[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 62 (Tuesday, April 1, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18245-18248]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07265]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2014-0155]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway; Morehead City, NC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to establish a temporary safety zone
on the waters of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway at Morehead City,
North Carolina. The safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety
of mariners on navigable waters during maintenance on the U.S. 70 Fixed
Bridge crossing the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile 203.7, at
Morehead City, North Carolina. The safety zone will temporarily
restrict vessel movement within the designated area.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before May 1, 2014.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email CWO4 Joseph M. Edge, U.S. Coast Guard Sector North
Carolina; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you
have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call
Cheryl Collins, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone (202)
366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

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

A. Public Participation and Request for Comments

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

1. Submitting Comments

    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. You may submit your comments and material online at
http://www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but
please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online, it
will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully
transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment,
it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when
it is received at the Docket Management Facility. We recommend that you
include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a
telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact
you if we have questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number [USCG-2014-0155] in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on ``Submit a Comment'' on the line associated with
this rulemaking.
    If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them
in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and
material received during the comment period and may change the rule
based on your comments.

2. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov,
type the docket number (USCG-2014-0155) in the ``SEARCH'' box and click
``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rulemaking. You may also visit the Docket Management Facility in
Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the Department of Transportation
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

3. Privacy Act

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

4. Public Meeting

    We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a
request for one, using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES.
Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be beneficial. If
we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a
time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

B. Basis and Purpose

    North Carolina Department of Transportation has awarded a contract
to FREYSSINET, INC of Sterling, Virginia to perform bridge maintenance
on the U.S. 70 Fixed Bridge crossing the Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway, mile 203.7, at Morehead City, North Carolina. Concrete
demolition, repair, shotcreting work and bridge bearing repair is
scheduled to commence on July 19, 2014, with a completion date of April
25, 2015. The contractor will utilize a 40 foot by 60 foot barge as a
work platform and for equipment staging. This safety zone will provide
a safety buffer to transiting vessels as bridge repairs present
potential hazards to mariners and property due to reduced horizontal
clearance. Due to the need to protect mariners from the hazards
associated with the bridge maintenance, vessel traffic will be
temporarily restricted from transiting within the area. In addition,
during this period the Coast Guard will require a two hour notification
to the work supervisor for passage through the U.S. 70 Fixed Bridge
along the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile 203.7, Morehead City,
North Carolina. The bridge notification requirement will apply during
the maintenance period for vessels requiring a horizontal clearance of
greater than 40 feet.

C. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The proposed temporary safety zone will encompass the waters
directly under the U.S. 70 Fixed Bridge crossing the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, mile 203.7, at Morehead City, North Carolina
(34[deg]43'16'' N, 076[deg]41'37'' W). In the interest of public
safety, general navigation within the safety zone will be restricted
during the specified date and times. Except for vessels authorized by
the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or his representative, no person or
vessel may enter or remain in the regulated area. All vessels
transiting this section of the waterway requiring a horizontal
clearance of greater than 40 feet will be required to make a two hour
advance notification to the work supervisor while the safety zone is in
effect. This zone will be in effect daily, 11 p.m. until 5 a.m., from
July 19, 2014 through April 25, 2015.

D. Regulatory Analyses

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

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
as supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders. This rule does not
restrict traffic from transiting the designated portion of the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, it imposes a two hour notification to ensure the
waterway is clear of impediment to allow passage to vessels requiring a
horizontal clearance of greater than 40 feet.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    This proposed rule would affect the following entities, some of
which may be small entities: the owners or operators of commercial tug
and barge companies, recreational and commercial fishing vessels
intending to transit the specified portion of Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway, 11 p.m. until 5 a.m., from July 19, 2014 through April 25,
2015.
    This safety zone would not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities for the following reasons.
Although the safety zone will apply to this section of the Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, vessel traffic requiring a horizontal clearance
of greater than 40 feet will be able to request passage by providing a
two hour advanced notification to the work supervisor. All those
requiring less than 40 feet may pass at any time. Before the effective
period, the Coast Guard will issue maritime advisories widely available
to the users of the waterway.
    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.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this 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.

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

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

6. Protest Activities

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

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

8. Taking of Private Property

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

9. Civil Justice Reform

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

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and would not
create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

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

12. Energy Effects

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

13. Technical Standards

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

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and
have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a
category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule
involves the establishment of a temporary safety zone. This rule is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of
Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. A preliminary environmental
analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical
Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to
the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

0
2. Add temporary Sec.  165.T05-0155 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-0155  Safety Zone, Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway;
Morehead City, NC.

    (a) Regulated Area. The following area is a safety zone: This zone
includes the waters directly under and 100 yards either side of the
U.S. 70 Fixed Bridge crossing the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile
203.7, at Morehead City, North Carolina (34[deg]43'16'' N,
076[deg]41'37'' W).
    (b) Regulations. The general safety zone regulations found in 33
CFR

165.23 apply to the safety zone created by this temporary section,
Sec.  165.T05-0155. In addition the following regulations apply:
    (1) All vessels requiring greater than 40 feet horizontal clearance
to safely transit through the U.S. 70 Fixed Bridge crossing the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, mile 203.7, at Morehead City, North
Carolina must contact the work supervisor tender on VHF-FM marine band
radio channels 10 and 13 or at<PHONE_NUMBER> two hours in advance of
intended transit.
    (2) All Coast Guard assets enforcing this safety zone can be
contacted on VHF-FM marine band radio channels 13 and 16.
    (3) The operator of any vessel within or in the immediate vicinity
of this safety zone shall:
    (i) Stop the vessel immediately upon being directed to do so by any
commissioned, warrant or petty officer on board a vessel displaying a
Coast Guard Ensign, and
    (ii) Proceed as directed by any commissioned, warrant or petty
officer on board a vessel displaying a Coast Guard Ensign.
    (c) Definitions. (1) Captain of the Port North Carolina means the
Commander, Coast Guard Sector North Carolina or any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been authorized by the
Captain of the Port to act on his behalf.
    (2) Designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer who has been authorized by the Captain of the
Port North Carolina to assist in enforcing the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section.
    (3) Work Supervisor means the contractor's on site representative.
    (d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted by Federal,
State and local agencies in the patrol and enforcement of the zone.
    (e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced daily 11 p.m.
until 5 a.m., from July 19, 2014 through April 25, 2015 unless
cancelled earlier by the Captain of the Port.

    Dated: March 16, 2014.
S.R. Murtagh,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port.
[FR Doc. 2014-07265 Filed 3-31-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: November 15, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 220)]
[Notices]
[Page 66520-66522]
[DOCID:fr15no06-55]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0875; FRL-8102-5]

Notice of Filing of Pesticide Petitions for Establishment or
Amendment to Regulations for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on
Various Commodities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of pesticide
petitions proposing the establishment or amendment of regulations for
residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various commodities.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 15, 2006

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0875 and pesticide petition numbers (PP)
4E6867 and 6E7066, 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 Drive, 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<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2006-0875. 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 Federal 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.
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 either in the electronic docket 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 Drive, 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 telephone number is (703) 305-
5805.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sidney Jackson, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania, Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer.
Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining
whether this action might apply to certain entities. 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. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    EPA is printing a summary of each pesticide petition received under
section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21
U.S.C. 346a, proposing the establishment or amendment of regulations in
40 CFR part 180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various
food commodities. EPA has determined that this pesticide petition
contains data or information regarding the elements set forth in FFDCA
section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency
of the submitted data at this time or whether the data support granting
of the pesticide petition. Additional data may be needed before EPA
rules on this pesticide petition.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of the petition included in
this notice, prepared by the petitioner along with a description of the
analytical method available for the detection and measurement of the
pesticide chemical residues is available on EPA's Electronic Docket at
http://www.regulations.gov. To locate this information on the home page

of EPA's Electronic Docket, select ``Quick Search'' and type the OPP
docket ID number. Once the search has located the docket, clicking on
the ``Docket ID'' will bring up a list of all documents in the docket
for the pesticide including the petition summary.

New Tolerances

    (PP) 4E6867 and 6E7066. The Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 291 W., Princeton, NJ 08540],
proposes to amend the tolerance(s) in 40 CFR 180.466 for residues of
the insecticide, fenpropathrin, (alpha-cyano-3-phenoxybenzyl 2,2,3,3-
tetramethylcyclopropanecarboxylate) in or on certain raw agricultural
commodities. 4E6867 proposes tolerances for residues of fenpropathrin
in or on fruit, stone, group 12 at 5.0 parts per million (ppm); nut,
tree, group 14 at 0.10 ppm, pistachio at 0.10 ppm and almond, hulls at
5.0 ppm, 6E7066 proposes tolerances for residues of fenpropathrin in or
on avocado, black sapote, canistel, mamey sapote, mango, papaya,
sapodilla and star apple at 1.0 ppm; barley, grain at 0.30 ppm; barley,
hay at 2.5 ppm; and barley, straw at 4.5 ppm.
    Adequate analytical methodology is available to detect and quantify
fenpropathrin at residue levels in numerous matrices. The methods use

solvent extraction and partition and/or column chromatography clean-up
steps, followed by separation and quantitation using capillary gas
liquid chromatography (GLC) with FID. The extraction efficiency has
been validated using radiocarbon samples from the plant and animal
metabolism studies. The enforcement methods have been validated at
independent laboratories and by EPA. The limit of quantification (LOQ)
for fenpropathrin in raw agricultural commodity samples is usually 0.01
ppm. The available analytical enforcement methodology was previously
reviewed in the Federal Register of March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11234) (FRL-
6492-6).

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives,
Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: November 6, 2006.
Lois Rossi,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E6-19169 Filed 11-14-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 46 (Wednesday, March 9, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12553-12556]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05242]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0321]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Epilepsy and
Seizure Disorders

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of applications for exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 31 individuals
for an exemption from the prohibition against persons with a clinical
diagnosis of

epilepsy or any other condition that is likely to cause a loss of
consciousness or any loss of ability to operate a commercial motor
vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce. If granted, the exemptions would
enable these individuals who have had one or more seizures and are
taking anti-seizure medication to operate CMVs for up to 2 years in
interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 8, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0321 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket numbers for this notice. Note that all comments received will be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below
for further information.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov as described in
the system records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine A. Hydock, Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or via email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by letter to FMCSA, Room W64-113, Department
of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-
0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
for up to a 2-year period if it finds ``such exemption would likely
achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to or greater than the
level that would be achieved absent such exemption.'' The statutes
allow the Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the 2-year period.
The 31 individuals listed in this notice have requested an exemption
from the epilepsy prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8), which applies to
drivers who operate CMVs in interstate commerce. Accordingly, the
Agency will evaluate the qualifications of each applicant to determine
whether granting the exemption will achieve the required level of
safety mandated by statute.
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding epilepsy
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person:

    Has no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of
epilepsy or any other condition which is likely to cause the loss of
consciousness or any loss of ability to control a CMV.
    In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory
criteria to assist medical examiners in determining whether drivers
with certain medical conditions are qualified to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce. The advisory criteria found in Appendix A to 49
CFR 391.41, states that:

    If an individual has had a sudden episode of a non-epileptic
seizure or loss of consciousness of unknown cause that did not
require anti-seizure medication, the decision whether that person's
condition is likely to cause the loss of consciousness or loss of
ability to control a CMV should be made on an individual basis by
the medical examiner in consultation with the treating physician.
Before certification is considered, it is suggested that a 6-month
waiting period elapse from the time of the episode. Following the
waiting period, it is suggested that the individual have a complete
neurological examination. If the results of the examination are
negative and anti-seizure medication is not required, then the
driver may be qualified.
    In those individual cases where a driver had a seizure or an
episode of loss of consciousness that resulted from a known medical
condition (e.g., drug reaction, high temperature, acute infectious
disease, dehydration, or acute metabolic disturbance), certification
should be deferred until the driver has recovered fully from that
condition, has no existing residual complications, and is not taking
anti-seizure medication.
    Drivers who have a history of epilepsy/seizures, off anti-
seizure medication and seizure-free for 10 years, may be qualified
to operate a CMV in interstate commerce. Interstate drivers with a
history of a single unprovoked seizure may be qualified to drive a
CMV in interstate commerce if seizure-free and off anti-seizure
medication for a 5-year period or more.

    As a result of medical examiners misinterpreting advisory criteria
as regulation, numerous drivers have been prohibited from operating a
CMV in interstate commerce based on the fact that they have had one or
more seizures and are taking anti-seizure medication, rather than an
individual analysis of their circumstances by a qualified medical
examiner based on the physical qualification standards and medical best
practices.

II. Qualifications of Applicants

Travis Earl Baird

    Mr. Baird is a 28 year-old driver in Oklahoma. He has a history of
a seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since 2003. He takes
anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency remaining the
same since that time. His physician states that he is supportive of Mr.
Baird receiving an exemption.

Robert P. Brackett

    Mr. Brackett is a 60 year-old class A CDL holder in Maine. He has a
history of a single unprovoked seizure in 2009. He takes anti-seizure
medication with the dosage and frequency remaining the same since that
time. His physician states that he is supportive of Mr. Brackett
receiving an exemption.

Brian R. Checkley, Jr.

    Mr. Checkley is a 36 year-old driver in New Jersey. He has a
history of epilepsy and has remained seizure free since 2007. He
underwent a right anterior temporal lobectomy in 2007 and has not taken
anti-seizure medication since August 2011. His physician states that he
is supportive of Mr. Checkley receiving an exemption.

James Clark

    Mr. Clark is a 32 year-old driver in Pennsylvania. He has a history
of a seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since 2003. He
takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency remaining
the same since that time. His physician states that he is supportive of
Mr. Clark receiving an exemption.

George J. Conte

    Mr. Conte is a 46 year-old driver in Connecticut. He has a history
of epilepsy and has remained seizure free since 2014. He takes anti-
seizure medication with the dosage and frequency remaining the same
since that time. His physician states that he is supportive of Mr.
Conte receiving an exemption.

Dean W. Drury

    Mr. Drury is a 55 year-old driver in Illinois. He had one seizure
following surgery in February 2015. He currently takes anti-seizure
medication but anticipates being weaned off of his this medication in
the future. His physician states that he is supportive of Mr. Drury
receiving an exemption.

Kelly Frederick

    Mr. Frederick is a 46 year-old driver in Louisiana. He has a
history of a seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since 2005.
He takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency
remaining the same since that time. His physician states that he is
supportive of Mr. Frederick receiving an exemption.

William Gessner

    Mr. Gessner is a 48 year-old class A CDL holder in Pennsylvania. He
has a history of a seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since
2006. He takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency
remaining the same since that time. His physician states that he is
supportive of Mr. Gessner receiving an exemption.

Jerry L. Henderson

    Mr. Henderson is a 56 year-old class A CDL holder in Indiana. He
has a history of a seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since
2007. He takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency
remaining the same since that time. His physician states that he is
supportive of Mr. Henderson receiving an exemption.

Clarence D. Jones

    Mr. Jones is a 73 year-old class A CDL holder in Virginia. He has a
history of a seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since 1987.
He takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency
remaining the same since that time. His physician states that he is
supportive of Mr. Jones receiving an exemption.

Preston Romayne Kanagy

    Mr. Kanagy is a 35 year-old class A CDL holder in Tennessee. He has
a history of epilepsy and has remained seizure free since 2000. He
takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency remaining
the same since 2001. His physician states that he is supportive of Mr.
Kanagy receiving an exemption.

James Randall King

    Mr. King is a 49 year-old driver in Connecticut. He has a history
of a seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since 2007. He has
not taken anti-seizure medication since 1988. His physician states that
he is supportive of Mr. King receiving an exemption.

Scott A. Lowe

    Mr. Lowe is a 58 year-old class A CDL holder in Massachusetts. He
has a history of a seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since
1983. He takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency
remaining the same since that time. His physician states that he is
supportive of Mr. Lowe receiving an exemption.

Ronald Alan Nagy, Jr.

    Mr. Nagy is a 29 year-old driver in Michigan. He underwent a
craniotomy for resection of an astrocytoma in June 2015. He takes anti-
seizure medication with the dosage and frequency remaining the same
since that time. His physician states that he is supportive of Mr. Nagy
receiving an exemption.

Roger Lynn Neal

    Mr. Neal is a 55 year-old class A CDL holder in Missouri. He has a
history of a seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since 1985.
He takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency
remaining the same since that time. His physician states that he is
supportive of Mr. Neal receiving an exemption.

Thomas Victor Oconnor

    Mr. Oconnor is a 46 year-old class A CDL holder in Florida. He has
a history of a seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since
2005. He takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency
remaining the same since that time. His physician states that he is
supportive of Mr. Oconnor receiving an exemption.

Nicholas Ramirez

    Mr. Ramirez is a 37 year-old driver in California. He has a history
of a seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since 2010. He
takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency remaining
the same since that time. His physician states that he is supportive of
Mr. Ramirez receiving an exemption.

Scott William Reaves

    Mr. Reaves is a 52 year-old driver in Texas. He has a history of a
seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since 2002. He takes
anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency remaining the
same since that time. His physician states that he is supportive of Mr.
Reaves receiving an exemption.

Steven Shirley

    Mr. Shirley is a 54 year-old driver in Utah. He has a history of
epilepsy and has remained seizure free since 1996. He takes anti-
seizure medication with the dosage and frequency remaining the same for
two years. His physician states that he is supportive of Mr. Shirley
receiving an exemption.

Tory J. Shuler

    Mr. Shuler is a 47 year-old driver in New York. He has a history of
a seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since 2002. He takes
anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency remaining the
same since that time. His physician states that he is supportive of Mr.
Shuler receiving an exemption.

Randall T. Slavik

    Mr. Slavik is a 70 year-old class A CDL holder in Missouri. He has
a history of a single seizure in 2015. He takes anti-seizure medication
with the dosage and frequency remaining the same since that time. His
physician states that he is supportive of Mr. Slavik receiving an
exemption.

Michael Spinelli, IV

    Mr. Spinelli is a 41 year-old class C CDL holder in New Jersey. He
has a history of seizure after being diagnosed with a brain tumor in
2007. He remained seizure free until June 2015 when he suffered a
seizure after taking a generic form of his anti-seizure medication. He
currently takes the brand name form of this anti-seizure medication
with the dosage and frequency remaining the same since that time. His
physician states that he is supportive of Mr. Spinelli receiving an
exemption.

Matthew Jack Staley

    Mr. Staley is a 43 year-old driver in Colorado. He has a history of
epilepsy and has remained seizure free since 1999. He takes anti-
seizure medication with the dosage and frequency remaining the same
since that time. His physician states that he is supportive of Mr.
Staley receiving an exemption.

Michael A. Sypolt

    Mr. Sypolt is a 53 year-old class A CDL holder in West Virginia. He
has a history of a seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since
1980. He takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency
remaining the same for two years. His physician states that he is
supportive of Mr. Sypolt receiving an exemption.

Daisy Tapia

    Ms. Tapia is a 59 year-old class B CDL holder in New York. She has
a history of a single provoked seizure in April 2012, followed by a
resection of a benign meningioma. She takes anti-seizure medication
with the dosage and frequency remaining the same since that time. Her
physician states that he is supportive of Ms. Tapia receiving an
exemption.

Peter M. Thompson

    Mr. Thompson is a 23 year-old class A CDL holder in Florida. He has
a history of juvenile epilepsy and has remained seizure free since
2003. He does not take anti-seizure medication. His physician states
that he is supportive of Mr. Thompson receiving an exemption.

Paul Richard Trombley

    Mr. Trombley is a 41 year-old class A CDL holder in Michigan. He
has a history of a seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since
2014. He takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency
remaining the same since that time. His physician states that he is
supportive of Mr. Trombley receiving an exemption.

Mohammad S. Warrad

    Mr. Warrad is a 55 year-old driver in Iowa. He has a history of a
seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since 1996. He takes
anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency remaining the
same since March 2014. His physician states that he is supportive of
Mr. Warrad receiving an exemption.

Richard James Wenner

    Mr. Wenner is a 50 year-old class A CDL holder in Minnesota. He has
a history of a seizure disorder and has remained seizure free since
2006. He takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency
remaining the same that time. His physician states that he is
supportive of Mr. Wenner receiving an exemption.

John Charles Wolfe

    Mr. Wolfe is a 55 year-old class A CDL holder in Pennsylvania. He
has a history of epilepsy and has remained seizure free since 2006. He
takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency remaining
the same that time. His physician states that he is supportive of Mr.
Wolfe receiving an exemption.

Dennis Raymond Zayic

    Mr. Zayic is a 63 year-old driver in Minnesota. He has a history of
a seizure following the resection of a benign meningioma in 1995. He
takes anti-seizure medication with the dosage and frequency remaining
the same since that time. His physician states that he is supportive of
Mr. Zayic receiving an exemption.

III. Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA requests
public comment from all interested persons on the exemption petitions
described in this notice. We will consider all comments received before
the close of business on the closing date indicated in the date section
of the notice.

IV. Submitting Comments

    You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail,
or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA
recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
in the search box insert the docket number ``FMCSA-2015-0321'' and
click the search button. When the new screen appears, click on the blue
``Comment Now!'' button on the right hand side of the page. On the new
page, enter information required including the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\
by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will
consider all comments and materials received during the comment period.
FMCSA may issue a final determination any time after the close of the
comment period.

V. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert
the docket number FMCSA-2015-0321 and click ``Search.'' Next, click
``Open Docket Folder'' and you will find all documents and comments
related to this notice.

    Issued on: February 26, 2016.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-05242 Filed 3-8-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 78 (Friday, April 22, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23592-23593]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08758]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2015-8060; Airspace Docket No. 15-ASW-4]

Establishment of Class E Airspace; Moriarty, NM

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class E airspace in Moriarty, NM.
Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate new Area Navigation
(RNAV) Standard Instrument Approach Procedures at Moriarty Airport. The
FAA is taking this action to enhance the safety and management of
Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, May 26, 2016. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under title 1,
Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual revision of
FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.9Z, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed on line at http://www.faa.gov/airtraffic/publications/. For further information, you can
contact the Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
The Order is also available for inspection at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of
this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal-regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.9, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Raul Garza, Jr., Central Service
Center, Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration,
Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX 76177;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part, A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it establishes controlled airspace at Moriarty Airport, Moriarty,
NM.

History

    On February 3, 2016, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to establish Class E Airspace in
the Moriarty, NM area. (81 FR 5676) FAA-2015-8060. Interested parties
were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting
written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.9Z dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15,
2015, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class
E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document amends FAA Order 7400.9Z, airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15,
2015. FAA Order 7400.9Z is publicly available as listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.9Z lists Class A, B,
C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and reporting
points.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 establishes Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet
above the surface within a 7.5-mile radius of Moriarty

Airport, Moriarty, NM, to accommodate new standard instrument approach
procedures. Controlled airspace is needed for the safety and management
of IFR operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.9Z, dated August 6, 2015, and effective September 15,
2015, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that only affects air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this action qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures,'' paragraph 5-6.5. This airspace action is not expected to
cause any potentially significant environmental impacts, and no
extraordinary circumstances exists that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

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

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

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

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9Z,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 6, 2015,
effective September 15, 2015, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

ASW NM E5 Moriarty, NM [New]

Moriarty Airport, NM
    (Lat. 34[deg]58'41'' N., long. 106[deg]00'00'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7.5-mile radius of Moriarty Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on April 6, 2016.
Robert W. Beck,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2016-08758 Filed 4-21-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


 [Federal Register Volume 76, Number 130 (Thursday, July 7, 2011)] [Notices] [Pages 39951-39953] [FR Doc No: 2011-16930]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-64782; File No. SR-NYSE-2011-26]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;

Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change

Deleting the Text of NYSE Rule 409(f) and Adopting the Text of FINRA

Rule 2232 and Deleting the Rule Interpretations to NYSE Rule 346

 June 30, 2011.

    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of

1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby

given that June 17, 2011, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or the

``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the

``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II

below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the self-

regulatory organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to

solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.

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

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.

    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.

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

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

of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes (1) To delete the text of NYSE Rule 409(f)

and adopt the text of FINRA Rule 2232 and (2) delete the Rule

Interpretations to NYSE Rule 346. The text of the proposed rule change

is available at the Exchange, the Commission's Public Reference Room,

and http://www.nyse.com.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization

included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the

proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the

proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at

the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared

summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most

significant parts of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose

    The Exchange proposes to (1) Delete the text of NYSE Rule 409(f)

and adopt the text of FINRA Rule 2232 and (2) delete the Rule

Interpretations to NYSE Rule 346.

Background

    On July 30, 2007, FINRA's predecessor, the National Association of

Securities Dealers, Inc. (``NASD''), and NYSE Regulation, Inc.

(``NYSER'') consolidated their member firm regulation operations into a

combined organization, FINRA.\4\ Pursuant to Rule 17d-2 under the Act,

NYSE, NYSER and FINRA entered into an agreement (the ``Agreement'') to

reduce regulatory duplication for their members by allocating to FINRA

certain regulatory responsibilities for certain NYSE rules and rule

interpretations (``FINRA Incorporated NYSE Rules''). NYSE Amex LLC

(``NYSE Amex'') became a party to the Agreement effective December 15,

2008.\5\

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

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62970 (Sept. 22,

2010), 75 FR 59771 (Sept. 28, 2010) (order approving SR-FINRA-2010-

37).

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 56148 (July 26,

2007), 72 FR 42146 (August 1, 2007) (order approving the Agreement);

56147 (July 26, 2007), 72 FR 42166 (August 1, 2007) (SR-NASD-2007-

054) (order approving the incorporation of certain NYSE Rules as

``Common Rules''); and 60409 (July 30, 2009), 74 FR 39353 (August 6,

2009) (order approving the amended and restated Agreement, adding

NYSE Amex LLC as a party). Paragraph 2(b) of the Agreement sets

forth procedures regarding proposed changes by FINRA, NYSE or NYSE

Amex to the substance of any of the Common Rules.

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

    As part of its effort to reduce regulatory duplication and relieve

firms that are members of FINRA, NYSE and NYSE Amex of conflicting or

unnecessary regulatory burdens, FINRA is now engaged in the process of

reviewing and amending the NASD and FINRA Incorporated NYSE Rules in

order to create a consolidated FINRA rulebook.\6\

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

    \6\ FINRA's rulebook currently has three sets of rules: (1) NASD

Rules, (2) FINRA Incorporated NYSE Rules, and (3) consolidated FINRA

Rules. The FINRA Incorporated NYSE Rules apply only to those members

of FINRA that are also members of the NYSE (``Dual Members''), while

the consolidated FINRA Rules apply to all FINRA members. For more

information about the FINRA rulebook consolidation process, see

FINRA Information Notice, March 12, 2008.

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

NYSE Rule 409(f) and FINRA Rule 2232

    In connection with the rule consolidation efforts between the

Exchange and FINRA, the Commission has recently approved FINRA Rule

2232,\7\ which is modeled after NYSE Rule 409(f), NASD Rule 2230 and

NASD IM-2110-6.\8\ FINRA Rule 2232 requires member firms, at or before

the completion of any transaction in any security effected for or with

an account of a customer, to give or send to such customer written

notification (``confirmation'') in conformity with the requirements of

Rule 10b-10 under the Act. A confirmation given or sent pursuant to

FINRA Rule 2232 must further disclose (1) With respect to any

transaction in any NMS stock, as defined in Rule 600 of SEC Regulation

NMS, or any security subject to the reporting requirements of the FINRA

Rule 6600 Series, other than direct participation programs as defined

in FINRA Rule 6420, the settlement date of the transaction; and (2)

with respect to any transaction in a callable equity security, that (A)

the security is a callable equity security and (B) a customer may

contact the member for more information concerning the security.

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

    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63150 (October 21,

2010), 75 FR 66173 (October 27, 2010) (SR-FINRA-2009-058). See also

Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63561 (December 16, 2010), 75 FR

80556 (December 22, 2010) (SR-FINRA-2010-066).

    \8\ NYSE Rule 409(f) currently provides that confirmation of all

transactions in securities admitted to dealings on the Exchange,

sent by members or member organizations to their customers, shall

clearly set forth with a suitable legend the settlement date of each

transaction.

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

    The Exchange proposes to delete the text of NYSE Rule 409(f) \9\

and adopt the text of FINRA Rule 2232 as NYSE Rule 2232, with certain

technical changes. Specifically, for consistency with Exchange rules,

the Exchange proposes to change all references to ``members'' to

``member organizations.'' The Exchange also proposes to delete the text

of Commentary .20 to Rule 411, which will no longer be applicable after

the deletion of the text of NYSE Rule 409(f). The Exchange proposes

that these changes, including new NYSE Rule 2232, be effective on the

same date as FINRA makes FINRA Rule 2232 effective.\10\

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

    \9\ NYSE Rule 409(f) would be marked as ``Reserved'' until such

time as NYSE Rule 409 is fully harmonized with FINRA rules. The

Exchange notes that FINRA has proposed a rule change that would

result in the deletion of the remaining text of FINRA Incorporated

NYSE Rule 409. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59921 (May

14, 2009), 74 FR 23912 (May 21, 2009) (SR-FINRA-2009-028).

    \10\ See FINRA Regulatory Notice 10-62. The implementation date

is currently scheduled for June 17, 2011. NYSE Amex also has

submitted a companion rule filing amending its rules in accordance

with FINRA's rule changes. See SR-NYSEAmex-2011-41.

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

Rule Interpretations to NYSE Rule 346

    The Exchange has previously submitted a proposed rule change with

the Commission that deleted NYSE Rule 346 (Limitations--Employment and

Association with Members and Member Organizations) and adopted new Rule

3270 (Outside Business Activities of Registered Persons) to correspond

with rule changes filed by FINRA and approved by the Commission.\11\ As

such, the Exchange also proposes to delete the Rule Interpretations to

NYSE Rule 346 in their entirety, which were also deleted by FINRA when

it deleted its Incorporated NYSE Rule 346. To harmonize Exchange Rule

Interpretations with FINRA's rule, the Exchange proposes that this

change be immediately effective upon filing.

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

    \11\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 64131 (March 28,

2011), 76 FR 18285 (April 1, 2011) (SR-NYSE-2011-12). See also

Securities Exchange Act Release No. 62762 (August 23, 2010), 75 FR

53362 (August 31, 2010) (order approving SR-FINRA-2009-042).

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

2. Statutory Basis

    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the

Act,\12\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section

6(b)(5),\13\ in particular, in that it is designed to prevent

fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and

equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination

with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to

remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open

market and a national market system. Specifically, the Exchange

believes that the proposed rule change supports the objectives of the

Act by providing greater harmonization between NYSE Rules and FINRA

Rules of similar purpose, resulting in less burdensome and more

efficient regulatory compliance. To the extent the Exchange has

proposed changes that differ from the FINRA version of the Rules, such

changes are technical in nature and do not change the substance of the

proposed NYSE Rules. Additionally, the proposed deletion of the Rule

Interpretations to NYSE Rule 346 would result in the removal of

interpretations to an NYSE Rule that no longer exists and would

therefore eliminate any potential confusion among members or member

organizations regarding the applicability of such Rule Interpretations.

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

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).

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

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will

impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate

in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed

Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the

proposed rule change.

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

Commission Action

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section

19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \14\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\15\

Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the

protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any

significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to

30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as

the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of

investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become

effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-

4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.

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

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).

    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).

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

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) normally does

not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the filing.\16\

However, pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii),\17\ the Commission may

designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the

protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked

the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal

may become operative immediately upon filing. In its filing, the

Exchange notes that the proposal to add new NYSE Rule 2232 is

substantially similar to the rule that the Commission approved for

FINRA,\18\ and the proposal conforms the Exchange's Rules with those of

FINRA, in furtherance of the consolidation of the member firm

regulation functions of NYSE, NYSE Amex Equities, and FINRA.

Furthermore, the proposed deletion of the Rule Interpretations to NYSE

Rule 346 would remove interpretations to an NYSE Rule that no longer

exists and would therefore eliminate any potential confusion among

members or member organizations regarding the applicability of such

Rule Interpretations. For these reasons, the Commission believes that

waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of

investors and the public interest, and designates the proposed rule

change to be operative upon filing with the Commission.\19\

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

    \16\ Id.

    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-

4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to

the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed

rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed

rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing

of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by

the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.

    \18\ See note 6, supra.

    \19\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,

the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on

efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.

78c(f).

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

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule

change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule

change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or

appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or

otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and

arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule

change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of

the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or

     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File Number SR-NYSE-2011-26 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,

Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,

Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2011-26. This file

number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To

help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,

please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on

the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are

filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to

the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other

than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and

printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE.,

Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of 10

a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing will also be available for

inspection and copying at the NYSE's principal office and on its

Internet Web site at http://www.nyse.com. All comments received will be

posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal

identifying information from submissions. You should submit only

information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions

should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2011-26 and should be submitted on

or before July 28, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,

pursuant to delegated authority.\20\

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

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

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

Cathy H. Ahn,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2011-16930 Filed 7-6-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: October 19, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 202)]
[Notices]
[Page 61745-61746]
[DOCID:fr19oc06-58]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER06-1261-000, ER06-1261-001]

FPL Energy Mower County, LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order

October 13, 2006.
    FPL Energy Mower County, LLC (FPL Mower) filed an application for
market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate schedule. The
proposed market-based rate schedule provides for the sale of energy,
capacity and ancillary services at market-based rates. FPL Mower also
requested waivers of various Commission regulations. In particular, FPL
Mower requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR
Part 34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability by FPL Mower.
    On September 21, 2006, pursuant to delegated authority, the
Director, Division of Tariffs and Market Development--West, granted the
requests for blanket approval under Part 34. The Director's order also
stated that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the
Federal Register establishing a period of time for the filing of
protests. Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard or to protest
the blanket approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of
liability by FPL Mower should file a motion to intervene or protest
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214
(2004).

    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to
intervene or protest is November 13, 2006.
    Absent a request to be heard in opposition by the deadline above,
FPL Mower is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or
liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect
of any security of another person; provided that such issuance or
assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of
FPL Mower, compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably
necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by
continued approvals of FPL Mower's issuance of securities or
assumptions of liability.
    Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's
Web site at http://www.ferc.gov, using the eLibrary link. Enter the

docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number
filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may
be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-17505 Filed 10-18-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 142 (Monday, July 25, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48333-48335]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17240]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2016-0678]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Illinois River Mile 69.3 to 69.8; Meredosia, IL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
certain waters of the Illinois River from mile 69.3 to mile 69.8. This
safety zone is needed to protect persons, property and infrastructure
from potential damage and safety hazards associated with work being
performed on new power lines across the river. Entry of vessels or
persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by
the Captain of the Port, Upper Mississippi River (COTP). Deviation from
the safety zone may be requested and will be considered on a case-by-
case basis as specifically authorized by the COTP or a designated
representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from July 25, 2016 through August 16,
2016. This rule will be enforced from 7 a.m. until 7 p.m. daily
beginning on July 25, 2016 through August 16, 2016.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2016-0678 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email LCDR Sean Peterson, Chief of Prevention, U.S. Coast
Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port
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 finds good cause 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 NPRM with respect to this rule
because Ameren, the company performing the power line operations,
notified the Coast Guard on July 8, 2016 of the dates for these
operations, requiring helicopters to stretch power lines across the
river. This notice did not allow for the full NPRM process to be
completed. Due to the risks associated with power line work crossing
the navigational channel, a safety zone is needed to protect persons
and property on the waterway. It would be impracticable to publish a
NPRM because the safety zone must be established beginning July 25,
2016. Broadcast Notice to Mariners and information sharing with
waterway users will update mariners of the safety zone and enforcement
times during the operations.
    We are issuing this rule, and under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast
Guard finds that good cause exists for making it effective less than 30
days after publication in the Federal Register. Providing 30 days
notice would be impracticable because immediate action is needed to
protect persons and

property from the hazards associated with power line work crossing the
navigable channel.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The COTP has determined that potential hazards associated with
using helicopters to stretch power lines across the navigational
channel presents safety concerns for anyone within this limited area of
the waterway. This rule provides additional safety measures, to protect
persons and vessels, in the form of a safety zone from mile 69.3 to
mile 69.8 on the Illinois River to protect those in the area and for
the Coast Guard to maintain navigational safety.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone prohibiting
access to the Illinois River from mile 69.3 to mile 69.8, extending the
entire width of the river from 7 a.m. until 7 p.m. daily, beginning on
July 25, 2016 and scheduled to end on August 16, 2016, or until
conditions allow for safe navigation, whichever occurs earlier.
Deviation from the safety zone may be requested and will be considered
on a case-by-case basis as specifically authorized by the COTP or a
designated representative. The COTP may be contacted by telephone at
314-269-2332 or can be reached by VHF-FM channel 16.

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. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. 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.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the limited
location, enforcement periods and impacts on navigation. This rule
establishes a temporary safety zone limiting access to a one-half mile
area on the Illinois River from mile 69.3 to mile 69.8, for 12 hours
each day for approximately 3 weeks. The impacts on navigation will be
limited to ensure the safety of mariners and vessels during the period
that helicopters will be pulling power lines across the navigational
channel. Notifications of enforcement times will be communicated to the
marine community via Broadcast Notice to Mariners. Deviation requests
will be reviewed and considered on a case-by-case basis.

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
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.

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 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 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 a safety

zone on the Illinois River from mile 69.3 to mile 69.8. It is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of
Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis
checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion
Determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from 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 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0678 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0678  Safety Zone; Illinois River 69.3 to 69.8;
Meredosia, IL.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of
the Illinois River mile 69.3 to 69.8, extending the entire width of the
river.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain,
petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a
Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi River (COTP) in the enforcement
of the safety zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in
subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative.
    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's
representative via VHF-FM channel 16, or through Coast Guard Sector
Upper Mississippi River at<PHONE_NUMBER>. Those in the safety zone must
comply with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP
or the COTP's designated representative.
    (d) Enforcement period. This rule will be enforced from 7 a.m.
until 7 p.m. daily beginning on July 25, 2016 through August 16, 2016.

    Dated: July 18, 2016.
M.L. Malloy,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Upper Mississippi River.
[FR Doc. 2016-17240 Filed 7-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 182 (Friday, September 19, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 56355]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22396]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER14-2820-000]

Spring Canyon Energy II LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding,
of Spring Canyon Energy II LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate schedule, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability is October 2, 2014.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding(s) are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 12, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-22396 Filed 9-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P