[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 250 (Wednesday, December 31, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 78739-78742]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30366]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 46

[Docket No. RM15-3-000]

Revisions to Public Utility Filing Requirements

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Energy.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission is proposing to revise its regulations to
eliminate the requirement to submit FERC-566 (Annual Report of a
Utility's 20 Largest Customers) for regional transmission organizations
(RTOs), independent system operators (ISOs), and exempt wholesale
generators (EWGs). The Commission is also proposing to revise its
regulations to eliminate the requirement to submit FERC-566 for public
utilities that have not made any reportable sales under FERC-566 in any
of the three preceding years. The Commission further proposes to
eliminate the requirement for public utilities submitting FERC-566 to
identify individual residential customers by name and address.

DATES: Comments are due March 2, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by docket number, may be filed in the
following ways:
     Electronic Filing through http://www.ferc.gov. Documents
created electronically using word processing software should be filed
in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned
format.
     Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable to file electronically
may mail or hand-deliver comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Comment
Procedures section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mary LaFave (Technical Information), Office of Energy Market
Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Lina Naik (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

Table of Contents

                                                               Paragraph
                                                                 Nos.

I. Discussion...............................................           7
    A. RTOs and ISOs........................................           7
    B. EWGs.................................................           8
    C. Public utilities that have not made sales............           9
    D. Identification requirement...........................          10
II. Information Collection Statement........................          11
III. Environmental Analysis.................................          16
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act..............................          17
V. Comment Procedures.......................................          20
VI. Document Availability...................................          24

    1. Section 305(c) of the Federal Power Act (FPA) requires, among
other things, that, on or before January 31 of each calendar year, each
public utility shall publish a list, pursuant to rules prescribed by
the Commission, of any company, firm, or organization that is one of
the 20 purchasers of electric energy which purchased (for purposes
other than resale) one of the 20 largest annual amounts of electric
energy sold by such public utility (or by any public utility which is
part of the same holding company system) during any one of the three
calendar years immediately preceding the filing date.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 16 U.S.C. 825d(c) (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. The Commission implemented Congress' mandate in part 46 of the
Commission's regulations.\2\ Section 46.3 of the regulations thus
provides, in relevant part, that on or before January 31 of each year,
each public utility shall compile a list of purchasers of electric
energy (other than for resale), and shall identify each purchaser by
name and principal business address, and shall

submit the list to the Secretary and make the list publicly available.
The list identifies each purchaser who, during any of the three
preceding calendar years, purchased (for purposes other than resale)
from a public utility one of the twenty largest amounts of electric
energy by such public utility, and the public utility is required to
notify each purchaser which has been identified on the list.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 18 CFR part 46 (2014).
    \3\ 18 CFR 46.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. On February 26, 2014, in compliance with the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,\4\ the Commission issued a request for
comments on, among other things, the currently-approved information
collection FERC-566 (Annual Report of a Utility's 20 Largest
Customers). Specifically, the Commission sought comment on: (1) Whether
the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate
of the burden and cost of the collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance
the quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A).
    \5\ See Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-520,
FERC-561, FERC-566); Comment Request; Extension, Docket No. IC14-9-
000 (Feb. 26, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. The Commission received four comments. With respect to the FERC-
566, commenters recommended that the Commission eliminate the
requirement to file FERC-566 for public utilities that do not make any
reportable sales; that certain Regional Transmission Organizations
(RTOs) and Independent System Operators (ISOs) should be exempted from
the requirement to submit FERC-566; and that the Commission should
exempt exempt wholesale generators (EWGs) from the FERC-566 filing
requirement.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-520,
FERC-561, FERC-566); Comment Request, Docket No. IC14-9-000, at 7-8
(July 1, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. On July 1, 2014, the Commission issued a further notice
addressing the comments. Specifically, the Commission stated that it
shared commenters' interest in identifying and implementing burden
reductions to the benefit of filers as well as the Commission, but that
commenters' suggestions raised issues that required additional study.
The Commission stated that should it determine after further study to
pursue changes to these information collections, those changes would be
more appropriately addressed in a forum and through a process that is
better suited to full public identification of and deliberation on
possible proposed changes. The Commission noted that any changes to the
Commission's regulations would need to be made through the Commission's
formal rulemaking process.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Id. at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR), the Commission
proposes to revise its regulations to reduce the regulatory burden of
compliance on public utilities, while meeting the statutory standards
set forth in the FPA. Such modifications would enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information collected. Specifically, the
Commission proposes to eliminate the requirement to submit FERC-566 for
RTOs, ISOs, and EWGs. The Commission also proposes to eliminate the
requirement to submit FERC-566 for public utilities that have not made
any reportable sales in any of the three preceding years. The
Commission further proposes to eliminate the requirements for public
utilities submitting FERC-566 to identify individual residential
customers by name and address.

I. Discussion

A. RTOs and ISOs

    7. The Commission proposes to eliminate the requirement to submit
FERC-566 for RTOs and ISOs. By their nature, RTOs and ISOs are focused
primarily on sales of electric energy for resale. The statute expressly
seeks to acquire information about purchasers of electric energy who
purchased ``for purposes other than for resale.'' \8\ Accordingly, the
Commission proposes to revise the current regulation to eliminate the
requirement to submit FERC-566 for RTOs and ISOs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 16 U.S.C. 825(c)(2)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. EWGs

    8. Similarly, the Commission proposes to eliminate the requirement
to submit FERC-566 for EWGs. The term exempt wholesale generator is
defined as ``any person engaged directly, or indirectly through one or
more affiliates . . . and exclusively in the business of owning or
operating, or both owning and operating, all or part of one or more
eligible facilities and selling electric energy at wholesale.'' \9\
Thus, by definition, EWGs do not have retail customers. As discussed
above regarding RTOs and ISOs, the statute seeks to acquire information
about purchasers of electric energy who purchased for purposes other
than for resale. Because EWGs are defined as entities that only sell
energy at wholesale, the Commission believes FERC-566 should not be
required to be submitted by such entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 18 CFR 336.1 (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Public Utilities That Have Not Made Sales

    9. The Commission proposes to eliminate the requirement to submit
FERC-566 for those public utilities that have not made any reportable
sales in any of the three preceding years. Section 305(c) requires
public utilities to publish a list of purchasers; it does not require a
report of the absence of purchasers. Thus, the Commission proposes to
eliminate the requirement to submit FERC-566 for those public utilities
that have not made any reportable sales in any of the three preceding
years.

D. Identification Requirement

    10. The Commission proposes to eliminate the requirement for public
utilities submitting FERC-566 to identify individual residential
customers by name and address. Currently, section 46.3(d) requires that
each public utility identify each purchaser on the list of the twenty
largest purchasers by name and principal business address. However, it
may not be necessary to have such detailed information about
residential customers. Thus, the Commission proposes to allow public
utilities to identify individual residential customers as ``Residential
Customer,'' and provide only a zip code in lieu of an address.

II. Information Collection Statement

    11. The collection of information addressed in this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking is subject to review by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995.\10\ OMB's regulations require approval of certain information
collection requirements imposed by agency rules.\11\ Upon approval of a
collection(s) of information, OMB will assign an OMB control number and
an expiration date. Respondents subject to the filing requirements of a
rule will not be penalized for failing to respond to these collections
of information unless the

collections of information display a valid OMB control number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
    \11\ 5 CFR 1320.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    12. We solicit comments on the need for this information, whether
the information will have practical utility, the accuracy of the burden
estimates, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected or retained, and any suggested methods for
minimizing respondents' burden, including the use of automated
information techniques. Specifically, the Commission asks that any
revised burden or cost estimates submitted by commenters be supported
by sufficient detail to understand how the estimates are generated.
    13. Public Reporting Burden: The burden and cost estimates below
are based on the estimated reduction in burden for certain entities
that would no longer have to file the annual report of twenty largest
purchasers. The Commission estimates the annual report to require (on
average) six hours to prepare and to file. The Commission estimates
that there are six RTOs/ISOs and an additional 880 filers that report
no purchasers. The latter category includes EWGs. The following table
illustrates the burden reductions to be applied to the information
collection:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Total
                                                  Annual  number                   Reduction in    reduction in
                                     Number of     of  responses   Total number       average     annual  burden
       Respondent category          respondents         per        of responses    burden hours   hours  & total
                                                    respondent                      & cost per     annual  cost
                                                                                response \12\       \13\
                                             (1)             (2)     (1)*(2)=(3)             (4)     (3)*(4)=(5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RTOs/ISOs.......................               6               1               6               6              36
                                                                                $423          $2,538
Filers with No Purchasers                    880               1             880               6           5,280
 (including EWGs)...............                                                            $423        $372,240
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Reduction.............  ..............  ..............             886  ..............           5,316
                                                                                $374,778
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Title: Annual Report of Twenty Largest Purchasers (FERC-566).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The estimates for cost per response are derived using the
following formula: Burden Hours per Response * $70.50/hour = Cost
per Response. The $70.50/hour figure is based on the average salary
plus benefits for a FERC employee. We assume that industry
respondents earn at a similar rate.
    \13\ Total Annual Burden Hours * $70.50.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Action: Revision to existing collection.
    OMB Control No: 1902-0114.
    Respondents: Business or other for profit, and not for profit
institutions.
    Frequency of Responses: Annually.
    Necessity of the Information: The Commission is required by the
Federal Power Act to collect information on public utilities' twenty
largest retail purchasers. This information helps the Commission
understand electric energy markets and transactions, in order to better
safeguard public and private interests. Upon review, the Commission
proposes that certain entities no longer need to make the annual
filing.
    Internal review: The Commission has assured itself, by means of its
internal review, that there is specific, objective support for the
burden estimates associated with the information requirements.
    14. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting
requirements by contacting the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Office of the Executive Director, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426 [Attention: Ellen Brown, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone:
(202) 502-8663, fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>].
    15. Comments concerning the information collection proposed in this
NOPR and the associated burden estimates, should be sent to the
Commission in this docket and may also be sent to the Office of
Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
[Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission].
For security reasons, comments should be sent by email to OMB at the
following email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please reference
the docket numbers of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Docket No.
RM15-3-000) in your submission.

III. Environmental Analysis

    16. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental
Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may
have a significant adverse effect on the human environment.\14\ This
action has been categorically excluded under section 380.4(a)(2)(ii),
addressing the collection of information.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats.
& Regs. Preambles 1986-1990 ] 30,783 (1987).
    \15\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    17. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \16\ generally
requires a description and analysis of proposed rules that will have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This NOPR proposes to revise the Commission's regulations to reduce
reporting burdens. Specifically, the Commission proposes to eliminate
the requirement to submit FERC-566 for RTOs and ISOs, EWGs, and those
public utilities that did not make retail sales in the preceding three
years. The Commission is also simplifying the requirements for existing
filers, as they will no longer have to identify individual residential
customers by name and address.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 5 U.S.C. 601-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. The Commission estimates that, on average, each of the entities
that will no longer have to file the FERC-566 will experience a
reduction in cost of $423 per year.
    19. Accordingly, the Commission certifies that this NOPR, if
adopted, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.

V. Comment Procedures

    20. The Commission invites interested persons to submit comments on
the matters and issues proposed in this notice to be adopted, including
any related matters or alternative proposals that commenters may wish
to discuss. Comments are due March 2, 2015. Comments must refer to
Docket No. RM15-3-000, and must include the commenter's name, the
organization they represent, if applicable, and their address in their
comments.
    21. The Commission encourages comments to be filed electronically
via the eFiling link on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov. The

Commission accepts most standard word processing formats. Documents
created electronically using word processing software should be filed
in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned
format. Commenters filing electronically do not need to make a paper
filing.
    22. Commenters that are not able to file comments electronically
must send an original of their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    23. All comments will be placed in the Commission's public files
and may be viewed, printed, or downloaded remotely as described in the
Document Availability section below. Commenters on this proposal are
not required to serve copies of their comments on other commenters.

VI. Document Availability

    24. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
Internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and
in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal business hours
(8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A,
Washington DC 20426.
    25. From the Commission's Home Page on the Internet, this
information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is
available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing,
printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type
the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in
the docket number field.
    26. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's
Web site during normal business hours from the Commission's Online
Support at<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email the Public Reference Room at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 46

    Electric utilities; Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    By direction of the Commission.

    Dated: December 18, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission proposes to amend
Part 46, Chapter I, Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

PART 46--PUBLIC UTILITY FILING REQUIREMENTS AND FILING REQUIREMENTS
FOR PERSONS HOLDING INTERLOCKING POSITIONS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 46 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 792-828c; 16 U.S.C. 2601-2645; 42 U.S.C.
7101-7352; E.O. 12009, 3 CFR 142.

0
2. Section 46.3 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:

Sec.  46.3  Purchaser list.

    (a)(1) Compilation and filing list. On or before January 31 of each
year, except as provided below, each public utility shall compile a
list of the purchasers described in paragraph (b) of this section and
shall identify each purchaser by name and principal business address.
The public utility must submit the list to the Secretary of the
Commission in accordance with filing procedures posted on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov and make the list publicly
available through its principal business office.
    (2) Notwithstanding paragraph (a)(1) of this section, public
utilities that are defined as Regional Transmission Operators, as
defined in Sec.  35.34(b)(1) of this chapter, and public utilities that
are defined as Independent System Operators, as defined in Sec.
35.46(d) of this chapter, are exempt from the requirement to file.
    (3) Notwithstanding paragraph (a)(1) of this section, public
utilities that meet the criteria for exempt wholesale generators, as
defined in Sec.  366.1 of this chapter, and are certified as such
pursuant to Sec.  366.7 of this chapter, are exempt from the
requirement to file.
    (4) Notwithstanding paragraph (a)(1) of this section, public
utilities that have no reportable sales as defined in section (b) in
any of the three preceding years are exempt from the requirement to
file.
    (5) Notwithstanding paragraph (a)(1) of this section, individual
residential customers on the list may be identified as ``Residential
Customer,'' and with a zip code in lieu of an address.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-30366 Filed 12-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 151 (Monday, August 6, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38318-38319]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16697]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2008-0010]

Board of Visitors for the National Fire Academy

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Committee management; notice of open federal advisory committee
meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Board of Visitors for the National Fire Academy (Board)
will meet on August 27-28, 2018, in Emmitsburg, Maryland. The meeting
will be open to the public.

DATES: The meeting will take place on Monday, August 27, 8:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time and on Tuesday, August 28, 8:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time. Please note that the meeting may close
early if the Board has completed its business.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the National Emergency Training
Center, 16825 South Seton Avenue,

Building H, Room 300, Emmitsburg, Maryland. Members of the public who
wish to obtain details on how to gain access to the facility and
directions may contact Deborah Gartrell-Kemp as listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by close of business August 17,
2018. Photo identification that meets REAL ID ACT standards (https://www.usfa.fema.gov/training/nfa/admissions/campus_access.html) is
required for access. Members of the public may also participate by
teleconference and may contact Deborah Gartrell-Kemp to obtain the
call-in number and access code. For information on services for
individuals with disabilities or to request special assistance, contact
Deborah Gartrell-Kemp as soon as possible.
    To facilitate public participation, we are inviting public comment
on the issues to be considered by the Board as listed in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. Comments must be submitted in
writing no later than August 17, 2018, must be identified by Docket ID
FEMA-2008-0010 and may be submitted by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Email: [email protected]. Include the docket number
in the subject line of the message.
     Mail/Hand Delivery: Deborah Gartrell-Kemp, 16825 South
Seton Avenue, Emmitsburg, Maryland 21727, post-marked no later than
August 17, 2018.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the words
``Federal Emergency Management Agency'' and the Docket ID for this
action. Comments received will be posted without alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received by the National Fire Academy Board of Visitors, go to
http://www.regulations.gov, click on ``Advanced Search,'' then enter
``FEMA-2008-0010'' in the ``By Docket ID'' box, then select ``FEMA''
under ``By Agency,'' and then click ``Search.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    Alternate Designated Federal Officer: Kirby E. Kiefer, telephone
(301) 447-1117, email [email protected].
    Logistical Information: Deborah Gartrell-Kemp, telephone (301) 447-
7230 and email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board will meet on Monday, August 27,
and Tuesday, August 28, 2018. The meeting will be open to the public.
Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee
Act, 5 U.S.C. App.

Purpose of the Board

    The purpose of the Board is to review annually the programs of the
National Fire Academy (Academy) and advise the Administrator of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), through the United States
Fire Administrator, on the operation of the Academy and any
improvements therein that the Board deems appropriate. In carrying out
its responsibilities, the Board examines Academy programs to determine
whether these programs further the basic missions that are approved by
the Administrator of FEMA, examines the physical plant of the Academy
to determine the adequacy of the Academy's facilities, and examines the
funding levels for Academy programs. The Board submits a written annual
report through the United States Fire Administrator to the
Administrator of FEMA. The report provides detailed comments and
recommendations regarding the operation of the Academy.

Agenda

    On Monday, August 27, 2018, there will be five sessions, with
deliberations and voting at the end of each session as necessary:
    1. The Board will conduct a swearing in of new Board members and
will then select a Chairperson and Vice Chairperson for Fiscal Year
2019.
    2. The Board will receive annual ethics training and will tour the
campus facility.
    3. The Board will discuss deferred maintenance and capital
improvements on the National Emergency Training Center campus and
Fiscal Year 2018 Budget Request/Budget Planning.
    4. The Board will deliberate and vote on recommendations on Academy
program activities, including:
     Fire and Emergency Services Higher Education (FESHE)
Recognition Program update, a certification program acknowledging that
a collegiate emergency services degree meets the minimum standards of
excellence established by FESHE development committees and the Academy;
     The National Professional Development Summit Report held
on June 13-16, 2018, which brought national training and education
audiences together for their annual conference and support initiatives;
     The Managing Officer Program progress report, a multiyear
curriculum that introduces emerging emergency services leaders to
personal and professional skills in change management, risk reduction,
and adaptive leadership;
     Program application selection results;
     The Executive Fire Officer (EFO) Program Symposium held
April 6-8, 2018, an annual event for alumni which recognizes
outstanding applied research completed by present EFO Program
participants, recognizes recent EFO Program graduates, provides high-
quality presentations offered by private and public sector
representatives, facilitates networking between EFO Program graduates,
promotes further dialog between EFO Program graduates and U.S. Fire
Administrator and National Fire Academy faculty and staff;
     The EFO Program review initiative;
     Curriculum development and revision updates for Academy
courses;
     Discussion on the approval process for state-specific
courses;
     Online mediated instruction program update;
     Distance learning program update;
     Staffing update.
    5. The Board will receive activity reports on the National Fire
Incident Reporting System Subcommittee, the Professional Development
Initiative Subcommittee, and four EFO Program Subcommittees:
Admissions, Curriculum, Delivery and Design, and Evaluations and
Outcomes.
    On Tuesday, August 28, 2018, the Board will receive updates on U.S.
Fire Administration data, research, and response support initiatives
and will conduct classroom visits. The Board will also engage in an
annual report writing session. Deliberations or voting may occur as
needed during the report writing session.
    There will be a 10-minute comment period after each agenda item and
each speaker will be given no more than 2 minutes to speak. Please note
that the public comment period may end before the time indicated,
following the last call for comments. Contact Deborah Gartrell-Kemp to
register as a speaker. Meeting materials will be posted at https://www.usfa.fema.gov/training/nfa/about/bov.html by August 17, 2018.

    Dated: July 27, 2018.
Tonya L. Hoover,
Superintendent, National Fire Academy, United States Fire
Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2018-16697 Filed 8-3-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-45-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 204 (Friday, October 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65506-65507]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27228]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2256-068]

Notice of Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments,
Motions To Intervene, and Protests; Consolidated Water Power Company

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Types of Application: Request to remove lands from the project
boundary.
    b. Project No.: 2256-068.
    c. Date Filed: August 15, 2011, and supplemented September 2 and
28, 2011.
    d. Applicant: Consolidated Water Power Company.
    e. Name of Projects: Wisconsin Rapids Hydroelectric Projects.
    f. Location: Wisconsin River in the City of Wisconsin Rapids, Wood
County, Wisconsin.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Thomas J. Witt, Consolidated Water Power
Company, P.O. Box 8050, Wisconsin Rapids, WI 54495-8050, (715) 422-
3073.
    i. FERC Contact: Mr. Jeremy Jessup,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests, is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice. All
documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. If unable to be filed
electronically, documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an
original and seven copies should be mailed to: Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters,
without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and
contact information at the end of your comments.
    Please include the project number (P-2256-068) on any comments,
motions, or recommendations filed.
    k. Description of Request: The applicant proposes to remove an
approximately one acre parcel of property, with an existing office
building, from the project boundary. The parcel is located in downtown
Wisconsin Rapids, WI, on the west side

of the Wisconsin River about 1,000 feet downstream from the Wisconsin
Rapids dam and about 100 feet from the river's shoreline. The applicant
states the parcel is not and has not been needed for any project
purposes.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed
on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field to access the document. You may also
register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208- 3676 or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR
4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate
to project works which are the subject of the license surrender.
Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the
applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served
upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other
filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof
of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the
Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and
385.2010.

    Dated: October 14, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-27228 Filed 10-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 58 (Friday, March 25, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16985-16987]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06288]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2020-0658]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Indian Creek, Miami Beach, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is changing the operating schedule that
governs the 63rd Street Bridge, across Indian Creek, mile 4.0, at Miami
Beach, FL. A request was made to place the drawbridge on a weekend
operating schedule to assist with alleviating vehicle congestion due to
on demand drawbridge openings. This change extends the operating
schedule to the weekend, so that openings on the hour and half-hour
will be required every day of the week, except Federal Holidays.

DATES: This rule is effective April 25, 2022.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov. Type USCG-
2020-0658 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH. In the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have any questions on this
rule, call or email Ms. Jennifer Zercher, Bridge Management Specialist,
Seventh Coast Guard District, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
OMB Office of Management and Budget
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Advance, Supplemental)
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code
FL Florida
FDOT Florida Department of Transportation
LNM Local Notice to Mariners

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On December 3, 2020, the Coast Guard published a Test Deviation,
with a request for comments, entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Indian Creek, Miami Beach, FL, in the Federal Register (85 FR 77994),
to test this operating schedule for the 63rd Street Bridge. Thirty one
comments were received during the test period and those comments were
addressed in the NPRM.
    On April 12, 2021, the Coast Guard published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Indian Creek,
Miami Beach, FL in the Federal Register (86 FR 18927). There we stated
why we issued the NPRM and invited comments on our proposed regulatory
action related to this regulatory change. During the comment period
that ended May 27, 2021, we received one comment which is addressed in
Section IV of this Final Rule.
    On June 24, 2021, the Coast Guard reopened the comment period in
the Federal Register (86 FR 33153). There we stated why we reopened the
comment period and invited comments on our proposed regulatory action
related to this regulatory change. During the comment period that ended
July 26, 2021, we received three hundred and thirteen comments, and
those comments are addressed in Section IV of this Final Rule.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority 33 U.S.C. 499.
    The 63rd Street Bridge across Indian Creek, mile 4.0, at Miami
Beach, FL, is a double-leaf bascule bridge with an 11 foot vertical
clearance at mean high water in the closed position. The operating
schedule for the drawbridge is set forth in 33 CFR 117.293. Navigation
on the waterway is commercial and recreational.
    A private citizen, with the support from the bridge owner, Florida
Department of Transportation (FDOT), requested the Coast Guard consider
placing the drawbridge on a weekend operating schedule to assist with
alleviating vehicle congestion due to on demand bridge openings. The
bridge currently operates on a schedule during the weekdays. This
change extends the operating schedule to the weekend. Openings on the
hour and half-hour will be required every day of the week, including
Saturday and Sunday.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule

    During the NPRM and the reopening of the NPRM comment period, three
hundred and fourteen comments were received. One hundred and forty
seven comments were in support of the proposed change but did not
provide additional recommendations or opinions.

    One hundred and nineteen comments were in support of the proposed
change but requested additional restrictions be placed on the operation
of the drawbridge. The additional restrictions included allowing the
drawbridge to only open four times a day, only open once an hour, allow
the drawbridge to remain closed to navigation at all times, limit the
amount of time the drawbridge remained in the open to navigation
position, extending the hours of the proposed schedule and removing the
on demand openings completely. The Coast Guard recognizes that when the
drawbridge opens to marine traffic, there is an interruption in vehicle
traffic flow. However, the traffic congestion in the area surrounding
the 63rd Street Bridge is not solely the result of the drawbridge's
operation. We have the responsibility to ensure that drawbridges are
operated so that they are a minimum obstruction to waterway traffic
while taking into account all modes of transportation. In order to help
reduce motor vehicle traffic delays and congestion, the Coast Guard has
authorized the drawbridge to operate on a schedule during weekdays, and
now have authorized the drawbridge to operate on this proposed weekend
schedule. We made the determination that adding restrictions beyond the
proposal will not meet the reasonable needs of navigation for this
waterway. Vessels have only one way to transit through Indian Creek at
this location. Other modes of transportation have alternate routes to
travel around this waterway.
    Six comments were received against the proposed weekend schedule.
The commenters felt that the drawbridge is restricted enough during the
weekday and boaters should continue to be able to request weekend
openings on demand. The Coast Guard feels it reasonable to place the
drawbridge on a weekend operating schedule to assist in alleviating
vehicle congestion in the area.
    Thirty four comments were received but did not provide an opinion
on the proposed operating schedule. The comments were directed toward
overall traffic congestion, roadway design, an increase in charter
vessels, vessel wakes, noise from charter vessels, and general comments
on the drawbridge not associated with the proposed operating schedule.
The Coast Guard will provide these comments to the appropriate agency
that has enforcement authority.
    Six comments were duplicate entries and addressed above. Two were
blank entries providing no opinions.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, it has
not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the ability that
vessels can still transit the drawbridge during the scheduled openings.
Additionally, vessels capable of transiting the waterway without an
opening may do so at any time.

B. 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 received zero comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rule. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C.
605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
drawbridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in Section
V.A. above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01, Rev.1,

associated implementing instructions, and Environmental Planning Policy
COMDTINST 5090.1 (series) which guide the Coast Guard in complying with
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-
4370f). The Coast Guard has 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 promulgates the
operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges and is
categorically excluded from further review, under paragraph L49, of
Chapter 3, Table3-1 of the U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning
Implementation Procedures.
    Neither a Record of Environmental Consideration nor a Memorandum
for the Record are required for this rule.

G. 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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Amend Sec.  117.293 by revising the introductory text and paragraph
(a) to read as follows:

Sec.  117.293   Indian Creek.

    The draw of the 63rd Street Bridge across Indian Creek, mile 4.0 at
Miami Beach, FL, shall open on signal except that:
    (a) Each day from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., except Federal holidays, the
draw need open only on the hour and half-hour;
* * * * *

    Dated: March 17, 2022.
Brendan C. McPherson,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander Seventh Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2022-06288 Filed 3-24-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 103 (Tuesday, May 30, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34446-34448]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11430]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2023-0431]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Laguna Madre, South Padre Island, TX

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
certain navigable waters in the Laguna Madre. The safety zone is needed
to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from
potential hazards created by a firework display launched from a barge
in the Laguna Madre, South Padre Island, Texas. Entry of vessels or
persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by
the Captain of the Port Sector Corpus Christi or a designated
representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 9:30 p.m. through 11:59 p.m. on May
28, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Commander Anthony Garofalo, Sector Corpus
Christi Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 361-
939-5130, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. We must
establish this safety zone immediately to protect personnel, vessels,
and the marine environment from potential hazards created by the
fireworks display and lack sufficient time to provide a reasonable
comment period and then to consider those comments before issuing the
rule.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be contrary to the public interest because immediate
action is needed to respond to the potential safety hazards associated
with fireworks launched from a barge in the waters of the Laguna Madre.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034. The Captain of the Port Sector Corpus Christi (COTP) has
determined that potential hazards associated with the fireworks display
from 9:30 p.m. through 11:59 p.m. on May 28, 2023, will be a safety
concern for anyone within the waters of the Laguna Madre area with a
700 yard radius from the following point; 26[deg]6'02.1'' N,
97[deg]10'17.7'' W. The purpose of this rule is to ensure safety of
vessels and persons on these navigable waters in the safety zone while
the display of the fireworks takes place in the Laguna Madre.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a temporary safety zone from 9:30 p.m.
through 11:59 p.m. on May 28, 2023. The safety zone will encompass
certain navigable waters of the Laguna Madre and is defined by a 700-
yard radius around the launching platform. The regulated area
encompasses a 700-yard radius from the following point; 26[deg]6'02.1''
N, 97[deg]10'17.7'' W. The fireworks display will take place in waters
of the Laguna Madre. No vessel or person is permitted to enter the
temporary safety zone during the effective period without obtaining
permission from the COTP or a designated representative, who may be
contacted on Channel 16 VHF-FM (156.8 MHz) or by telephone at 361-939-
0450. The Coast Guard will issue Broadcast Notices to Mariners, Local
Notices to Mariners, and/or Safety Marine Information Broadcasts, as
appropriate.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this
rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, and duration of the safety zone. The temporary safety zone
will be enforced for a short period of 2.5 hours. The zone is limited
to a 700-yard radius from the launching position of in the navigable

waters of the Laguna Madre. The rule does not completely restrict the
traffic within a waterway and allows mariners to request permission to
enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

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

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, and Environmental Planning, COMDTINST 5090.1
(series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f) and have
determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves establishment of a temporary safety
zone for navigable waters of the Laguna Madre in a zone defined by a
700 yard radius from the following coordinate: 26[deg]6'02.1'' N,
97[deg]10'17.7'' W. The safety zone is needed to protect personnel,
vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards created by
fireworks display in the waters of the Laguna Madre. It is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60 of
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A
record of environmental consideration is not necessary, but will be
provided if needed.

G. 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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0431 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0431  Safety Zone; Laguna Madre, South Padre Island, TX.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: all navigable
waters of the Laguna Madre encompassed by a 700-yard radius from the
following point; 26[deg]6'02.1'' N, 97[deg]10'17.7'' W.
    (b) Effective period. This section is effective from 9:30 p.m.
through 11:59 p.m. on May 28, 2023.
    (c) Regulations. (1) According to the general regulations in Sec.
165.23 of this part, entry into the temporary safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section is prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Sector Corpus Christi (COTP) or a designated
representative. They may be contacted on Channel 16 VHF-FM (156.8 MHz)
or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (2) If permission is granted, all persons and vessels shall comply
with the instructions of the COTP or designated representative.
    (d) Information broadcasts. The COTP or a designated representative
will inform the public of the enforcement times and date for this
safety zone through Broadcast Notices to Mariners, Local Notices to
Mariners, and/or Safety

Marine Information Broadcasts as appropriate.

    Dated: May 23, 2023.
J.B. Gunning,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Corpus Christi.
[FR Doc. 2023-11430 Filed 5-25-23; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 102 (Wednesday, May 28, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30599-30600]
[FR Doc No: 2014-12194]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC14-12-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-523); Comment
Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 USC 3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is soliciting public comment on the
currently approved information collection, FERC-523, Applications for
Authorization for Issuance of Securities or the Assumption of
Liabilities.

    Note: This 60-day notice is correcting an erroneous burden
estimate that was published in the Federal Register on 5/14/2014 (79
FR 27589). That published notice contained data concerning two other
FERC collections: FERC Form 2 (OMB Control No. 1902-0028) and FERC
Form 2A (OMB Control No. 1902-0030). These collections are also
being renewed, but they are completely unrelated to the FERC-523.
The burden estimations for the FERC Form 2 and Form 2A are
unaffected by this notice. Please see the Estimate of Annual Burden
section below for the corrected burden estimate for FERC-523.
Comments for all three collections will be due by the date listed in
this notice.

DATES: Comments on the collections of information are due July 28,
2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (identified by Docket No. IC14-12-
000) by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at (202)
273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: Applications for Authorization for Issuance of Securities or
the Assumption of Liabilities
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0082.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-523 information
collection requirements with no changes to the current reporting
requirements.
    Abstract: Under Federal Power Act (FPA) section 204, 16 U.S.C.
824c, no public utility or licensee shall issue any security, or assume
any obligation or liability as guarantor, endorser, surety, or
otherwise in respect of any security of another person, until the
public utility applies for and receives Commission approval by order
authorizing the issue or assumption of the liability. The Commission
issues an order if it finds that such issue or assumption (a) is for
lawful object, within the corporate purposes of the applicant and
compatible with the public interest, which is necessary or appropriate
for or consistent with the proper performance by the applicant as a
public utility, and which will not impair its ability to perform that
service, and (b) is reasonably necessary or appropriate for such
purposes.
    The Commission uses the information contained in filings to
determine its acceptance and/or rejection of applications for
authorization to either issue securities or to assume an obligation or
liability by the public utilities and their licensees who submit these
applications.
    The specific application requirements and filing format are found
at 18 CFR Part 34; and 18 CFR 131.43 and 131.50. The information is
filed electronically.
    Type of Respondents: Public utilities subject to the FPA.

    Estimate of Annual Burden: \1\ The Commission estimates the annual
public reporting burden for the information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Commission defines burden as the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain,
retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal
agency. For further explanation of what is included in the
information collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal
Regulations 1320.3.

                          FERC-523--Applications for Authorization for Issuance of Securities or the Assumption of Liabilities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Average      Total annual
                                                          Number of      Annual  number   Total  number   burden &  cost  burden hours &     Cost per
                                                         respondents     of  responses    of  responses    per  response   total annual     respondent
                                                                        per  respondent                         \2\            cost             ($)
                                                                  (1)              (2)      (1)*(2)=(3)              (4)     (3)*(4)=(5)         (5)/(1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERC-523.............................................              56                1               56               70           3,920          $4,935
                                                                                $4,935        $276,360  ..............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    \2\ The estimates for cost per response are derived using the
following formula: Average Burden Hours per Response * $70.50 per
Hour = Average Cost per Response. The hourly cost figure of $70.50
is the average FERC employee wage plus benefits. We assume that
respondents earn at a similar rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: May 19, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-12194 Filed 5-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


1 PRODUCT CHARACTERIZATION &

HUMAN HEALTH SAFETY ASSESSMENT FOR STACKED PLANT INCORPORATED PROTECTANTS June 8, 2004 2 OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION ° Overview of food safety regulation ° Active ingredient versus new product ° Traditional breeding versus transformation ° Oral Toxicity not Allergenicity Assessment is subject of discussion 3 FEDERAL OVERSIGHT OF FEDERAL OVERSIGHT OF FOOD SAFETY FOR FOOD SAFETY FOR GENETICALLY GENETICALLY ENGINEERED ENGINEERED PLANTS PLANTS ° Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs ° Food and Drug Administration Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition 4 PLANT PLANT INCORPORATED INCORPORATED PROTECTANTS (

PROTECTANTS ( PIPs PIPs)

° A PIP is defined as the pesticidal substance and the genetic material necessary for its production in a living plant.

° Genetic material is essential for a plant to express a new pesticidal substance.

° The basis of the risk assessment is the hazard of, and exposure to, the pesticidal substance.

° New active ingredient versus new product.

° Transformation versus traditional breeding. 5 PLANT PLANT INCORPORATED INCORPORATED PROTECTANTS (

PROTECTANTS ( PIPs PIPs)

° Most PIPs have marker genes associated with them as inert ingredients.

° Several PIPs have more than one active pesticidal substance.

° Potato Cry3A & PLRV replicase.

° Corn Cry1Ab & Cry3Bb1 YieldGard Plus.

° Cotton Cry1Ac & Cry1F WideStrike.

° Cotton Cry1Ac & Cry2Ab2 BollGard II. 6 DATA CATEGORIES RELATED TO DATA CATEGORIES RELATED TO TOXICITY & DIETARY SAFETY OF TOXICITY & DIETARY SAFETY OF PROTEIN PIPS PROTEIN PIPS ° CHARACTERIZATION OF THE PROTEIN.

° PESTICIDAL MODE OF ACTION.

° AMINO ACID SEQUENCE HOMOLOGY.

° IN VITRO DIGESTIBILITY/ PROCESSING.

° ACUTE ORAL TOXICITY.

° ALLERGENICITY DETERMINATION. 7 PROTEIN TOXICITY ASSESSMENT ORAL TOXICITY ° Dietary Proteins Paradigm ° Known Protein Toxins/ Longer Term Effects ° Limit Dose ( Maximum Hazard) Approach ° June 7, 2000 SAP comments on protein fragments and safety factors approach 8 PROTEIN TOXICITY ASSESSMENT ACUTE ORAL TOXICITY LIMIT DOSE ° Pure protein test substance ° Alternate expression vehicle ° Dose of 2 5 g/ kg bodyweight ° Concentration of test substance ° Dose volume limitation 2.0ml/ 100gm 9 WIDESTRIKE COTTON CRY1F & CRY1Ac PROTEIN TOXICITY ASSESSMENT ° Cry1Ac tested at 700mg/ kg ( 14%).

° Cry1F tested at 600 mg/ kg ( 30%).

° Combination of 1Ac and 1F tested at 350 and 375 mg/ kg respectively.

° No adverse effects in any study.

° No similarity to any toxins.

° No receptor interaction/ Synergy. 10 DNA / AMINO ACID SEQUENCE ° June 2000 SAP " novel" proteins needed greater scrutiny ° Changes to DNA sequence for codon preference / Southern blot/ plasmid map ° Chimeric Cry proteins for protoxin ° Full amino acid ( AA) sequence data is always available for the introduced trait/ expressed protein ° Confirmation of AA sequence by Nterminal or MALDI TOF 11 AGRONOMIC AGRONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS/

CHARACTERISTICS/

CONSTITUENT ANALYSIS CONSTITUENT ANALYSIS ° APHIS/ CFSAN data ° Analysis of crosses with expected Mendelian ratios ° Tissue expression over time ° Efficacy and other performance parameters ° Fatty acid/ gossypol levels 12 CONCLUSIONS ° No signs of toxicity from the submitted tests.

° No significant direct exposure to Cry proteins in cottonseed.

° Data for individual proteins sufficient for human dietary hazard assessment unless mode of action indicates binary toxin or synergy.

° Traditional breeding to introduce or combine traits less problematic than sequential transformations. 13 QUESTION 1 ° The Agency examines the safety of proteins based on the source of the protein, the protein's pesticidal mode of action, comparisons of the amino acid sequence to toxins and allergens and the results of acute oral toxicity testing. The company provided numerous mammalian oral toxicity studies to demonstrate the safety of the introduced Cry1Ac and Cry1F protein insecticidal toxins. The toxins were tested both separately and in combination. The Agency believes tests with combinations of pure proteins may address possible synergistic interactions between introduced proteins. 14 QUESTION 1 ( continued)

° However, the Agency believes that unless there is an indication that the two proteins would interact, such as being parts of a binary toxin or attaching to the same receptor, there is little to justify testing the two protein together when separate oral toxicity tests indicate a lack of toxicity for the individual proteins.

° Does the panel have additional comments on this position including instances where it would be justified to require the toxicity testing of two proteins in combination? 15 QUESTION 2 ° When traits are introduced into crop plants using transformation techniques of modern biotechnology of even traditional breeding,

one of the areas of concern is the possibility of unintentional changes. There is a general difficulty in screening for these changes since it is a conceptual leap to anticipate the unexpected. However, in general the approach has been to examine general performance of the new cultivars like agronomic performance and compositional analysis to detect unintentional effects. 16 QUESTION2 ( continued)

° PIP products can be both transformed lines and the result of traditional breeding of two transformed lines to yield a new product like WideStrike cotton. In both cases, the new PIP product must be registered just as other combinations of pesticide active ingredients must be registered.

° For PIP products resulting from traditionally bred transformed lines, under what circumstances, if any,

would it be appropriate to examine agronomic performance and compositional analysis to provide a screen for unintentional changes in the crop? Please describe other ways EPA might consider screening for potential unintentional changes in a crop.


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 110 (Wednesday, June 8, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34873-34874]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12359]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2021-0566; FRL-9867-01-OAR]

Notice of June 2022 Denial of Petitions for Small Refinery
Exemptions Under the Renewable Fuel Standard Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Denial of petitions.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is providing notice
of its final action entitled June 2022 Denial of Petitions for RFS
Small Refinery Exemptions (``SRE Denial'') in which EPA denied 69 small
refinery exemption (SRE) petitions under the Renewable Fuel Standard
(RFS) program. EPA is providing this notice for public awareness of,
and the basis for, EPA's decision announced on June 3, 2022.

DATES: June 8, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Nelson, Office of Transportation
and Air Quality, Compliance Division, Environmental Protection Agency,
2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105; telephone number: 734-214-
4657; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Clean Air Act (CAA) provides that a small refinery \1\ may at
any time petition EPA for an extension of the

exemption from the obligations of the RFS program for the reason of
disproportionate economic hardship (DEH).\2\ In evaluating such
petitions, the EPA Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of
Energy, will consider the findings of a Department of Energy (DOE)
study and other economic factors.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The CAA defines a small refinery as ``a refinery for which
the average aggregate daily crude oil throughput for a calendar year
. . . does not exceed 75,000 barrels.'' CAA section 211(o)(1)(K).
    \2\ CAA section 211(o)(9)(B)(i).
    \3\ CAA section 211(o)(9)(B)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Decision

    In the SRE Denial,\4\ we conducted an extensive analysis and review
of information provided to EPA by small refineries in their SRE
petitions and in the comments submitted in response to the Proposed
Denial.\5\ We sought comment on all aspects of the Proposed Denial,
including on our conclusions that the CAA requires small refineries to
demonstrate that DEH is caused by compliance with the RFS program. We
also sought comment on our economic analyses and conclusion that no
small refineries face disproportionate costs of compliance due to the
RFS program, no economic hardship, and, therefore, no DEH caused by RFS
compliance. We requested additional data that would show the
relationship between RFS compliance costs and the price of
transportation fuel blendstocks. We also sought comment on our proposed
change in approach to SRE eligibility based on receipt of the original
statutory exemption, and our proposed decision to deny all pending SRE
petitions based on the proportional nature of the RFS requirements and
our findings regarding RIN cost passthrough. We considered all the
comments received and have responded to them in the SRE Denial and its
corresponding appendices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``June 2022 Denial of Petitions for RFS Small Refinery
Exemptions,'' EPA-420-R-22-011, June 2022.
    \5\ ``Proposed RFS Small Refinery Exemption Decision,'' EPA-420-
D-21-001, December 2021 (hereinafter the ``Proposed Denial''). 86 FR
70999 (December 14, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the SRE Denial, we find that all refineries face the same costs
to acquire RINs regardless of whether the RINs are created through the
act of blending renewable fuels or are purchased on the open market.
This happens because the market price for these fuels increases to
reflect the cost of the RIN, much as it would increase in response to
higher crude prices. In other words, this increased price for gasoline
and diesel fuel allows obligated parties to recover their RIN costs
through the market price of the fuel they produce. Because the market
behaves this way for all parties subject to the RFS program, there is
no disproportionate cost to any party, including small refineries, and
no hardship given that the costs are recovered. As a result, we
conclude that small refineries do not face DEH. Given this conclusion
and the other reasons described in the SRE Denial, we have denied 69
SRE petitions for the 2016-2021 compliance years by finding the
petitioning refineries do not face DEH caused by compliance with their
RFS obligations.

III. Judicial Review

    Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA governs judicial review of final
actions by the EPA. This section provides, in part, that petitions for
review must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit: (i) when the agency action consists of
``nationally applicable . . . final actions taken by the
Administrator,'' or (ii) when such action is locally or regionally
applicable, but ``such action is based on a determination of nationwide
scope or effect and if in taking such action the Administrator finds
and publishes that such action is based on such a determination.'' For
locally or regionally applicable final actions, the CAA reserves to the
EPA complete discretion whether to invoke the exception in (ii)
described in the preceding sentence.
    This final action is ``nationally applicable'' within the meaning
of CAA section 307(b)(1). In the alternative, to the extent a court
finds this final action to be locally or regionally applicable, the
Administrator is exercising the complete discretion afforded to him
under the CAA to make and publish a finding that this action is based
on a determination of ``nationwide scope or effect'' within the meaning
of CAA section 307(b)(1).\6\ This final action denies 69 petitions for
exemptions from the RFS program for over 30 small refineries across the
country and applies to small refineries located within 15 states in 7
of the 10 EPA regions and in 8 different Federal judicial circuits.\7\
This final action is based on EPA's revised interpretation of the
relevant CAA provisions and the RIN discount and RIN cost passthrough
principles that are applicable to all small refineries no matter the
location or market in which they operate. For these reasons, this final
action is nationally applicable or, alternatively, the Administrator is
exercising the complete discretion afforded to him by the CAA and
hereby finds that this final action is based on a determination of
nationwide scope or effect for purposes of CAA section 307(b)(1) and is
hereby publishing that finding in the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In deciding whether to invoke the exception by making and
publishing a finding that this final action is based on a
determination of nationwide scope or effect, the Administrator has
also taken into account a number of policy considerations, including
his judgment balancing the benefit of obtaining the D.C. Circuit's
authoritative centralized review versus allowing development of the
issue in other contexts and the best use of Agency resources.
    \7\ In the report on the 1977 Amendments that revised section
307(b)(1) of the CAA, Congress noted that the Administrator's
determination that the ``nationwide scope or effect'' exception
applies would be appropriate for any action that has a scope or
effect beyond a single judicial circuit. See H.R. Rep. No. 95-294 at
323, 324, reprinted in 1977 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1402-03.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit by August 8, 2022.

Joseph Goffman,
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2022-12359 Filed 6-7-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P