours researching and dissecting these issues, but they take time. I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback.

I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes as an alternative to combustible cigarettes. Quite simply, I firmly believe that they extended my life. I know they have made me feel better than I have in many years and I have not smoked in 9 months. . I wish to provide you with my personal story, as well as science- and evidence-based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.

I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further.

Thank You, Claudia Pendlay