[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 89 (Friday, May 8, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26554-26555]
[FR Doc No: 2015-11212]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0231; FRL-9925-80]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), this
document announces that EPA is planning to submit an Information
Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
The ICR, entitled: ``Foreign Purchaser Acknowledgement Statement of
Unregistered Pesticides'' and identified by EPA ICR No. 0161.13 and OMB
Control No. 2070-0027, represents the renewal of an existing ICR that
is scheduled to expire on January 31, 2016. Before submitting the ICR
to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific
aspects of the proposed information collection that is summarized in
this document. The ICR and accompanying material are available in the
docket for public review and comment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 7, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0231, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC
20460-0001.
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along
with more information about

dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Drewes, Field and External
Affairs Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What information is EPA particularly interested in?

    Pursuant to PRA section 3506(c)(2)(A) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)),
EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility.
    2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burden of
the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used.
    3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected.
    4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

II. What information collection activity or ICR does this action apply
to?

    Title: Foreign Purchaser Acknowledgement Statement of Unregistered
Pesticides.
    ICR number: EPA ICR No. 0161.13.
    OMB control number: OMB Control No. 2070-0027.
    ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on January
31, 2016. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays
a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), after
appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR
part 9, are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or
by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection
instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers
for certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: This information collection request is designed to enable
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to provide notice to foreign
purchasers of unregistered pesticides exported from the United States
that the pesticide product cannot be sold in the United States. Section
17(a)(2) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA) requires an exporter of any pesticide not registered under
FIFRA section 3 or sold under FIFRA section 6(a)(1) to obtain a signed
statement from the foreign purchaser acknowledging that the purchaser
is aware that the pesticide is not registered for use in, and cannot be
sold in, the United States. A copy of this statement must be
transmitted to an appropriate official of the government in the
importing country. This information is submitted in the form of annual
or per-shipment statements to the EPA, which maintains original records
and transmits copies thereof to appropriate government officials of the
countries which are importing the pesticide. This information
collection request also includes the burden imposed by export labeling
requirements, which meet the definition of third-party disclosure. In
addition to the export notification for unregistered pesticides, FIFRA
requires that all pesticides include appropriate labeling. There are
different requirements for registered and unregistered products. This
information collection has been constant since the implementation of
the 1993 pesticide export policy governing the export of pesticides,
devices, and active ingredients used in producing pesticides.
    Burden statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average one
to eight hours per response. Burden is defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    The ICR, which is available in the docket along with other related
materials, provides a detailed explanation of the collection activities
and the burden estimate that is only briefly summarized here:
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Entities potentially affected by
this ICR are individuals or entities that produce and export
pesticides. The North American Classification System (NAICS) code
assigned to the parties responding to this information collection is
325300.
    Estimated total number of potential respondents: 50.
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent:
20-60.
    Estimated total annual burden hours: 17,993 hours.
    Estimated total annual costs: $ 1,224,655. There are no capital
investment or maintenance and operational costs for this information
collection.

III. Are there changes in the estimates from the last approval?

    There is a decrease of 6,477 hours in the total estimated
respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR currently
approved by OMB. This decrease reflects EPA's updating of burden
estimates for this collection based upon historical information on the
number of responses per year. Based upon revised estimates, the number
of exported products has decreased from 900 to 611, with a
corresponding decrease in the associated burden. This change is an
adjustment.

IV. What is the next step in the process for this ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another
Federal Register document pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to
announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit
additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or
the approval process, please contact the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

    Dated: May 1, 2015.
James Jones,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2015-11212 Filed 5-7-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 183 (Friday, September 24, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 53107]
[FR Doc No: 2021-20683]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4508-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

Montana; Amendment No. 6 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the State of Montana (FEMA-4508-DR), dated March 31, 2020, and
related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued August 5, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
dated March 31, 2020 for the State of Montana is hereby amended to
include the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    All areas within the State of Montana are eligible for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-20683 Filed 9-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: March 28, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 59)]
[Notices]
[Page 14548-14551]
[DOCID:fr28mr07-58]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0037; FRL-8118-3]

Pesticide Registration Review; New Dockets Opened for Review and
Comment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA has established registration review dockets for the
pesticides listed in the table in Unit III.A. With this document, EPA
is opening the public comment period for these registration reviews.
Registration review is EPA's periodic review of pesticide registrations
to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the statutory
standard for registration, that

is, the pesticide can perform its intended function without
unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment.
Registration review dockets contain information that will assist the
public in understanding the types of information and issues that the
Agency may consider during the course of registration reviews. Through
this program, EPA is ensuring that each pesticide's registration is
based on current scientific and other knowledge, including its effects
on human health and the environment. This document also announces the
Agency's intent not to open a registration review docket for pyridate.
This pesticide does not currently have any active federally registered
pesticide products and is not, therefore, scheduled for review under
the registration review program.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 26, 2007..

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments identified by the docket identification
(ID) number for the specific pesticide of interest provided in the
table in Unit III.A., by one of the following methods:
    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the

on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    Mail. Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket
(7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001.
    Delivery. OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental
Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket's normal hours of operation 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. Special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information. The Docket telephone number is
(703) 305-5805.
    Instructions. Direct your comments to the docket ID numbers listed
in the Table below for the pesticides you are commenting on. EPA's
policy is that all comments received will be included in the docket
without change and may be made available on-line 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 regulations.gov or e-mail. The
regulations.gov website 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 regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the 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 docket are listed in the docket index
available at regulations.gov. To access the electronic docket, go to
http://www.regulations.gov, select ``Advanced Search,'' then ``Docket

Search.'' Insert the docket ID number where indicated and select the
``Submit'' button. Follow the instructions on the regulations.gov web
site to view the docket index or access available documents. Although,
listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
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 electronically at
http://www.regulations.gov , or, if only available in hard copy, at the

OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of
this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number
is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about the pesticides
included in this notice, contact the specific Chemical Review Managers
for these pesticides as identified in the table to this document.
    For general questions on the registration review program, contact
Kennan Garvey, Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508P),
Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703) 305-7106; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, farmworker, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry;
pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale,
distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be
interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific
entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.

    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Authority

    EPA is initiating its reviews of the pesticides identified in this
document pursuant to section 3(g) of the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Procedural Regulations
for Registration Review published on August 9, 2006, and effective on
October 10, 2006 (71 FR 45719) (FRL-8080-4), also at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-PEST/2006/August/Day-09/p12904.htm.
 Section

3(g) of FIFRA provides, among other things, that the registrations of
pesticides are to be periodically reviewed. The goal is a review of a
pesticide's registration every 15 years. Under section 3(a) of FIFRA, a
pesticide product may be registered or remain registered only if it
meets the statutory standard for registration given in FIFRA section
3(c)(5). When used in accordance with widespread and commonly
recognized practice, the pesticide product must perform its intended
function without unreasonable adverse effects on the environment; that
is, without any unreasonable risk to man or the environment, or a human
dietary risk from residues that result from the use of a pesticide in
or on food.

III. Registration Reviews

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    As directed by FIFRA section 3(g), EPA is periodically reviewing
pesticide registrations to assure that they continue to satisfy the
FIFRA standard for registration--that is, they can still be used
without unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the
environment. The implementing regulations establishing the procedures
for registration review appear at 40 CFR part 155. A pesticide's
registration review begins when the Agency establishes a docket for the
pesticide's registration review case and opens the docket for public
review and comment. At present, EPA is opening registration review
dockets for the cases identified in the following table.

               Table--Registration Review Dockets Opening
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Chemical Review
  Registration Review Case Name    Pesticide Docket      Manager Name,
           and Number                  ID Number       Phone Number, E-
                                                         mail Address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paclobutrazol (7002)              EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-01  Nathan Mottl
                                   09<PHONE_NUMBER>
                                                      mottl.nathan@epa.
                                                       ov
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cyromazine (7439)                 EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-01  James Parker
                                   08<PHONE_NUMBER>
                                                      parker.james@epa.
                                                       ov
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fenarimol (7001)                  EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-02  Katherine St.
                                   41                  Clair
<PHONE_NUMBER>
                                                      stclair.katherine@
                                                       epa.gov
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Triflumizole (7003)               EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-01  Mark T. Howard
                                   15<PHONE_NUMBER>
                                                      howard.markt@epa.
                                                       ov
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Formesafen (7211)                 EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-02  Wilhelmena
                                   39                  Livingston
<PHONE_NUMBER>
                                                      livingston.wilhelm
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>---------------------------------
Clofentezine (7602)               EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-02  Joy Schnackenbeck
                                   40<PHONE_NUMBER>
                                                      schnackenbeck.joy@
                                                       epa.gov
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA is also announcing that it will not be opening a docket for
pyridate because this pesticide is not included in any products
actively registered under section 3 of FIFRA. Tough 3.75 EC was
officially cancelled in 2002 for failure to pay the required annual
maintenance fee. Pryridate Technical and Tough 5EC were subsequently
cancelled in 2004 (October 27, 2004; 69 FR 62666; FRL-7683-7). The
Agency will take separate action to cancel any remaining section 24(c)
Special Local Needs registrations with this active ingredient and to
propose revocation of any affected tolerances that are not supported
for import purposes only.

B. Docket Content

    1. Review dockets. The registration review dockets contain
information that the Agency may consider in the course of the
registration review. The Agency may include information from its files
including, but not limited to, the following information:
     An overview of the registration review case status.
     A list of current product registrations and registrants.
     FR Notices regarding any pending registration actions.
     FR Notices regarding current or pending tolerances.
     Risk assessments.
     Bibliographies concerning current registrations.
     Summaries of incident data.
     Any other pertinent data or information.
    Each docket contains a document summarizing what the Agency
currently knows about the pesticide case and a preliminary work plan
for anticipated data and assessment needs. Additional documents provide
more detailed information. During this public comment period, the
Agency is asking that interested persons identify any additional
information they believe the Agency should consider during the
registration reviews of these pesticides. The Agency identifies in each
docket the areas where public comment is specifically requested, though
comment in any area is welcome.

    2. Other related information. More information on these cases,
including the active ingredients for each case, may be located in the
registration review schedule on the Agency's website at http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/registration_review/schedule.htm.
 Information on

the Agency's registration review program and its implementing
regulation may be seen at http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/registration_review/
.

     3. Information submission requirements. Anyone may submit data or
information in response to this document. To be considered during a
pesticide's registration review, the submitted data or information must
meet the following requirements:
    To ensure that EPA will consider data or information submitted,
interested persons must submit the data or information during the
comment period. The Agency may, at its discretion, consider data or
information submitted at a later date.
    The data or information submitted must be presented in legible and
useable form. For example, an English translation must accompany any
material that is not in English and a written transcript must accompany
any information submitted as an audiographic or videographic record.
Written material may be submitted in paper or electronic form.
    Submitters must clearly identify the source of any submitted data
or information.
    Submitters may request the Agency to reconsider data or information
that the Agency rejected in a previous review. However, submitters must
explain why they believe the Agency should reconsider the data or
information in the pesticide's registration review.
    As provided in 40 CFR part 155, subpart C, Sec.  155.58, the
registration review docket for each pesticide case will remain publicly
accessible through the duration of the registration review process;
that is, until all actions required in the final decision on the
registration review case have been completed.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: March 14, 2007.
James B. Gulliford,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic
Substances.
[FR Doc. E7-5574 Filed 3-27-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 74 (Wednesday, April 19, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18407-18409]
[FR Doc No: 2017-07907]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2017-0212]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; St. Louis River (Duluth-Superior
Harbor), Between the Towns of Duluth, MN and Superior, WI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the regulations that govern
the drawbridges over the St. Louis River at Duluth-Superior Harbor.
This waterway borders Minnesota and Wisconsin and is listed under
Minnesota as St. Louis River (Duluth-Superior Harbor) and under
Wisconsin as Duluth-Superior Harbor (St. Louis River) in the CFR. This
proposed rule would affect both regulations. The owner of the
Burlington Northern Grassy Point Railroad Bridge at mile 5.44 requested
the regulation be updated to include permanent winter operating
schedule. This proposed rule would also align river mile numbers with
the United States Coast Pilot and delete bridges from the regulations
that have been removed from the waterway and make the regulation easier
to read and less confusing to the mariner.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before May 19, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2017-0212 using Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email Mr. Lee D. Soule, Bridge Management Specialist,
Ninth Coast Guard District; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
LWD Low Water Datum
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
SNPRM Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking
Pub. L. Public Law

Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    The St. Louis River flows eastward through Grassy Point into the
St. Louis Bay and then into the west side of Superior Bay near its
north end through Rices Point and Connors Point. The Minnesota Channel,
the dredged channel, follows the Minnesota shore for 2 miles west of
Grassy Point before turning south. The buoys in the Minnesota Channel,
are maintained from April 28 to December 7 each year when the waterway
is typically ice free. The waterway is used by recreational and
commercial vessels, including large freighters. Most vessels, including
the larger freighters, avoid navigating the Minnesota Channel after
December 7 when the buoys are decommissioned for the winter and ice
makes navigation difficult.
    The Burlington Northern Grassy Point Railroad Bridge at mile 5.44
is a center swing bridge that provides 175 feet of horizontal clearance
in both draws and a vertical clearance of 12 feet in the closed
position with an unlimited clearance in the open position at LWD. Fixed
spans, outside of the channel limits, adjoining the bridge have a
horizontal clearance of 64 feet and a vertical clearance of 13 feet at
LWD. The bridge currently opens on signal, except that from January 1
through March 15 the draw opens on signal if at least 24 hours notice
is provided.
    The bridges listed in the regulation as the Grassy Point Bridge at
mile 8.0 and the Arrow Head Bridge at mile 8.7, respectively, have been
removed from the waterway.
    The Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range combined Railroad and Highway
Bridge, also known as the Oliver Bridge, at mile 13.91, is a center
swing bridge with a horizontal clearance of 125 feet in both draws and
a vertical clearance of 22 feet in the closed position at LWD. This
bridge has been authorized to remain in the closed position for over 20
years but must return to operable condition when notified by the
District Commander to do so.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The bridge river/waterway mile numbers in the current regulation
and the Coast Pilot 6 do not match. To avoid confusion this discussion
only refers to the bridge mile numbers as published in the current
Coast Pilot 6. The intent is to correct the mile numbers in this
proposed rule so both the CFR and Coast Pilot 6 match.
    The bridges referred to as the Grassy Point Bridge at mile 8.0 and
the Arrow Head Bridge at mile 8.7 in the current regulation will be
removed from the CFR because the bridges have been removed and are no
longer crossing the waterway.
    The drawbridge referred to as the Burlington Northern Railroad
Bridge at mile 5.7 in the current regulation will be revised and
referred to as the Burlington Northern Railroad Grassy Point Bridge at
mile 5.44.
    We reviewed the drawtender logs provided by the owners of the
Burlington Northern Railroad Grassy Point Bridge and found the last
vessel to request an opening in 2014 was an unknown tug boat on
December 11, at 9 p.m., and in 2015 the last vessel to request an
opening was a Coast Guard vessel that requested an opening on December
6, at 2 p.m., and in 2016 the last vessel to request an opening was a
Coast Guard vessel that requested an opening on December 2, at 5:45
p.m. Due to the lack of openings after December 7, we propose to allow
the bridge to open if a 12-hour notice is given from December 15
through March 15 each year.
    We propose to rename the Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range combined
Railroad and Highway Bridge at mile 13.91 to the Canadian National
Railroad and Highway Bridge to reflect the current ownership of the
bridge, but continue to allow the bridge to remain in the closed
position. The bridge will be required to return to operable condition
when notified by the District Commander to do so.
    The regulatory language for these drawbridges appear under two
separate sections of 33 CFR; Sec.  117.669 St. Louis River (Duluth-
Superior Harbor) and Sec.  117.1083 Duluth-Superior Harbor (St. Louis
River). Our intent is to issue a Final Rule for Sec.  117.669 that
includes all revised language for St. Louis River drawbridges, and
revise Sec.  117.1083 by removing the regulatory language and referring
readers to Sec.  117.669 Duluth-Superior Harbor (St. Louis River).

IV. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This NPRM has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the ability that
vessels can still transit the bridge from December 15 through March 15
if a 12-hour advance notice of arrival is provided at a time of year
when vessel traffic is at its lowest. All other changes to the
regulation are administrative in nature and required to make the
regulation consistent with other published navigation information.

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 certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. While some owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit the bridge may be small entities, for the
reasons stated in section IV.A above this proposed rule would not have
a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator because
the bridge will still open if advance notice if provided.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    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 proposed 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. The Coast Guard will

not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about
this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

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

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 proposed 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 proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed 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 proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this
proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule simply
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges.
Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review,
under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are not required for this rule. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed 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.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).
    Documents mentioned in this document, and all public comments, are
in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by
following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the
online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when
comments are posted or a final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 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; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Revise Sec.  117.669 to read as follows:

Sec.  117.669   St. Louis River (Duluth-Superior Harbor).

    (a) The draw of the Burlington Northern Grassy Point railroad
Bridge, mile 5.44, shall open on signal except that, from December 15
through March 15 the draw shall open if at least 12-hour notice is
given.
    (b) The draw of the Canadian National Combined Railroad and Highway
Bridge, mile 13.91, need not be opened for the passage of vessels. The
owner shall return the draw to operable condition within a reasonable
time when notified by the District Commander to do so.
0
3. Revise Sec.  117.1083 to read as follows:

Sec.  117.1083   Duluth-Superior Harbor (St. Louis River).

    See Sec.  117.669 St. Louis River (Duluth-Superior Harbor), listed
under Minnesota.

    Dated: March 31, 2017.
J.E. Ryan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Ninth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2017-07907 Filed 4-18-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: June 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 119)]
[Notices]
[Page 34976]
[DOCID:fr19jn08-113]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Intent To Request Revision From the Office of
Management and Budget of a Currently Approved Information Collection
Activity, Request for Comments; FAA Airport Master Record

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA invites public comments about our intention to request
that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approve a current
information collection. The information is required to carry out FAA
missions related to the aviation industry, flight planning, and airport
engineering.

DATES: Please submit comments by August 18, 2008.

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

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

    Title: FAA Airport Master Record.
    Type of Request: Extension without change of an approved
collection.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0015.
    Form(s): 5010-1, 5010-2, 5010-3, 5010-5.
    Affected Public: A total of 19,345 Respondents.
    Frequency: The information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden Per Response: Approximately 27 minutes per
response.
    Estimated Annual Burden Hours: An estimated 8,770 hours annually.
    Abstract: 49 U.S.C. 329(b) directs the Secretary of Transportation
to collect information about civil aeronautics. The information is
required to carry out FAA missions related to the aviation industry,
flight planning, and airport engineering. The database is the basic
source of data for private, state, and Federal government aeronautical
charts and publications.

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

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 11, 2008.
Carla Mauney,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises Business
Services Division, AES-200.
[FR Doc. E8-13778 Filed 6-18-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 77 (Monday, April 24, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18879-18881]
[FR Doc No: 2017-08142]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0776]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Ashley River, Charleston, SC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to modify the operating schedule that
governs the Ashley River Bridges across the Ashley River, miles 2.4 and
2.5 at Charleston, SC. This proposed rule would require a bridge tender
to be present during the daytime hours only from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. daily
for on signal openings. All other times would require 12 hours advance
notification. This modification would provide some relief to vehicle
traffic congestion and would have little to no effect on navigation.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before June 23, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2016-0776 using Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov.
    See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this proposed
rule, call or email LT John Downing with the Coast Guard; telephone
843-740-3184, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Pub. L. Public Law
SCDOT South Carolina Department of Transportation
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis

    On May 19, 2015, the HDR/ICA contractor for South Carolina
Department of Transportation requested that the Coast Guard review the
current bridge operating schedule to determine whether a change could
be made to improve vehicle traffic flow in the area.

The bridge owner, South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT)
was also consulted on this issue and concurred with the recommendation
to change the current 12 hours advance notice for a bridge opening to
be extended to include nighttime hours.
    The US 17, Ashley River Bridges, miles 2.4 and 2.5, at Charleston,
SC are double leaf bascule bridges. Each bridge has a vertical
clearance of 24 feet in the closed position at mean high water and a
horizontal clearance of 90 feet.
    Presently, in accordance with 33 CFR 117.915(a), the Ashley River
bridges (US17) also known as the US17 Highway Bridge at miles 2.4 and
2.5 at Charleston, SC shall open on signal, except that from 7 a.m.
until 9 a.m. Monday through Friday and 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. daily, the
draws need be opened only if at least 12 hours notice is given. The
draws of either bridge shall open as soon as possible for the passage
of vessels in an emergency involving danger to life or property.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The Coast Guard proposes to change the operation of the Ashley
River (US17) Bridges, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, miles 2.4 and
2.5, at Charleston, SC. The proposed regulation would require a bridge
tender to be present during the daytime hours only from 9 a.m. to 4
p.m. daily to open the bridge on signal. All other times would require
at least 12 hours notice. This regulation change should not have a
significant impact on navigation in this area.
    These proposed changes will still allow vessels to pass through the
bridge while taking into account the reasonable needs of other modes of
transportation. Vessels not requiring an opening may pass at any time.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This NPRM has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the limited impact
that it is anticipated to have on vessel traffic on the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, while taking in to consideration the needs of
vehicular traffic. Vessels that can transit under the bridge without an
opening may do so. Emergency vessels and tugs with tows can still
request openings 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 certifies, under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. While some owners or operators of
vessels intending to transit the bridge may be small entities, for the
reasons stated in section IV.A above this proposed rule would not have
a significant economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    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 proposed 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. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any
policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would 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 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 proposed 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 proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed 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 proposed rule will not
result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this proposed
rule elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule
promulgates the operating regulations or procedures for drawbridges.
Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further

review, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction.
    Under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the Instruction, an
environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination are not required for this rule. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed 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.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).
    Documents mentioned in this proposed rule and all public comments
are in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be
viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you
go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be
notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes
to amend 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; Department of Homeland
Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Amend Sec.  117.915 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  117.915  Ashley River.

    (a) The draws of the US17 highway bridges, mile 2.4 and 2.5 at
Charleston, SC shall open on signal; except that, from 4 p.m. to 9 a.m.
daily, the draws shall open only if at least 12 hours notice is given.
The draws of either bridge shall open as soon as possible for the
passage of vessels in an emergency involving danger to life or
property.
* * * * *

    Dated: April 7, 2017.
S.A. Buschman,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2017-08142 Filed 4-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 219 (Tuesday, November 13, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56320-56321]
[FR Doc No: 2018-24650]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0055; FRL-9985-86-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for the Secondary Lead Smelter
Industry (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), NESHAP for the Secondary Lead
Smelter Industry (EPA ICR No. 1686.11, OMB Control No. 2060-0296), to
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed
extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through November 30,
2018. Public comments were previously requested, via the Federal
Register, on June 29, 2017 during a 60-day comment period. This notice
allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller
description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden
and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct nor sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before December 13,
2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2014-0055, to: (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to [email protected], or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email
to [email protected]. Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 564-0050; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) for the Secondary Lead Smelter Industry apply to
existing facilities and new facilities that operate furnaces to reduce
scrap lead metal and lead compounds to elemental lead. Specifically,
the rule applies to secondary lead smelters that use blast,
reverberatory, rotary, or electric smelting furnaces to recover lead
metal from scrap lead, primarily from used lead-acid automotive-type
batteries. New facilities include those that commenced construction or
reconstruction after the date of proposal. In general, all NESHAP
standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and
periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected

facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the
occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the
operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the
monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and
records are essential in determining compliance with 40 CFR 63, subpart
X.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Secondary lead smelters.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart X).
    Estimated number of respondents: 12 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially, occasionally, semiannually and
annually.
    Total estimated burden: 21,700 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $2,630,000 (per year), which includes
$251,000 annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance
costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase in the total
estimated burden and the number of responses from the most recently
approved ICR due to several adjustments: (1) The overall number of
sources decreased; and (2) there were several missing burden line items
and inaccurate assumptions that were corrected since the previous
renewal. In addition, the previous renewal had not accounted for any
burden for dioxin/furan testing since that burden occurs every six
years, which was added to this renewal. Third, this renewal includes
time for each affected facility to review rule requirements each year.
There is a decrease in the O&M costs from the most recently approved
ICR due to an adjustment in the number of sources.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2018-24650 Filed 11-9-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 48 (Friday, March 11, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 13438]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5802]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

 [File No. 500-1]

 In the Matter of AdAl Group, Inc., Com/Tech Communications
Technologies, Inc., Dialog Group, Inc., Eurogas, Inc., Golden Books
Family Entertainment, Inc. (n/k/a GB Holdings Liquidation, Inc.),
Information Management Technologies Corporation, Interiors, Inc., and
SFG Financial Corp.; Order of Suspension of Trading

March 9, 2011.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
AdAl Group, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since
the period ended September 30, 2005.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Com/Tech Communications Technologies, Inc. because it has not filed any
periodic reports since the period ended December 31, 1996.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Dialog Group, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since
the period ended September 30, 2007.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Eurogas, Inc. because its Forms 10-K for the periods ended December 31,
2007, 2008 and 2009 failed to include audited financial statements and
its Forms 10-Q for the interim periods from March 31, 2007 through
September 30, 2010, inclusive, were not reviewed by an independent
auditing firm, as required by Commission rules.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Golden Books Family Entertainment, Inc. (n/k/a GB Holdings Liquidation,
Inc.) because it has not filed any periodic reports since the period
ended March 31, 2001.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Information Management Technologies Corporation because it has not
filed any periodic reports since the period ended June 30, 1999.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Interiors, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since the
period ended March 31, 2002.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
SFG Financial Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports since
the period ended January 31, 2008.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed companies. Therefore, it is ordered,
pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that
trading in the securities of the above-listed companies is suspended
for the period from 9:30 a.m. EST on March 9, 2011, through 11:59 p.m.
EDT on March 22, 2011.

    By the Commission.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-5802 Filed 3-9-11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P