[Federal Register: February 9, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 26)]
[Notices]
[Page 6378-6380]
[DOCID:fr09fe10-60]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[ Docket No. CP10-40-000]

BCR Holdings, Inc.; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental
Assessment for the Proposed Bully Camp Gas Storage Project and Request
for Comments on Environmental Issues

February 2, 2010.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of the Bully Camp Gas Storage Project
involving construction and operation of facilities by BCR Holdings,
Inc. (BCR) in Lafourche Parish, Louisiana. This EA will be used by the
Commission in its decision-making process to determine whether the
project is in the public convenience and necessity.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the
Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested
agencies on the project. Your input will help the Commission staff
determine what issues need to be evaluated in the EA. Please note that
the scoping period will close on March 4, 2010.
    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental
mailing list for this project. State and local government
representatives are asked to notify their constituents of this proposed
project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
    If you are a landowner receiving this notice, you may be contacted
by a pipeline company representative about the acquisition of an
easement to construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities.
The company would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable

agreement. However, if the project is approved by the Commission, that
approval conveys with it the right of eminent domain. Therefore, if
easement negotiations fail to produce an agreement, the pipeline
company could initiate condemnation proceedings in accordance with
state law.
    A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled ``An Interstate Natural
Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?'' was attached to the
project notice BCR provided to landowners. This fact sheet addresses a
number of typically asked questions, including the use of eminent
domain and how to participate in the Commission's proceedings. It is
also available for viewing on the FERC Web site (http://www.ferc.gov).

Summary of the Proposed Project

    BCR proposes to construct and operate a new natural gas storage
facility in a solution-mined salt dome in Lafourche Parish, Louisiana.
The Bully Camp Gas Storage Project would provide about 15.0 billion
cubic feet (Bcf) of working gas storage and would be integrated into
the regional gas transmission system through interconnects with
existing interstate and intrastate pipelines. According to BCR, its
project would add competitive new storage and hub services to the
interstate and intrastate markets. The storage facility would provide
its customers with flexibility to manage their gas supply portfolios;
ability to meet the immediate demands of peaking facilities (both
increases in gas supplies and decreases in market needs); and ability
to capture transitory market price spreads.
    The Bully Camp Gas Storage Project would consist of the following
facilities:
     Two salt storage caverns (each with a working capacity of
7.5 Bcf), wells, and well pads;
     An 18,940-horsepower compressor station;
     Four meter stations and interconnection facilities (for
Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP; Discovery Gas Transmission, LLC;
Bridgeline Holdings, LP; and Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation);
     Four sections of natural gas pipeline totaling about 6.1
miles (ranging from 10 inches to 20 inches in diameter); and
     Six sections of various diameter water and brine pipeline
totaling about 19.5 miles (ranging from 3 inches to 24 inches in
diameter).
    The general location of the project facilities is shown in appendix
1.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The appendices referenced in this notice are not being
printed in the Federal Register. Copies of appendices were sent to
all those receiving this notice in the mail and are available at
http://www.ferc.gov using the link called ``eLibrary'' or from the
Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, or call<PHONE_NUMBER>. For instructions on
connecting to eLibrary, refer to page 5 of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements for Construction

    Construction of the proposed facilities would disturb about 163
acres of land for the aboveground facilities and the pipelines.
Following construction, about 29.2 acres would be maintained for
permanent operation of the project's facilities; the remaining acreage
would be restored and allowed to revert to former uses.

The EA Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
\2\ to discover and address concerns the public may have about
proposals. This process is referred to as ``scoping''. The main goal of
the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important
environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests public
comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA. All comments
received will be considered during the preparation of the EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``We'', ``us'', and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the Commission's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the EA we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of
the construction and operation of the proposed project under these
general headings:
     Geology and soils;
     Land use;
     Water resources, fisheries, and wetlands;
     Cultural resources;
     Vegetation and wildlife;
     Air quality and noise;
     Endangered and threatened species; and
     Public safety.
    We will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed
project or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to
lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    Our independent analysis of the issues will be presented in the EA.
The EA will be placed in the public record and, depending on the
comments received during the scoping process, may be published and
distributed to the public. A comment period will be allotted for review
if the EA is published. We will consider all comments on the EA before
we make our recommendations to the Commission. To ensure your comments
are considered, please carefully follow the instructions in the Public
Participation section below.
    With this notice, we are asking agencies with jurisdiction and/or
special expertise with respect to environmental issues to formally
cooperate with us in the preparation of the EA. These agencies may
choose to participate once they have evaluated the proposal relative to
their responsibilities. Agencies that would like to request cooperating
agency status should follow the instructions for filing comments
provided under the Public Participation section of this notice.

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the project. Your comments should focus on
the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and
measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. The more specific
your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your
written comments are timely and properly recorded, please send in your
comments so that they will be received in Washington, DC on or before
March 4, 2010.
    For your convenience, there are three methods which you can use to
submit your written comments to the Commission. The Commission
encourages electronic filing of comments and has expert eFiling staff
available to assist you at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (1) You may file your comments electronically by using the Quick
Comment feature, which is located at http://www.ferc.gov under the link
called ``Documents and Filings''. A Quick Comment is an easy method for
interested persons to submit text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You may file your comments electronically by using the
``eFiling'' feature that is listed under the ``Documents and Filings''
link. eFiling involves preparing your submission in the same manner as
you would if filing on paper, and then saving the file on your
computer's hard drive. You will attach that file to your submission.
New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on the links
called ``Sign up'' or ``eRegister''. You will be asked to select the
type of filing you are making. A comment on a particular

project is considered a ``Comment on a Filing''; or
    (3) You may file a paper copy of your comments at the following
address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426.

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other
interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also
includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's
regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property
may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within
certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits
comments on the project. We will update the environmental mailing list
as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related
to this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and
government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the
proposed project.
    If the EA is published for distribution, copies will be sent to the
environmental mailing list for public review and comment. If you would
prefer to receive a paper copy of the document instead of the CD
version, please return the attached Information Request (appendix 2).

Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an ``intervenor,'' which is an official party to the
Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the
process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard
by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling.
An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a
request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are
included in the User's Guide under the ``e-filing'' link on the
Commission's Web site.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
Internet at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Click on
the eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the docket
number, excluding the last three digits, in the Docket Number field
(i.e., CP10-40). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range.
For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries and direct links to
the documents. Go to http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.
    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/
EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-2730 Filed 2-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 21, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 243)]
[Notices]
[Page 67867-67868]
[DOCID:fr21de09-30]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

December 14, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER98-1643-014.
    Applicants: Portland General Electric Company.
    Description: Portland General Electric Company submits response to
FERC 11/17/09 letter requesting additional information re PGE's 9/4/09
change in status filing.
    Filed Date: 12/10/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091210-4003.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, December 31, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER04-1215-003.
    Applicants: Anthracite Power and Light Company.
    Description: Anthracite Power and Light Company submits Notice of
Change in Status and Appendix A.
    Filed Date: 12/10/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091211-0193.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, December 31, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-1397-001.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. submits an unexecuted,
revised Service Agreement for Network Integration Transmission Service
etc.
    Filed Date: 12/10/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091211-0180.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, December 31, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-147-002.
    Applicants: Great River Energy.
    Description: Great River Energy et al. submits revised tariff
sheets to correct a reference in tariff sheets previously filed.
    Filed Date: 12/10/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091211-0181.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, December 31, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-37-001.
    Applicants: Idaho Power Company.
    Description: Idaho Power submits the Exchange Agreement with
appreciate designations required by Section 35.9 of the Commission's
Regulations.
    Filed Date: 12/11/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091211-0192.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 01, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-47-002.
    Applicants: Geodyne Energy, LLC.
    Description: Geodyne Energy, LLC submits an amended filing of the
Petition for Acceptance of Rate Schedule etc.
    Filed Date: 12/11/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091211-0200.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 01, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-62-001.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.
    Description: ISO New England Inc. et al. submits a compliance
filing which incorporates into the ISO's Financial Assurance Policy
etc.
    Filed Date: 12/10/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091211-0055.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, December 31, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-401-000.
    Applicants: Asset and Energy Cost Saving Cooperative.
    Description: Customized Energy Solutions, Ltd submits petition for
acceptance of initial rate schedule, waivers and blanket authority of
Asset and Energy Cost Saving Cooperative.
    Filed Date: 12/11/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091211-0196.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 01, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-402-000.
    Applicants: FPL Energy Illinois Wind, LLC.
    Description: FPL Energy Illinois Wind, LLC submits application for
authorization to make market-based sales of energy, capacity and
certain ancillary services under a market-based rate tariff.
    Filed Date: 12/10/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091211-0178.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, December 31, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-407-000.
    Applicants: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Pacific Gas and Electric Company submits for filing
and acceptance a Notice of Termination of the Service Agreement for
Wholesale Distribution Service and a prior Interconnection Agreement
etc.
    Filed Date: 12/10/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091211-0053.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, December 31, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-408-000.
    Applicants: American Electric Power Service Corporation.
    Description: American Electric Power Texas North Company submits an
executed Interconnection Agreement between American Electric Power
Texas North Company and Electric Transmission, LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/10/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091211-0052.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, December 31, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-411-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool submits executed Large Generator
Interconnection Agreement between SPP, Golden Spread Electric
Cooperative, Inc., et al.
    Filed Date: 12/10/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091211-0179.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, December 31, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-412-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, LLC.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, LLC submits notice of
cancellation of Original Service Agreement No. 2273 between PJM,
Calvert Cliffs 3 Nuclear Project, LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/11/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091211-0199.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 01, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-413-000.

    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation.
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corporation
submits an informational filing to provide notice regarding the ISO's
revised transmission access charges effective 2/27/08 through 3/31/09.
    Filed Date: 12/11/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091211-0198.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 01, 2010.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
securities filings:

    Docket Numbers: ES10-14-000.
    Applicants: Kansas Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Application of Kansas Gas and Electric Company under
Section 204 for Short Term Debt Authority.
    Filed Date: 12/14/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091214-5004.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 04, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ES10-15-000.
    Applicants: Kansas Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Application of Kansas Gas and Electric Company under
Section 204 for Short Term Guaranty and Pledge Authority.
    Filed Date: 12/14/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091214-5005.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 04, 2010.

    Docket Numbers: ES10-16-000.
    Applicants: Westar Energy, Inc.
    Description: Application of Westar Energy, Inc. under Section 204
for Short Term Debt Authority.
    Filed Date: 12/14/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091214-5006.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 04, 2010.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following open access
transmission tariff filings:

    Docket Numbers: OA08-52-007.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: New York Transmission Owners et al. submits revisions
to Attachment Y of the NYISO's Open Access Transmission Tariff.
    Filed Date: 12/11/2009.
    Accession Number: 20091211-0195.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 01, 2010.

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

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-30217 Filed 12-18-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 244 (Thursday, December 21, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60639-60640]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27461]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-251, OMB Control No. 3235-0256]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736.

Extension:
    Form F-3.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    Form F-3 (17 CFR 239.33) is used by foreign issuers to register
securities pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et
seq.). The information collected is intended to ensure that the
information required to be filed by the Commission permits verification
of compliance with securities law requirements and assures the public
availability of such information. Form F-3 takes approximately 167
hours per response and is filed by approximately 112 respondents. We
estimate that 25% of the 167 hours per response (41.75 hours) is
prepared by the registrant for a total annual reporting burden of 4,676
hours (41.75 hours per response x 112 responses).
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number.
    The public may view the background documentation for this
information collection at the following website, www.reginfo.gov.
Comments should be directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and

Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC
20503, or by sending an email to: [email protected]; and (ii)
Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief Information Officer, Securities and
Exchange Commission, c/o Remi Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE,
Washington, DC 20549 or send an email to: [email protected]. Comments
must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice.

    Dated: December 15, 2017.
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-27461 Filed 12-20-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 105 (Tuesday, June 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31455-31456]
[FR Doc No: 2015-13333]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

[OST Docket No. 2012-0028]

Notice of Submission of Proposed Information Collection to OMB

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. chapter 35, as amended) this notice announces the Department of
Transportation's (Department) intention to request the renewal of an
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number for the collection
of emergency contingency plans for tarmac delays from U.S. carriers and
U.S. airports as required by the FAA Modernization and Reform Act
(Act). On April 16, 2012, the Department of Transportation submitted to
OMB for review and clearance utilizing emergency review procedures
information collection requests related to the submission by U.S.
carriers and U.S. airports of tarmac delay contingency plans for review
and approval by the Department, as well as the public posting of those
plans, as set forth in the Act. OMB issued the Department a control
number authorizing these new collections of information until November
30, 2012 (OMB Control Number 2105-0566).

DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by August 3, 2015.
Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this
proposal.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that you do not duplicate your docket submissions,
please submit them by only one of the following means:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., West Building Ground Floor
Room W-12/140, Washington, DC 20590-0001;
     Hand delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W-12/140,
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly Graber, Office of the
Secretary, Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Aviation
Enforcement and Proceedings (C-70), Department of Transportation, 1200
New Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20590,<PHONE_NUMBER> (voice) 202-
366-7152 (fax) or at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA Modernization and Reform Act, which
was signed into law on February 14, 2012, required U.S. carriers that
operate scheduled passenger service or public charter service using any
aircraft with a design capacity of 30 or more seats, and operators of
large hub, medium hub, small hub, or non-hub U.S. airports, to submit
emergency contingency plans for lengthy tarmac delays to the Secretary
of Transportation for review and approval no later than May 14, 2012.
The Act also required each covered carrier and airport to ensure public
access to its plan after DOT approval by posting the plan on its Web
site. In addition to requiring the initial submission of emergency
contingency plans, the Act requires U.S. carriers to submit an updated
plan every 3 years. Further, the Act requires airport operators to
submit an updated plan every 5 years. The information collection
requirements are specifically required by statute and are not being
imposed as an exercise of the Department's discretion.
    On April 16, 2012, the Department submitted to OMB for review and
clearance information collection requests regarding submission of the
plans and OMB approved this information collection. The Department then
issued a notice in the Federal Register stating how covered U.S.
carriers and airports should submit the required plans to the
Department through an online system (77 FR 27267, May 9, 2012). The
Department intends to ask for a renewal of the OMB control number for
U.S. carriers and airport operators to submit plan updates.
    A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection
of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to
an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the
PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition,
notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally
be subject to monetary penalty for failing to comply with a collection
of information if the collection of information does not display a
valid OMB Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6.
    For each of these information collections, the title, a description
of the respondents, and an estimate of the annual recordkeeping and
periodic reporting burden are set forth below:
    1. Requirement to submit tarmac delay plan to DOT for review and
approval.
    Title: Filing of Tarmac Delay Plan to DOT.
    Respondents: Each large, medium, small and non-hub airport in the
U.S.; U.S. carriers that operate scheduled passenger service or public
charter service using any aircraft with a design capacity of 30 or more
seats.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 420 U.S. airports and 65 U.S.
airlines.
    Frequency: Every 5 years for covered U.S. airports; every 3 years
for covered U.S. airlines.
    Estimated Total Burden on Respondents: For U.S. airports--247.5
hours (25 airports not covered in 2012 x 2 hours) + (395 existing
airports x .5 hours) = 247.5 hours. This estimate is based on the
following facts: Tarmac delay plans for submission are general in
nature and do not consist of extensive airport-specific customization.
Airport associations have prepared templates for use by U.S. airports
which require very little additional information to be customized for
individual airports. Airport associations' templates have been the
template for most of the airport plans submitted. For an airport that
had not prepared and submitted a plan to meet the requirement in 2012
(25 airports), we estimate 2 hours to review the templates, to prepare
by entering the airport-specific information, and to submit the plan
through the Department's electronic submission system. We estimate
there are or will be approximately 25 airports that will be newly
covered by the Act by the next submission deadline and that did not
previously submit plans to meet the requirement in 2012.\1\ For U.S.
airports

that have already prepared and submitted a plan and will continue to be
subject to this requirement (395 airports), they will need to review
and update the plan through the Department's electronic submission
system. We estimate .5 hour for these 395 airports to review, update,
and submit the plan through the Department's electronic submission
system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ These estimates are based on currently available data. Our
estimates assume that the number of covered airports will increase
between 2012 and 2017 so that there will be a larger number of
covered airports by the date of the next submission requirement for
covered airports in 2017. There were approximately 395 airports that
were coverend in 2012. Based on current FAA data, it appears that
approximately 416 airports now meet the threshold of the Act that
requires them to submit plans. http://www.faa.gov/airports/planning_capacity/passenger_allcargo_stats/passenger/media/cy13-commercial-service-enplanements.pdf. Based on fluctuations in
airport traffic combined with the recent trend of increasing air
traffic, we anticipate that approximately 25 airports that were not
covered by the Act in 2012 now meet or will meet the threshold and
be covered airports by 2017, the next required submission date. This
number includes an assumption that a small number of airports that
were previously covered will no longer be covered by 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For U.S. airlines--40 hours (60 existing carriers x .5 hours) + (5
new carriers x 2 hours) = 40 hours.\2\ Airline plans for submission
generally are not very detailed and provide only the level of
information required to meet the statutory requirement. Although
airlines often choose to prepare more detailed plans for internal use,
the submitted plans are brief. In addition, currently operating U.S.
carriers are already required to have such plans in place since this is
a continuing requirement and the statute has already been in place
since 2012. Therefore we estimate that most covered U.S. carriers (an
estimated 60) will spend .5 hour to review, update, and submit the plan
through the Department's electronic submission system. We estimate that
up to 5 U.S. carriers may meet the threshold for the filing requirement
in 2015 but may not have submitted a plan previously. We estimate those
carriers will spend 2 hours to prepare and submit the plan through the
Department's electronic submission system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ These estimates are based on the number of airlines that
were required to file in the past and the potential for an increased
number of airlines that may be covered by the date of the next
submission requirement for airlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Requirement to ensure public access to tarmac delay plan after
DOT approval (as required by the Act).
    Title: Posting of Tarmac Delay Plan on Web sites.
    Respondents: Each large, medium, small and non-hub airport in the
U.S.; U.S. carriers that operate scheduled passenger service or public
charter service and foreign air carriers operating to or from the
United States, using any aircraft with a design capacity of 30 or more
seats.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 420 U.S. airports and 65 U.S.
airlines.
    Estimated Total Frequency: Every 5 years for covered U.S. airports;
every 3 years for covered U.S. airlines (if not already posted or if
there are updates).
    Burden on Respondents: 121.25 (Average of 15 minutes per respondent
(420 U.S. airports and 65 U.S. airlines) to post current plan on Web
site).
    We invite comments on (a) whether the collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the
Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of
the proposed information collection; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology. All responses to this notice will be summarized
and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also
become a matter of public record on the docket.

    Issued this 27 day of May, 2015, at Washington, DC.
Blane A. Workie,
Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings.
[FR Doc. 2015-13333 Filed 6-1-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P


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

E. Commenting on the Proposed Confidentiality Determinations in Two
Direct Emitter Categories
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ http://www.semi.org/en/Store/MarketInformation/fabdatabase/
ctr--027238.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We seek comment on the proposed confidentiality status of data
elements in two direct emitter data categories (``Unit/Process `Static'
Characteristics That are Not Inputs to Emission Equations'' and ``Unit/
Process Operating Characteristics That are Not Inputs to Emission
Equations''). By proposing confidentiality determinations prior to data
reporting through this proposal and rulemaking process, we provide
potential reporters an opportunity to submit comments identifying data
they consider sensitive and the rationales and supporting
documentation, same as those they would otherwise submit for case-by-
case confidentiality determinations. We will evaluate claims of
confidentiality before finalizing the confidentiality determinations.
Please note that this will be reporters' only opportunity to
substantiate your confidentiality claim. Upon finalization of this
rule, the EPA will release or withhold subpart I data in accordance
with 40 CFR 2.301, which contains special provisions governing the
treatment of 40 CFR part 98 data for which confidentiality
determinations have been made through rulemaking.
    Please consider the following instructions in submitting comments
on the data elements in subpart I.
    Please identify each individual data element you do or do not
consider to be CBI or emission data in your comments. Please explain
specifically how the public release of that particular data element
would or would not cause a competitive disadvantage to a facility.
Discuss how this data element may be different from or similar to data
that are already publicly available. Please submit information
identifying any publicly available sources of

information containing the specific data elements in question, since
data that are already available through other sources would not be CBI.
In your comments, please identify the manner and location in which each
specific data element you identify is available, including a citation.
If the data are physically published, such as in a book, industry trade
publication, or federal agency publication, provide the title, volume
number (if applicable), author(s), publisher, publication date, and
ISBN or other identifier. For data published on a Web site, provide the
address of the Web site and the date you last visited the Web site and
identify the Web site publisher and content author.
    If your concern is that competitors could use a particular input to
discern sensitive information, specifically describe the pathway by
which this could occur and explain how the discerned information would
negatively affect your competitive position. Describe any unique
process or aspect of your facility that would be revealed if the
particular data element you consider sensitive were made publicly
available. If the data element you identify would cause harm only when
used in combination with other publicly available data, then describe
the other data, identify the public source(s) of these data, and
explain how the combination of data could be used to cause competitive
harm. Describe the measures currently taken to keep the data
confidential. Avoid conclusory and unsubstantiated statements, or
general assertions regarding potential harm. Please be as specific as
possible in your comments and include all information necessary for the
EPA to evaluate your comments.

IV. Background and Rationale for the Proposed Amendments to the Best
Available Monitoring Method Provisions

    Following the publication of the final subpart I rule in the
Federal Register, an industry association requested reconsideration of
numerous provisions in the final rule. The proposed amendments in this
action are in response to the request for reconsideration of the
specific provision that requires facilities that have been granted
extensions to use best available monitoring methods (BAMM) to
recalculate their emissions for the time period for which BAMM was used
at a later date using methods that are fully compliant with subpart I.
The other amendments that have been made to date are also related to
the reconsideration petition.
    As mentioned above in Section II.C of this preamble, the EPA is
finalizing technical corrections and revisions regarding the definition
of fluorinated HTFs and the provisions to estimate and report emissions
of fluorinated HTFs in a separate action.
    As finalized in December 2010, subpart I allowed facilities to use
BAMM without going through an application process until July 1, 2011.
In 2011, the EPA published other amendments to subpart I, including
several related to the BAMM provisions. On June 22, 2011, the EPA
extended the period in subpart I for using the BAMM provisions without
going through an application process to September 30, 2011 (76 FR
36339). Under the September 27, 2011 amendments to subpart I, this
initial BAMM period was extended through December 31, 2011. Facilities
were given until October 17, 2011 to apply for an extension beyond this
initial period. Under subpart I, facilities could apply to use BAMM
after December 31, 2011 for any parameter for which it is not
reasonably feasible to acquire, install, or operate a required piece of
monitoring equipment in a facility, or to procure necessary measurement
services (40 CFR 94(a)(1)).
    Also on September 27, 2011, the EPA amended the calculation and
monitoring provisions for large semiconductor manufacturing facilities
that fabricate devices on wafers measuring 300 millimeters or less in
diameter (76 FR 59542). The large semiconductor manufacturing
facilities are those that have an annual manufacturing capacity of
greater than 10,500 square meters of substrate. For reporting years
2011, 2012, and 2013, these amendments allow the large semiconductor
facilities the option to calculate emissions using default emission
factors already contained in subpart I, instead of using recipe-
specific utilization and by-product formation rates for the plasma
etching process type.
    The EPA is proposing to amend subpart I to remove the requirement
that facilities that are granted an extension to use BAMM must
recalculate and resubmit the emissions estimate for the BAMM extension
period. Currently, subpart I requires facilities, after the end of the
period for which they have been granted a BAMM extension, to
recalculate and resubmit all emissions after they have begun following
all applicable monitoring methods of subpart I. The September 27, 2011
amendments did not alter the BAMM recalculation provisions in subpart
I.
    Under 40 CFR 98.94(a)(2) and (3), a facility granted an extension
``through December 31, 2011'', per the original schedule in the rule,
must include recalculated 2011 emissions in its 2012 emission report
due in 2013, unless it receives an additional extension. Under 40 CFR
98.94(a)(4), a facility granted an extension beyond December 31, 2011,
must include recalculated 2012 emissions in its 2013 emission report
due in March 2014. Under 40 CFR 98.94(a)(2) and (a)(4), facilities are
not required to verify their 2011 and 2012 BAMM engineering model for
apportioning gas consumption in their recalculated report.
    The petitioners have noted that in the case of subpart I, the
requirement for facilities to recalculate emissions in full compliance
with subpart I would require them to implement data collection at a
level of detail that is not currently feasible for all facilities using
the BAMM provisions.
    Industry members that are applying for BAMM extensions have noted
that, although they have systems to track data that are pertinent to
processing of wafers and determining tool capacities and manufacturing
efficiency, those systems are not currently designed to apportion gas
usage to any particular recipe or tool, or to produce the apportioning
factors required by the rule. They have also noted that they will not
have the systems in place (including hardware and software upgrades) to
collect the data needed to develop heel factors, and to track abatement
system up-time according to subpart I.
    The petitioners also noted that the compliance schedule for subpart
I does not provide adequate time for facilities using BAMM to implement
the data collection needed to recalculate emissions at a later date.
The final subpart I was published on December 1, 2010, and became
effective on January 1, 2011. On January 1, 2011, a facility would have
needed some method in place to track the chemicals, the flow
stabilization times, reactor pressure, individual gas flow rates, and
applied radio frequency power.
    After considering these requests, the EPA is proposing to remove
the requirements to recalculate and resubmit all emission estimates for
subpart I. The EPA has determined that there may be significant burden
imposed by a broad recalculation requirement for subpart I. In
addition, the EPA's ongoing consideration of potential further
revisions to the calculation and monitoring requirements complicates
the recalculation requirement. For example, while the agency may want
to evaluate the feasibility of a recalculation requirement for any new
methodologies,

we do not believe the automatic imposition of a recalculation
requirement is appropriate at this time. Finally, it is important to
note, the majority of the other subparts of Part 98 with specific BAMM
provisions do not require facilities to recalculate or resubmit
emission estimates after the BAMM period has been completed. We have,
therefore, concluded that it is not necessary to require facilities
that have been granted extensions to use best available monitoring
methods to recalculate their emissions for the time period for which
BAMM was used at a later date using calculation methods in subpart I.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action, which is proposing to (1) assign subpart I data reporting
elements into data categories; (2) determine CBI status for the
remaining data elements for which determinations have not yet been
made; and (3) amend reporting methodologies in subpart I that would
reduce the data collection and submittal burden for certain facilities,
is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive
Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore not subject
to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January
21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    As previously mentioned, this action proposes confidentiality
determinations and proposes amended reporting methodologies in subpart
I that would reduce the data collection burden for certain facilities.
This action does not increase the reporting burden. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has previously approved the information
collection requirements contained in subpart I, under 40 CFR part 98,
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq. The Information Collection Request (ICR) documents prepared by the
EPA have been assigned OMB control number 2060-0650 for subpart I. The
OMB control numbers for the EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed at
40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this re-proposal on small
entities, ``small entity'' is defined as: (1) A small business as
defined by the Small Business Administration's regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; or (3) a small organization that is any
not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and
is not dominant in its field.
    This action proposes confidentiality determinations and proposes
amended reporting methodologies in subpart I that would reduce the data
collection burden for certain facilities. After considering the
economic impacts of today's proposed rule on small entities, I certify
that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The small entities directly
regulated by this proposed rule are facilities included in NAICS codes
for Semiconductor and Related Device Manufacturing (334413) and Other
Computer Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing (334119). As shown in
Tables 5-13 and 5-14 of the Economic Impact Analysis for the Mandatory
Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Final Rule (74 FR 56260, October
30, 2009) available in docket number EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0508, the average
ratio of annualized reporting program costs to receipts of
establishments owned by model small enterprises was less than 1% for
industries presumed likely to have small businesses covered by the
reporting program.
    The EPA took several steps to reduce the impact of Part 98 on small
entities. For example, the EPA determined appropriate thresholds that
reduced the number of small businesses reporting. For some source
categories, the EPA developed tiered methods that are simpler and less
burdensome. In addition, the EPA conducted several meetings with
industry associations to discuss regulatory options and the
corresponding burden on industry, such as recordkeeping and reporting.
Finally, the EPA continues to conduct significant outreach on the
mandatory GHG reporting rule and maintains an ``open door'' policy for
stakeholders to help inform the EPA's understanding of key issues for
the industries.
    We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of this
action on small entities and welcome comments on issues related to such
effects.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2
U.S.C. 1531-1538, requires federal agencies, unless otherwise
prohibited by law, to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on
state, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. Federal
agencies must also develop a plan to provide notice to small
governments that might be significantly or uniquely affected by any
regulatory requirements. The plan must enable officials of affected
small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of the EPA regulatory proposals with significant federal
intergovernmental mandates and must inform, educate, and advise small
governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
    This action, which is proposing confidentiality determinations and
amended reporting methodologies in subpart I that would reduce the data
collection burden for certain facilities, does not contain a federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year. This action does not increase the reporting
burden. Thus, this action is not subject to the requirements of
sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA.
    In developing Part 98, the EPA consulted with small governments
pursuant to a plan established under section 203 of the UMRA to address
impacts of regulatory requirements in the rule that might significantly
or uniquely affect small governments. For a summary of the EPA's
consultations with state and/or local officials or other
representatives of state and/or local governments in developing Part
98, see Section VIII.D of the preamble to the final rule (74 FR 56370,
October 30, 2009).

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects 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, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. However, for a

more detailed discussion about how Part 98 relates to existing state
programs, please see Section II of the preamble to the final rule (74
FR 56266, October 30, 2009).
    This action, which is proposing confidentiality determinations and
amended reporting methodologies in subpart I that would reduce the data
collection burden, would only apply to certain electronics
manufacturers. No state or local government facilities are known to be
engaged in the activities that would be affected by the provisions in
this proposed rule. This action also does not limit the power of states
or localities to collect GHG data and/or regulate GHG emissions. Thus,
Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with the EPA
policy to promote communications between the EPA and state and local
governments, the EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed
action from state and local officials. For a summary of the EPA's
consultation with state and local organizations and representatives in
developing Part 98, see Section VIII.E of the preamble to the final
rule (74 FR 56371, October 30, 2009).

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action,
which proposes confidentiality determinations and proposes amended
reporting methodologies in subpart I that would reduce the data
collection burden for certain facilities, does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000). No tribal facilities are known to be engaged in the
activities affected by this action. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this action. For a summary of the EPA's consultations with
tribal governments and representatives, see Section VIII.F of the
preamble to the final rule (74 FR 56371, October 30, 2009). The EPA
specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed action from
tribal officials.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997) as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health
or safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
action, which is proposing to (1) assign subpart I data reporting
elements into data categories; (2) determine CBI status for the
remaining data elements for which determinations have not yet been
made; and (3) amend reporting methodologies in subpart I that would
reduce the data collection and submittal burden for certain facilities,
is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not establish
an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action, which is proposing to (1) assign subpart I data
reporting elements into data categories; (2) determine CBI status for
the remaining data elements for which determinations have not yet been
made; and (3) amend reporting methodologies in subpart I that would
reduce the data collection and submittal burden for certain facilities,
is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)). It is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy. This action does not increase the reporting burden. The
proposed rule amendments in this action do not impose any significant
changes to the current reporting requirements contained in 40 CFR part
98, subpart I; rather, the proposed amendments to the reporting
requirements would only affect certain electronics manufacturers.
Therefore, this action is not subject to Executive Order 13211.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs
the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to
provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the agency decides not
to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This action, which is proposing to (1) assign subpart I data
reporting elements into data categories; (2) determine CBI status for
the remaining data elements for which determinations have not yet been
made; and (3) amend reporting methodologies in subpart I that would
reduce the data collection and submittal burden for certain facilities,
does not involve technical standards. Therefore, the EPA is not
considering the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    The EPA has determined that this action, which is proposing to (1)
assign subpart I data reporting elements into data categories; (2)
determine CBI status for the remaining data elements for which
determinations have not yet been made; and (3) amend reporting
methodologies in subpart I that would reduce the data collection and
submittal burden for certain facilities, will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This action addresses only reporting and recordkeeping
procedures.

List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 98

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Greenhouse gases, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 10, 2012.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, of
the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 98--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 98 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart I--[Amended]

    2. Section 98.94 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2)(iii),
(a)(3)(iii), and (a)(4)(iii) to read as follows:

Sec.  98.94  Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) Approval criteria. To obtain approval, the owner or operator
must demonstrate to the Administrator's satisfaction that by July 1,
2011, it is not reasonably feasible to acquire, install, or operate the
required piece of monitoring equipment, or procure necessary
measurement services to comply with the requirements of this subpart.
    (3) * * *
    (iii) Approval criteria. To obtain approval, the owner or operator
must demonstrate to the Administrator's satisfaction that by December
31, 2011 it is not reasonably feasible to acquire, install, or operate
the required piece of monitoring equipment or procure necessary
measurement services to comply with the requirements of this subpart.
    (4) * * *
    (iii) Approval criteria. To obtain approval, the owner or operator
must demonstrate to the Administrator's satisfaction that by December
31, 2011 (or in the case of facilities that are required to calculate
and report emissions in accordance with Sec.  98.93(a)(2)(ii)(A),
December 31, 2012), it is not reasonably feasible to acquire, install,
or operate the required piece of monitoring equipment according to the
requirements of this subpart.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-3778 Filed 2-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 117 (Wednesday, June 18, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34737-34738]
[FR Doc No: 2014-14235]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9912-54-OA]

Meetings of the Small Community Advisory Subcommittee and the
Local Government Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Announcement of Meetings.

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

SUMMARY: The Small Community Advisory Subcommittee (SCAS) will meet via
teleconference on Thursday, July 3, 2014, 2:00 p.m.-2:30 p.m. (EDT).
The Subcommittee will discuss small community issues related to EPA's
Waters of the United States. This is an open meeting. Individuals or
organizations wishing to address the Subcommittee meeting will be
allowed a maximum of five minutes to present their point of view on
issues pertaining to small communities.
    The Local Government Advisory Committee (LGAC) will meet via

teleconference on Thursday, July 3, 2014, 2:30 p.m.-3:00 p.m. (EDT).
The Committee meeting will focus on the Protecting America's Waters
Workgroup initial recommendations on the Waters of the United States.
    These are open meetings, and all interested persons are invited to
participate. The Subcommittee will hear comments from the public
between 2:15 p.m. and 2:30 p.m. on Thursday, July 3, 2014, and the
Committee will hear comments from the public between 2:45 p.m. and 3:00
p.m. on Thursday, July 3, 2014. Individuals or organizations wishing to
address the Subcommittee or the Committee will be allowed a maximum of
five minutes to present their point of view. Also, written comments
should be submitted electronically to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
contact the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at the number listed below
to schedule a time on the agenda. Time will be allotted on a first-come
first-serve basis, and the total period for comments may be extended if
the number of requests for appearances requires it.

ADDRESSES: The Small Communities Advisory Subcommittee and Local
Government Advisory Committee meetings will meet via teleconference.
Meeting summaries will be available after the meeting online at
www.epa.gov/ocir/scas_lgac/lgac_index.htm and can be obtained by
written request to the DFO.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Local Government Advisory Committee
(LGAC) and Small Communities Advisory Subcommittee (SCAS), contact
Frances Eargle, Designated Federal Officer, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Information On Services For Those With Disabilities: For
information on access or services for individuals with disabilities,
please contact Frances Eargle at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>To request accommodation of a disability,
please request it 10 days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much
time as possible to process your request.

    Dated: June 13, 2014.
Frances Eargle,
Designated Federal Officer, Local Government Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 2014-14235 Filed 6-17-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 134 (Wednesday, July 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41247-41248]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17641]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-1017; FRL-8881-1]

Product Cancellation Order for Certain Pesticide Registrations;
Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: EPA issued a cancellation order in the Federal Register of
February 25, 2011, concerning the voluntary cancellation of multiple
pesticide products. This document is being issued to correct the
cancellations of two Phaeton Corporation pesticide products.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maia Tatinclaux, Pesticide Re-
evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    The Agency included in the notice a list of those who may be
potentially affected by this action. If you have questions regarding
the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the
person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-1017. 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
Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-
4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington,
VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m.
to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket
Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

II. Background

    The cancellation of Phaeton Corporation's pesticide products, EPA
Reg. Nos. 28293-160 and 28293-215 was published in the Federal Register
of February 25, 2011 (76 FR 10587) (FRL-8833-4). The Cancellation Order
was issued following a Notice announcing the requests to voluntarily
cancel these products published in the Federal Register of November 10,
2010. This Notice was subject to a 30-day comment period during which
no comments were received regarding the subject product registrations.
    These products were cancelled in error because Phaeton Corporation
did not request their voluntary cancellation. The Agency mistakenly
included these products in the Cancellation Order and notification was
not received during the comment period prior to issuance of the final
Cancellation Order. Therefore, EPA Reg. Nos. 28293-160 and 28293-215
should not have been included in the Cancellation Order published in
the Federal Register of February 25, 2011, and these products maintain
active registrations at this time.

III. What does this correction do?

    The preamble for FR Doc. 2011-4140 published in the Federal
Register of February 25, 2011 (76 FR 10587) (FRL-8863-4) is corrected
as follows:
    1. On page 10588, in Table 1, remove the entries for EPA Reg. No.
028293-00160, for Unicorn House and Carpet Spray 11, and EPA Reg. No.
028293-

00215, for Unicorn IGR Pressurized Spray.
    2. On page 10590, in Table 4, remove the Company No. 28293 and the
company name and address for ``Phaeton Corporation.''

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

    Dated: July 7, 2011.
Richard P. Keigwin, Jr.,
Director, Pesticide Re-evaluation Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011-17641 Filed 7-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 20, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 87930-87932]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28001]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2023-0965]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Laguna de Lobina, Culebra, Puerto Rico

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Temporary interim rule and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
navigable waters of Laguna de Lobina within a 50-yard radius of Culebra
Bridge due to structural damage to the bridge. The safety zone is
needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from
potential hazards created by the damaged bridge. Entry of persons and
vessels from into the safety zone is prohibited unless specifically
authorized by the Captain of the Port San Juan or a designated
representative.

DATES: This temporary interim rule is effective without actual notice
from December 20, 2023, through February 12, 2024. For the purposes of
enforcement, actual notice will be used from December 14, 2023, until
December 20, 2023.
    Comments and related material must reach the Coast Guard on or
before January 19, 2024.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2023-0965 in the search box and click ``Search.'' Next, in the Document
Type column, select ``Supporting & Related Material.'' See section VI
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for information on public
participation and request for comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Commander Carlos M. Ortega-Perez, Sector San
Juan Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 787-
729-2380, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

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

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because structural damaged is causing the
potential collapse of the Culebra Bridge. Due to this situation the
Culebra Bridge is temporary closed and immediate action is needed to
respond to the potential safety hazards associated with the bridge
structural condition. It is impracticable to publish an NPRM because we
must establish this safety zone by December 14, 2023. Therefore, we
lack sufficient time to provide a reasonable comment period and then to
consider those comments before issuing the rule.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable

because immediate action is needed to respond to the potential safety
hazards associated with potential collapsing of the Culebra Bridge.
    We are soliciting comments on this rulemaking. If we determine that
changes to this rulemaking action are necessary, the Coast Guard will
consider comments received in a subsequent temporary final rule.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034. The Captain of the Port Sector San Juan (COTP) has determined
that potential hazards associated with potential collapsing of the
Culebra Bridge starting December 14, 2023, will be a safety concern for
anyone within a 50-yard radius of bridge. This rule is needed to
protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in the navigable
waters within the safety zone while the bridge is being closed.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from December 14, 2023, while
the bridge is closed due to structural damage. The safety zone will
cover all navigable waters of the Laguna de Lobina within a 50-yard
radius of the Culebra Bridge. The duration of the zone is intended to
protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in these
navigable waters while the bridge is closed. No vessel or person will
be permitted to enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from
the COTP or a designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. This rule has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as
amended by Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing Regulatory Review).
Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on: (1) The safety of
personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from potential hazards
created by potential collapsing the bridge; (2) although persons and
vessels may not enter, transit through, anchor in, or remain within the
safety zone without authorization from the COTP or a designated
representative they may operate in the surrounding area during the
enforcement period.

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
call or email 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.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing instructions, and
Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast
Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of
a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves a
safety zone that will prohibit entry within 50-yard radius of the
Culebra Bridge. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph L60(d) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-
01-001-01, Rev. 1. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting
this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on
locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble. 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 call or email 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.

VI. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through
the Federal Decision-Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2023-0965 in the
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment
option. If you cannot submit your material by using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this rule for alternate instructions.
    Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this
rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as described in
the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting & Related
Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will also be
placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following instructions
on the https://www.regulations.gov. Frequently Asked Questions web
page. Also, if you click on the Dockets tab and then the rule, you
should see a ``Subscribe'' option for email alerts. The option will
notify you when comments are posted, or a final rule is published.
    We review all comments received, but we will only post comments
that address the topic of the rule. We may choose not to post off-
topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we receive.
    Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we
post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal
information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions
to the docket in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T07-0965 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T07-0965  Safety Zone; Culebra Bridge, Puerto Rico.

    (a) Location. All waters of Laguna de Lobina and Ensenada Honda,
from surface to bottom, encompassed by 50-yard radius from Culebra
Bridge located at 18[deg]18'07'' N 65[deg]17'59'' W.
    (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 San Juan (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 by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or a designated
representative via VHF-FM radio on channel 16 to request authorization.
If authorization is granted, all persons and vessels receiving such
authorization must comply with the instructions of the COTP San Juan or
a designated representative. 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.
    (3) The Coast Guard will provide notice of the regulated area by
Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM
channel 16, or the COTP's designated representative
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from December
14, 2023, until February 12, 2024.

Jos[eacute] E. D[iacute]az,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Juan.
[FR Doc. 2023-28001 Filed 12-19-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P