18202 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2003 / Notices 7. WPS Canada Generation, Inc.

[ Docket No. ER03   689   000] Take notice that on April 1, 2003, WPS Canada Generation, Inc. ( WPS Canada), filed rate schedules for its Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation Sources Services ( Reactive Power Service) in order to obtain compensation for the Reactive Power Service that it provides to Maine Public Service Company ( MPS) and the Northern Maine Independent System Administrator, Inc. to maintain the reliability of the MPS transmission system. WPS Canada states that copies of the filing were served upon Maine Public Service Company, the Northern Maine Independent System Administrator, Inc., the Houlton Water Company, Eastern Maine Electric Cooperative, and Van Buren Light and Power District. Comment Date: April 22, 2003.

8. Minnesota Power [ Docket No. ER03   691   000] Take notice that on April 1, 2003, Minnesota Power tendered for filing an executed letter agreement dated February 26, 2003 amending and updating the pricing terms and conditions of the Network Integration Transmission Service Agreement between Minnesota Power and Great River Energy ( GRE) under Minnesota Power's open access transmission tariff ( OATT), Service Agreement No. 65 Transmission under FERC Electric Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 6, effective March 1, 2003. Comment Date: April 22, 2003.

Standard Paragraph Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing 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). 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. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. All such motions or protests should be filed on or before the comment date, and, to the extent applicable, must be served on the applicant and on any other person designated on the official service list. This filing is available for review at the Commission or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at http:// www. ferc. gov , using the `` FERRIS'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at FERCOnlineSupport@ ferc. gov or tollfree at ( 866) 208   3676, or for TTY, contact ( 202) 502   8659. 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. 03   9233 Filed 4   14   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717   01   P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ OPPT   2003   0013; FRL   7300   5]

Request for Contractor Access to TSCA Confidential Business Information; Request for Comment on Renewal of Information Collection Activities AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act ( PRA) ( 44 U. S. C 3501 et seq.) EPA is seeking public comment on the following Information Collection Request ( ICR): Request for Contractor Access to TSCA Confidential Business Information ( EPA ICR No. 1250.07, OMB Control No. 2070   0075). This ICR involves a collection activity that is currently approved and scheduled to expire on February 29, 2004. The information collection involves company and individual employee information provided by EPA contractor companies for those employees needing Toxic Substances Control Act ( TSCA) confidential business information ( CBI) clearance in order to perform their duties. Before submitting this ICR to the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) for review and approval under the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the collection. DATES: Written comments, identified by the docket ID number OPPT   2003   0013, must be received on or before June 16, 2003. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/ courier. Follow the detailed instructions as provided in Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Barbara Cunningham, Acting Director, Environmental Assistance Division ( 7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 202) 554   1404; e mail address: TSCA Hotline@ epa. gov. For technical information contact: Sandra Wilkins, Information Management Division ( 7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001; telephone number: ( 202) 564   8952; fax number: ( 202) 564   8955; e mail address: wilkins. sandra@ epa. gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

You may be potentially affected by this action if you are a company under contract to EPA to provide certain services, and your employees must have access to TSCA CBI in the performance of their duties. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to:   Information services ( NAICS 514), e. g., Information search services.   Administrative and support services ( NAICS 561), e. g., Office administrative services. 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 technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information?

1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification ( ID) number OPPT   2003   0013. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information ( CBI) or other information whose disclosure is VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 07 Apr 14, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 15APN1. SGM 15APN1 OPPT 2003 0013 0001 RECEIVED OPPT NCIC 2003 APR15 7: 23AM 18203 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2003 / Notices restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the EPA Docket Center, Rm. B102 Reading Room, EPA West, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The EPA Docket Center Reading Room telephone number is ( 202) 566   1744 and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket, which is located in EPA Docket Center, is ( 202) 566   0280. 2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically through the EPA Internet under the `` Federal Register'' listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. Once in the system, select `` search,'' then key in the appropriate docket ID number. Certain types of information will not be placed in the EPA Dockets. Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute, which is not included in the official public docket, will not be available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material will not be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in printed, paper form in the official public docket. To the extent feasible, publicly available docket materials will be made available in EPA's electronic public docket. When a document is selected from the index list in EPA Dockets, the system will identify whether the document is available for viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I. B. 1. EPA intends to work towards providing electronic access to all of the publicly available docket materials through EPA's electronic public docket. For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that is placed in EPA's electronic public docket. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket. Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the docket will be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief description written by the docket staff.

C. How and to Whom Do I Submit the Comments? You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/ courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket ID number in the subject line on the first page of your comment. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked `` late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late comments. If you wish to submit CBI or information that is otherwise protected by statute, please follow the instructions in Unit I. D. Do not use EPA Dockets or e mail to submit CBI or information protected by statute. 1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as prescribed in this unit, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other contact information in the body of your comment. Also include this contact information on the outside of any disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any cover letter accompanying the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that EPA will not edit your comment, and any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. 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. i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA's electronic public docket to submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket, and follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once in the system, select `` search,'' and then key in docket ID number OPPT   2003   0013. The system is an `` anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity, e mail address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. ii. E mail. Comments may be sent by e mail to oppt. ncic@ epa. gov, Attention: Docket ID Number OPPT   2003   0013. In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e mail system is not an `` anonymous access'' system. If you send an e mail comment directly to the docket without going through EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e mail system automatically captures your email address. E mail addresses that are automatically captured by EPA's e mail system are included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit comments on a disk or CD ROM that you mail to the mailing address identified in Unit I. C. 2. These electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect or ASCII file format. Avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption. 2. By mail. Send your comments to: Document Control Office ( 7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics ( OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460   0001. 3. By hand delivery or courier. Deliver your comments to: OPPT Document Control Office ( DCO) in EPA East Building Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. Attention: Docket ID Number OPPT   2003   0013. The DCO is open from 8 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the DCO is ( 202) 564   8930.

D. How Should I Submit CBI To the Agency? Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI electronically through EPA's electronic public docket VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 19: 09 Apr 14, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 15APN1. SGM 15APN1 18204 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2003 / Notices or by e mail. You may claim information that you submit to EPA as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI ( if you submit CBI on disk or CD ROM, 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 CBI). Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes any 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 and EPA's electronic public docket. If you submit the copy that does not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and EPA's electronic public docket without prior notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

E. What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments: 1. Explain your views as clearly as possible. 2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 3. Provide copies of any technical information and/ or data you used that support your views. 4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide. 5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns. 6. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity. 7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline in this notice. 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal Register citation.

F. What Information is EPA Particularly Interested in?

Pursuant to section 3506( c)( 2)( A) of the PRA, EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to: 1. Evaluate whether the proposed collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility. 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burdens of the proposed collections of information. 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected. 4. Minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated or electronic collection technologies or other forms of information technology, e. g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

II. What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does this Action Apply to? EPA is seeking comments on the following ICR: Title: Request for Contractor Access to TSCA Confidential Business Information. ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1250.07, OMB Control No. 2070   0075. ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on February 29, 2004. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information that is subject to approval under PRA, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and included on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. Abstract: Certain employees of companies working under contract to EPA require access to CBI collected under the authority of TSCA in order to perform their official duties. The Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics ( OPPT), which is responsible for maintaining the security of TSCA CBI, requires that all individuals desiring access to TSCA CBI obtain and annually renew official clearance to TSCA CBI. As part of the process for obtaining TSCA CBI clearance, OPPT requires certain information about the contracting company and about each contractor employee requesting TSCA CBI clearance. This includes primarily the name, Social Security number and EPA identification badge number of the employee, the type of TSCA CBI clearance requested and the justification for such clearance, and the signature of the employee to an agreement with respect to access to and use of TSCA CBI. Responses to the collection of information are voluntary, but failure to provide the requested information will prevent a contractor employee from obtaining clearance to TSCA CBI. EPA will observe strict confidentiality precautions with respect to the information collected on individual employees, based on the Privacy Act of 1974, as outlined in the ICR and in the collection instrument.

III. What Are EPA's Burden and Cost Estimates for This ICR?

Under the PRA, `` burden'' means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal Agency. For this collection it includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The ICR provides a detailed explanation of this estimate, which is only briefly summarized in this notice. The annual public burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1.6 hours per response. The following is a summary of the estimates taken from the ICR: Respondents/ affected entities: 19. Estimated total number of potential respondents: Unknown. Frequency of response: One time only per individual employee needing TSCA CBI clearance. Estimated total/ average number of responses for each respondent: 14. Estimated total annual burden hours: 428 hours. Estimated total annual burden costs: $ 15,736.

IV. Are There Changes in the Estimates From the Last Approval?

There is a decrease of 247 hours ( from 675 hours to 428 hours) in the total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR most recently approved by OMB. This change results from a lesser number of contractor companies with employees needing TSCA CBI clearance.

V. What is the Next Step in the Process for This ICR?

EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 19: 09 Apr 14, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 15APN1. SGM 15APN1 18205 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2003 / Notices appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5( a)( 1)( iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: April 1, 2003. Stephen L. Johnson, Assistant Administrator for Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

[ FR Doc. 03   9211 Filed 4   14   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ FRL   7483   2]

Compliance Assistance Centers; Request for Suggestions on Candidates for Compliance Assistance Center Development in FY 2004 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Solicitation for suggestions.

SUMMARY: In partnership with industry, academic institutions, environmental groups, and other agencies, the Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) supports thirteen Compliance Assistance Centers ( Centers) to help small and medium size businesses and local governments better understand and comply with environmental regulations. These Centers provide easy to understand compliance information targeted to specific sectors, geographic and environmental topics: agriculture; automotive service and repair; automotive recycling, chemical manufacturers; construction; federal facilities; local governments, metal finishing; paints and coatings; printed wiring board manufacturers; printers; transportation; and the U. S. / Mexican border environmental issues. All Centers can be accessed at http:// www. assistancecneters. net. EPA would like to expand the Center program to support other sectors, geographical areas or topical issues. To support new Center development, EPA has funded the National Center for Manufacturing Sciences ( NCMS) to develop, operate and maintain the Compliance Assistance Center Platform ( Platform) from which new Centers can be `` launched.'' The Platform includes a suite of comprehensive web based tools necessary to create a full featured Center. States, industry, and compliance assistance providers can work with NCMS to establish Centers that will help the regulated community better understand and more efficiently comply with environmental requirements. The Centers for the construction sector, automotive recycling sector and U. S. / Mexican border environmental issues have been developed in partnership with NCMS and the Platform. Visit http:// www. envcap. org to access Platform resources. EPA is exploring new sector, geographical, or topical candidates for Center development in FY 2004. Center candidates will be evaluated initially against the following criteria: impact on health and the environment; patterns of noncompliance; assessment that compliance assistance is an appropriate `` tool'' to use; predominately involves or affects small businesses; the problem or issue is prevalent nationally; impact of new environmental regulations; subject to multiple environmental statutes/ regulations; and not currently supported by an existing compliance assistance program. Once these threshold criteria have been met, an additional criteria will be applied: willingness of a sector or third party organization to partner with EPA. EPA invites feedback from interested parties on candidates for Center development. The above criteria should be considered in your evaluation of sector, geographic, or topical candidates. EPA anticipates selecting the sectors, topics or geographic areas for which new Centers will be developed in July, 2003. Pursuant to EPA's Grants Competition Policy that went into effect October 1, 2002, EPA will compete any assistance agreement that will be provided to support new Center development in FY 2004. Interested parties should communicate their suggestions regarding new sectors, geographical areas or topical issues for Center development to EPA by letter or e mail to the contact listed below.

DATES: Contact by May 9, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tracy Back, Team Leader, Compliance Assistance Centers, US, EPA ( mail code 2224A), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, E mail: back. tracy@ epa. gov. Telephone: 202   564   7076, Fax: 202   564   0009. Dated: April 3, 2003. Lisa C. Lund, Acting Director, Office of Compliance. [ FR Doc. 03   9209 Filed 4   14   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [ Report No. 2604]

Petition for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding April 9, 2003. Petition for Reconsideration has been filed in the Commission's rulemaking proceeding listed in this Public Notice and published pursuant to 47 CFR section 1.429( e). The full text of this document is available for viewing and copying in Room CY   A257, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC or may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Qualex International ( 202) 863   2893. Oppositions to this petition must be filed by April 30, 2003. See Section 1.4( b)( 1) of the Commission's rules ( 47 CFR 1.4( b)( 1)). Replies to an opposition must be filed within 10 days after the time for filing oppositions has expired. Subject: In the Matter of the Telecommunications Relay Services and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ( CC Docket No. 90   571). Number of Petitions Filed: 1.

William F. Caton, Deputy Secretary. [ FR Doc. 03   9118 Filed 4   14   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712   01   M FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ( FDIC). ACTION: Notice and request for comment.

SUMMARY: The FDIC, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/ or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 ( 44 U. S. C. chapter 35). Currently, the FDIC is soliciting comments concerning the following collections of information titled: ( 1) Securities of Insured Nonmember Banks, ( 2) Fair Housing Lending VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 19: 09 Apr 14, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 15APN1. SGM 15APN1


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 125 (Friday, June 28, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30884-30887]
[FR Doc No: 2019-13772]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket Number USCG-2019-0107]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulation; Choptank River, Cambridge, MD

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing temporary special local
regulations for certain navigable waters of the Choptank River. This
action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these waters
located at Cambridge, MD, on July 27, 2019, and July 28, 2019, during a
high-speed power boat racing event. This regulation prohibits persons
and vessels from being in the regulated area unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region or Coast Guard
Patrol Commander.

DATES: This rule is effective from 9:30 a.m. on July 27, 2019 to 6:30
p.m. on July 28, 2019. This rule will be enforced from 9:30 a.m. to
6:30 p.m. on July 27, 2019, and, from 9:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on July
28, 2019.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2019-0107 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 Mr. Ron Houck, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National
Capital Region; 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
PATCOM Coast Guard Patrol Commander
SNPRM Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard published an NPRM on March 18, 2019 (84 FR 9724),
proposing to establish a special local regulation for the Thunder on
the Choptank, on July 27, 2019, and July 28, 2019. The Coast Guard
received two comments. The Coast Guard published an SNPRM on May 16,
2019 (84 FR 22079), to amend the proposed special local regulation to
increase the size of the regulated area and make minor corrections to
the designated spectator area coordinates for the Thunder on the
Choptank, on July 27, 2019, and July 28, 2019, and reopen the comment
period to account for these changes. The comment period closed June 17,
2019. The Coast Guard received no additional comments during the second
request for comments.
    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. Due to the date of the event, it
would be impracticable to make the regulation effective 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule is impracticable and contrary to public interest because it
would delay the safety measures necessary to respond to potential
safety hazards associated with this marine event. Immediate action is
needed to protect participants, spectators, and other persons and
vessels during the high-speed race event on these navigable waters.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70041. The Captain of the Port Maryland-National Capital Region (COTP)
has determined that potential hazards associated with these power boat
races will be a safety concern for anyone intending to operate in or
near the race area. The purpose of this rule is to protect event
participants, spectators, and transiting vessels on specified waters of
the Choptank River before, during, and after the scheduled event.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    As noted above, we received two comments to the docket responding
to our NPRM published March 18, 2019. Both comments were in support of
the Coast Guard's rulemaking. However, one commenter questioned why the
regulation was needed, and wondered if instead waterway users could be

directed safely away from the event site or if there could be stated
times when waterway users could transit through the regulated area. The
COTP Maryland-National Capital Region is issuing this special local
regulation to ensure that all vessels are operated within the regulated
area at a safe speed that minimizes wake near the event area. A COTP
order, by comparison, would apply to only a single vessel. The Coast
Guard issues special local regulations under authority of 46 U.S.C.
70041(a), which grants the Commandant authority to issue regulations to
promote the safety of life on navigable waters during regattas or
marine parades. The Coast Guard issues such regulations in accordance
with the Administrative Procedure Act's rulemaking requirements.
    Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit the regulated area
once the PATCOM deems it safe to do so. Patrol vessels will be present
to monitor the event and enforce the special local regulation. In
addition, Broadcast Notice to Mariners will also be made for this
event, to begin prior to that start of the scheduled event, and to
continue to notify the public, until immediately after its completion.
    There are no changes in the regulatory text of this rule from the
proposed rule in the SNPRM.
    This rule establishes a special local regulation to be enforced
from 9:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on July 27, 2019, and from 9:30 a.m. to
6:30 on July 28, 2019. The regulated area will cover all navigable
waters of the Choptank River and Hambrooks Bay bounded by a line
connecting the following coordinates: Commencing at the shoreline at
Long Wharf Park, Cambridge, MD, at position latitude 38[deg]34'30'' N,
longitude 076[deg]04'16'' W; thence east to latitude 38[deg]34'20'' N,
longitude 076[deg]03'46'' W; thence northeast across the Choptank River
along the Senator Frederick C. Malkus, Jr. (US-50) Memorial Bridge, at
mile 15.5, to latitude 38[deg]35'30'' N, longitude 076[deg]02'52'' W;
thence west along the shoreline to latitude 38[deg]35'38'' N, longitude
076[deg]03'09'' W; thence north and west along the shoreline to
latitude 38[deg]36'42'' N, longitude 076[deg]04'15'' W; thence
southwest across the Choptank River to latitude 38[deg]35'31'' N,
longitude 076[deg]04'57'' W; thence west along the Hambrooks Bay
breakwall to latitude 38[deg]35'33'' N, longitude 076[deg]05'17'' W;
thence south and east along the shoreline to and terminating at the
point of origin.
    The duration of the special local regulations and size of the
regulated area are intended to ensure the safety of life on these
navigable waters before, during, and after these power boat races,
scheduled from 10 a.m. until 6 p.m. on July 27, 2019, and July 28,
2019. Except for participants and vessels already at berth, a vessel or
person will be required to get permission from the COTP or PATCOM
before entering the regulated area while the rule is being enforced.
Vessel operators can request permission to enter and transit through
the regulated area by contacting the PATCOM on VHF-FM channel 16.
Vessel traffic will be able to safely transit the regulated area once
the PATCOM deems it safe to do so. A person or vessel not registered
with the event sponsor as a participant or assigned as Official Patrols
will be considered a spectator. Official Patrols are any vessel
assigned or approved by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector Maryland-
National Capital Region with a commissioned, warrant, or petty officer
on board and displaying a Coast Guard ensign. If permission is granted
by the COTP or PATCOM, a person or vessel will be allowed to enter the
regulated area or pass directly through the regulated area as
instructed. Vessels will be required to operate at a safe speed that
minimizes wake while within the regulated area. Official Patrol vessels
will direct spectator vessels while within the regulated area. Vessels
will be prohibited from loitering within the navigable channel. Only
participant vessels and Official Patrols will be allowed to enter the
race area.

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 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, duration
and time of year of the racing event, which will impact a small
designated area of the Choptank River for 18 total enforcement hours.
The Coast Guard will issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM
marine channel 16 about the status of the special local regulation.
Moreover, the rule will allow vessels to seek permission to enter the
regulated area, and vessel traffic will be able to safely transit the
regulated area once the COTP or PATCOM deems it safe to do so.

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 received no comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rulemaking. 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
regulated area 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
Directive 023-01 and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have
determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves implementation of a temporary special
local regulation for certain navigable waters of the Choptank River.
This action is necessary to provide for the safety of life on these
waters located at Cambridge, MD, on July 27, 2019, and July 28, 2019,
during a high-speed power boat racing event. The temporary regulated
area will be enforced for 18 hours during the power boat races. It is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L61 in Table
3-1 of U.S. Coast Guard Environmental Planning Implementing Procedures
5090.1. A Memorandum For the Record for Categorically Excluded Actions
supporting this determination is available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES.

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 100

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

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70041; 33 CFR 1.05-1.

0
2. Add Sec.  [thinsp]100.501T05-0107 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.501T05-0107  Special Local Regulation; Choptank River,
Cambridge, MD.

    (a) Definitions. As used in this section:
    Captain of the Port (COTP) Maryland-National Capital Region means
the Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region
or any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been
authorized by the COTP to act on his behalf.
    Coast Guard Patrol Commander (PATCOM) means a commissioned,
warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard who has been
designated by the Commander, Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National
Capital Region.
    Official Patrol means any vessel assigned or approved by Commander,
Coast Guard Sector Maryland-National Capital Region with a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer on board and displaying a Coast
Guard ensign.
    Participants means all persons and vessels registered with the
event sponsor as participating in the Thunder on the Choptank or
otherwise designated by the event sponsor as having a function tied to
the event.
    Spectators means all persons and vessels not registered with the
event sponsor as participants or assigned as official patrols.
    (b) Regulated Areas. All coordinates reference Datum NAD 1983. All
navigable waters within Choptank River and Hambrooks Bay bounded by a
line connecting the following coordinates: Commencing at the shoreline
at Long Wharf Park, Cambridge, MD, at position latitude 38[deg]34'30''
N, longitude 076[deg]04'16'' W; thence east to latitude 38[deg]34'20''
N, longitude 076[deg]03'46'' W; thence northeast across the Choptank
River along the Senator Frederick C. Malkus, Jr. (US-50) Memorial
Bridge, at mile 15.5, to latitude 38[deg]35'30'' N, longitude
076[deg]02'52'' W; thence west along the shoreline to latitude
38[deg]35'38'' N, longitude 076[deg]03'09'' W; thence north and west
along the shoreline to latitude 38[deg]36'42'' N, longitude
076[deg]04'15'' W; thence southwest across the Choptank River to
latitude 38[deg]35'31'' N, longitude 076[deg]04'57'' W; thence west
along the Hambrooks Bay breakwall to latitude 38[deg]35'33'' N,
longitude 076[deg]05'17'' W; thence south and east along the shoreline
to and terminating at the point of origin. The following locations are
within the regulated area:
    (1) Race Area. Located within the waters of Hambrooks Bay and
Choptank River, between Hambrooks Bar and Great Marsh Point, MD.
    (2) Buffer Zone. All waters within Hambrooks Bay and Choptank River
(with the exception of the Race Area designated by the marine event
sponsor) bound to the north by the breakwall and continuing along a
line drawn from the east end of breakwall located at latitude
38[deg]35'27.6'' N, longitude 076[deg]04'50.1'' W; thence southeast to
latitude 38[deg]35'17.7'' N, longitude 076[deg]04'29'' W; thence south
to latitude 38[deg]35'01'' N, longitude 076[deg]04'29'' W; thence west
to the shoreline at latitude 38[deg]35'01'' N, longitude
076[deg]04'41.3'' W.
    (3) Spectator Area. All waters of the Choptank River, eastward and
outside of Hambrooks Bay breakwall, thence bound by line that commences
at latitude 38[deg]35'28'' N, longitude 076[deg]04'50'' W; thence
northeast to latitude 38[deg]35'30'' N, longitude 076[deg]04'47'' W;
thence southeast to latitude 38[deg]35'23'' N, longitude
076[deg]04'29'' W; thence southwest to latitude 38[deg]35'19'' N,
longitude

076[deg]04'31'' W; thence northwest to and terminating at the point of
origin.
    (c) Special local regulations. (1) The COTP Maryland-National
Capital Region or PATCOM may forbid and control the movement of all
vessels and persons, including event participants, in the regulated
area. When hailed or signaled by an official patrol, a vessel or person
in the regulated area shall immediately comply with the directions
given by the patrol. Failure to do so may result in the Coast Guard
expelling the person or vessel from the area, issuing a citation for
failure to comply, or both. The COTP Maryland-National Capital Region
or PATCOM may terminate the event, or a participant's operations at any
time the COTP Maryland-National Capital Region or PATCOM believes it
necessary to do so for the protection of life or property.
    (2) Except for participants and vessels already at berth, a person
or vessel within the regulated area at the start of enforcement of this
section must immediately depart the regulated area.
    (3) A spectator must contact the PATCOM to request permission to
either enter or pass through the regulated area. The PATCOM, and
official patrol vessels enforcing this regulated area, can be contacted
on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) and channel 22A
(157.1 MHz). If permission is granted, the spectator may enter the
designated Spectator Area or must pass directly through the regulated
area as instructed by PATCOM. A vessel within the regulated area must
operate at safe speed that minimizes wake. A spectator vessel must not
loiter within the navigable channel while within the regulated area.
    (4) A person or vessel that desires to transit, moor, or anchor
within the regulated area must first obtain authorization from the COTP
Maryland-National Capital Region or PATCOM. A person or vessel seeking
such permission can contact the COTP Maryland-National Capital Region
at telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER> or on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM
channel 16 (156.8 MHz) or the PATCOM on Marine Band Radio, VHF-FM
channel 16 (156.8 MHz).
    (5) The Coast Guard will publish a notice in the Fifth Coast Guard
District Local Notice to Mariners and issue a marine information
broadcast on VHF-FM marine band radio announcing specific event date
and times.
    (d) Enforcement officials. The Coast Guard may be assisted with
marine event patrol and enforcement of the regulated area by other
Federal, State, and local agencies.
    (e) Enforcement periods. This section will be enforced from 9:30
a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on July 27, 2019, and, from 9:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on
July 28, 2019.

    Dated: June 21, 2019.
Joseph B. Loring,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Maryland-National
Capital Region.
[FR Doc. 2019-13772 Filed 6-27-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 99 (Friday, May 22, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29551-29554]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12298]

========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 99 / Friday, May 22, 2015 / Proposed
Rules

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

15 CFR Part 758

[Docket No. 150107020-5160-01]
RIN 0694-AG47

Export Administration Regulations (EAR): Harmonization of the
Destination Control Statements

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would revise the destination control
statement in the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to harmonize
the statement required for the export of items subject to the EAR with
the destination control statement in the International Traffic in Arms
Regulations (ITAR).
    This proposed rule is published in conjunction with the publication
of a Department of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls
proposed rule revising the destination control statement in the ITAR.
Both proposed rules being published today by the Departments of
Commerce and State are part of the President's Export Control Reform
Initiative. This proposed rule is also part of Commerce's retrospective
regulatory review plan under Executive Order (E.O.) 13563 (see the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for availability of the plan).

DATES: The Bureau of Industry and Security will accept comments on this
proposed rule until July 6, 2015.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
     By the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. The identification number for this rulemaking is
BIS-2015-0013.
     By email directly to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Include
RIN 0694-AG47 in the subject line.
     By mail or delivery to Regulatory Policy Division, Bureau
of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 2099B, 14th
Street and Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. Refer to RIN
0694-AG47.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this rule, contact
Timothy Mooney, Regulatory Policy Division, Office of Exporter
Services, Bureau of Industry and Security, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The EAR currently requires exporters to include a destination
control statement, specified in Sec.  758.6 (Destination control
statement and other information furnished to consignees) of the EAR, on
certain export control documents that accompany a shipment for most
exports. The purpose of this statement is to alert other parties
outside the United States that receive the item that the item is
subject to the EAR, the item was exported in accordance with the EAR,
and that diversion contrary to U.S. law is prohibited.
    The ITAR, under Sec.  123.9(b)(1), also includes the same type of
destination control statement requirement, but specific to the ITAR
context and with slightly different text than what is used under the
EAR, although the purpose of the destination control statement
requirements is the same under both sets of export control regulations.
As a general principle under the Export Control Reform (ECR)
implementation that is currently underway, wherever the ITAR and EAR
have provisions that are intended to achieve the same purpose, the U.S.
Government is making an effort to harmonize those provisions, except
when circumstances exist that require that those provisions remain
different. The destination control statement requirements under the
ITAR and the EAR are an example of requirements that can and should be
harmonized to reduce the burden on exporters, improve compliance, and
ensure the regulations are achieving their intended purpose for use
under the U.S. export control system, specifically under the
transactions ``subject to the ITAR'' and ``subject to the EAR.'' The
proposed harmonization changes to be made to the EAR are described
below under the heading ``Harmonization of destination control
statement.''

Harmonization of Destination Control Statement

    This proposed rule would revise Sec.  758.6 of the EAR to harmonize
the destination control statement requirement text with Sec.
123.9(b)(1) of the ITAR. This change would be made to facilitate
implementation of the President's Export Control Reform Initiative,
which has transferred thousands of formerly ITAR controlled defense
article parts and components, along with other items, to the Commerce
Control List in the EAR under the jurisdiction of the Department of
Commerce.
    This change in jurisdiction for many of the parts and components
for military systems has increased incidence of exporters' shipping
articles subject to both the ITAR and the EAR in the same shipment.
Both regulations have a mandatory destination control statement that
must be on the export control documents for shipments that include
items subject to those regulations. This has caused confusion to
exporters as to which statement to include on such mixed shipments, or
whether to include both. Harmonizing these statements is intended to
ease the regulatory burden on exporters.
    This change is also being made to harmonize the two sets of
regulations, the EAR and the ITAR, per the President's instructions.
While the creation of a single export control list and licensing agency
would require legislation, the President has directed BIS and the
Directorate of Defense Trade Controls at the Department of State to
undertake all available actions to prepare for consolidation as a
single agency with a single set of regulations. Harmonization, to the
extent possible, is one important step for preparing both regulators
and the regulated public.
    The harmonization of the destination control statement would
include the following proposed changes to the EAR. The heading of Sec.
758.6 of the EAR would remain the same. However, the provisions
currently under paragraph (b) would be moved to a new paragraph (a)(2).
    Further, regarding proposed new paragraph (a)(2), this paragraph
would specify that the ECCN for each 9x515 or ``600 series'' item being
exported must be included, which is the same requirement that is
currently in paragraph (b), although it would be

slightly shortened because the introductory text of paragraph (a) would
specify some of the requirements that previously were included in
paragraph (b), specifically the documents for which the 9x515 and ``600
series'' classification must be included on under this section. These
documents are the same as those documents that the destination control
statement would be included on, so this change would shorten and
simplify this section by moving the text of paragraph (b) to paragraph
(a)(2). This change would reduce the number of documents that this
classification would need to be included on to conform with the
destination control statement changes described below.
    The proposed new introductory text paragraph (a) would specify that
the exporter shall incorporate the information specified under
paragraph (a)(1) (destination control statement) and (a)(2) (ECCN for
each 9x515 or ``600 series'' item being exported) as an integral part
of the commercial invoice and contractual documentation, when such
contractual documentation exists. This proposed change would mean this
section of the EAR would no longer include a requirement to include the
destination control statement on the air waybill, bill of lading or
other export control documents, and would instead focus the requirement
on the two documents--the commercial invoice and contractual
documentation. This rule proposes requiring the destination control
statement on the commercial invoice and contractual documentation
because these two documents are the most likely to travel with the item
from its time of export from the United States to its ultimate
destination and ultimate consignee. The intent of the destination
control statement requirement is to ensure that the statement reaches
the ultimate destination and ultimate consignee of the item, so
requiring the destination control statement to be included on such
documentation, when it exists, would be more likely to achieve the
intended purpose of this provision. At the same time, the requirement
would have the added benefit of reducing the number of documents on
which exporters would be responsible for entering the destination
statement. Consistent with the current destination control statement
provisions, this rule would not require an EAR destination control
statement for exports of EAR99 items or items exported under License
Exception BAG or GFT. Any other export from the United States of any
item on the CCL would require the destination statement as specified in
paragraph (a)(1) and any export of a 9x515 or ``600 series'' ECCN would
also need to be specified on those two documents as specified in
paragraph (a)(2), when they exist.
    The text of the harmonized destination control statement would be
specified under revised paragraph (a)(1) of Sec.  758.6 of the EAR. The
new destination control statement would not include EAR-specific
language, but rather would adopt language that would be equally
applicable under the ITAR as well as the EAR. The first sentence of the
statement would specify that ``these items are controlled and
authorized by the U.S. Government for export only to the specified
country of ultimate destination for use by the end-user herein
identified.'' This first sentence is intended to alert the person
outside the United States receiving the item that the item is subject
to U.S. export laws and regulations and was authorized by the U.S.
Government for export. In addition, the first sentence would specify
that the U.S. Government only authorized the export to the specified
country of ultimate destination and for use by the specified end-user.
The new destination control statement would use the term authorized,
but in the context of this EAR paragraph ``authorized'' would also
include exports that were designated under No License Required (NLR).
    The second sentence of the new harmonized destination control
statement would focus on alerting the persons receiving the items that
they may not be resold, transferred, or otherwise be disposed of, to
any other country or to any person other than the authorized end-user
or consignee(s), either in their original form or after being
incorporated into other items, without first obtaining approval from
the U.S. government or as otherwise authorized by U.S. law and
regulations. Similar to the first sentence, this proposed second
sentence adopts common language that can be used under the ITAR and the
EAR. The application of this second sentence would be different under
the ITAR and the EAR due to the different types of authorizations and
other approvals in the respective regulations, as well as other
differences, such as the de minimis requirements in the EAR, which is
not provided for in the ITAR. But the advantage of the proposed text is
that it would adopt a new harmonized destination control statement,
while at the same time still being flexible enough to not impact other
ITAR or EAR provisions that do warrant differentiation, such as the
availability of de minimis provisions, which are available under the
EAR, but because of statutory limitations in the Arms Export Control
Act are not available under the ITAR.
    Adoption of a new harmonized destination control statement would
simplify export clearance requirements for exporters because they would
not have to decide which destination control statement to include,
especially for mixed shipments containing both ITAR and EAR items.
    An exporter would still need to go through all of the steps to
determine jurisdiction, classification, license requirements, and to
obtain and use the proper authorization under the respective
regulations, prior to moving on to the respective export clearance
requirements under the ITAR or EAR. This is important to remember when
evaluating these proposed changes because the regulations need to be
reviewed and evaluated in the context in which they are intended to be
applied, including the steps for determining the applicable export
control requirements under the ITAR and the EAR. For those parties
outside the United States that would be receiving items under this new
destination control statement, although the new destination control
statement is not ITAR or EAR specific, in the case of the USML the
classification of the USML items would be required on the
documentation. This classification would alert the parties that the
items are subject to the ITAR. For military items under the EAR,
because of the proposed requirement in paragraph (a)(2)(which is
currently required under paragraph (b)) of Sec.  758.6 of the EAR,
anyone receiving a ``600 series'' military item or an ECCN 9x515 item
would know that specific item was subject to the EAR because the
classification information would also need to be included on the same
documentation. For other EAR items, there would not be a requirement to
include the classification information, although BIS does encourage the
inclusion of that information as a good export compliance practice.

Removal of Paragraph (c)

    BIS proposes removing paragraph (c) of Sec.  758.6 in this rule.
Paragraph (c) was added recently (January 23, 2015, 80 FR 3463) and
requires a special DCS for items controlled under ECCNs for crime
control columns 1 and 3 or regional stability column 2 reasons when
those items are destined to India. BIS proposes removing this
requirement because the benefit for this requirement in paragraph (c)
is outweighed by the added complexity to the EAR of including this
country specific requirement. Therefore, consistent with

the purpose of the retrospective regulatory review, BIS proposes
removing paragraph (c).
    As required by Executive Order (EO) 13563, BIS intends to review
this rule's impact on the licensing burden on exporters. Commerce's
full retrospective regulatory review plan is available at: http://open.commerce.gov/news/2011/08/23/plan-retrospective-analysis-existing-rules. Data are routinely collected on an ongoing basis, including
through the comments to be submitted and through new information and
results from Automated Export System data. These results and data have
formed, and will continue to form, the basis for ongoing reviews of the
rule and assessments of various aspects of the rule. As part of its
plan for retrospective analysis under E.O. 13563, BIS intends to
conduct periodic reviews of this rule and to modify, or repeal, aspects
of this rule, as appropriate, and after public notice and comment. With
regard to a number of aspects of this rule, assessments and refinements
will be made on an ongoing basis. This is particularly the case with
regard to possible modifications that will be considered based on
public comments described above.

Export Administration Act

    Although the Export Administration Act expired on August 20, 2001,
the President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001, 3 CFR,
2001 Comp., p. 783 (2002), as amended by Executive Order 13637 of March
8, 2013, 78 FR 16129 (March 13, 2013) and as extended by the Notice of
August 7, 2014, 79 FR 46959 (August 11, 2014), has continued the Export
Administration Regulations in effect under the International Emergency
Economic Powers Act. BIS continues to carry out the provisions of the
Export Administration Act, as appropriate and to the extent permitted
by law, pursuant to Executive Order 13222 as amended by Executive Order
13637.

Rulemaking Requirements

    1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distribute impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This proposed rule has been determined to be not
significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    2. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is
required to respond to, nor is subject to a penalty for failure to
comply with, a collection of information, subject to the requirements
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA),
unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB
control number. This regulation involves collections previously
approved by the OMB under control numbers 0694-0122, ``Licensing
Responsibilities and Enforcement.'' This rule does not alter any
information collection requirements; therefore, total burden hours
associated with the PRA and OMB control number 0694-0122 are not
expected to increase as a result of this rule. You may send comments
regarding the collection of information associated with this rule,
including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Jasmeet K. Seehra,
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), by email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by fax to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications
as that term is defined under E.O. 13132.
    4. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C.
601 et seq., generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to the notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act (5
U.S.C. 553) 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. Under section 605(b) of the RFA, however, if
the head of an agency certifies that a rule will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small entities, the statute does not
require the agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis.
Pursuant to section 605(b), the Chief Counsel for Regulation,
Department of Commerce, certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy,
Small Business Administration that this proposed rule, if promulgated,
will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities.

Number of Small Entities

    BIS does not collect data on the size of entities that apply for
and are issued export licenses. Although BIS is unable to estimate the
exact number of small entities that would be affected by this rule, it
acknowledges that this rule would affect some unknown number.

Economic Impact

    This proposed rule is part of the Administration's Export Control
Reform (ECR) Initiative. The destination control statement is an
existing regulatory requirement under the EAR that exporters must use
for export clearance purposes for most export transactions that are
subject to the EAR.
    The improvements to the export control system being implemented
under ECR have resulted in reduced burdens on exporters, including
small businesses, because the military items moved to the CCL now have
the availability of more flexible EAR authorizations and availability
of de minimis provisions among other advantages for exporters of items
that have moved from the USML to the CCL. However, the existing
destination control statement requirements impose an unnecessary burden
on exporters of mixed shipments (shipments that include items subject
to the EAR and ITAR). The current provisions create ambiguity for
exporters on which destination control statement to use for such mixed
shipments, which imposes unnecessary administrative costs and burdens
on such exporters. The proposed changes in this rule would relieve this
burden by adopting a harmonized destination control statement under the
EAR. The corresponding Department of State proposed rule would adopt a
harmonized destination control statement under the ITAR. This proposed
harmonized destination control statement would result in time savings
for exporters when they determine their export clearance requirements.
These proposed changes would also reduce the economic impact on
exporters, including small businesses, because it would make it easier
for exporters to comply with this export clearance requirement under
the EAR and the ITAR for specific transactions and would also simplify
the export control clearance requirements associated with mixed
transactions.
    In practice, the greatest impact of this rule on small entities
would likely be reduced administrative costs and reduced delay for
exports of items. Therefore, this proposed rule would not cause any
economic impact and would result in no additional compliance cost. On
the contrary, this proposed rule would reduce compliance costs.

Conclusion

    BIS is unable to determine the precise number of small entities
that would be affected by this rule. Based on the facts and conclusions
set forth above, BIS believes that any burdens imposed by this rule
would be offset by the improvements made to harmonization of the
destination control statement under the EAR and the ITAR. For these
reasons, the Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration that this rule, if adopted in final form, would not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 758

    Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Accordingly, Part 758 of the Export Administration Regulations (15
CFR parts 730-774) is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 758--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for 15 CFR part 758 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August
7, 2014, 79 FR 46959 (August 11, 2014).

0
2. Section 758.6 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  758.6  Destination control statement and other information
furnished to consignees.

    (a) The exporter shall incorporate the following information as an
integral part of the commercial invoice and contractual documentation,
when such contractual documentation exists, whenever items on the
Commerce Control List are exported, unless the export may be made under
License Exception BAG or GFT (see part 740 of the EAR):
    (1) For any item on the Commerce Control List being exported, the
following statement: ``These items are controlled and authorized by the
U.S. Government for export only to the specified country of ultimate
destination for use by the end-user herein identified. They may not be
resold, transferred, or otherwise disposed of, to any other country or
to any person other than the authorized end-user or consignee(s),
either in their original form or after being incorporated into other
items, without first obtaining approval from the U.S. government or as
otherwise authorized by U.S. law and regulations'' and
    (2) The ECCN for each 9x515 or ``600 series'' item being exported.
    (b) [Reserved]

    Dated: May 13, 2015.
Kevin J. Wolf,
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 2015-12298 Filed 5-21-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-33-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 15, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40634-40636]
[FR Doc No: 2018-17602]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-1998-4334; FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-2000-8398; FMCSA-
2001-9561; FMCSA-2003-14504; FMCSA-2003-14504; FMCSA-2003-15268; FMCSA-
2005-20560; FMCSA-2005-21254; FMCSA-2007-27333; FMCSA-2007-27515;
FMCSA-2007-27897; FMCSA-2007-28695; FMCSA-2009-0121; FMCSA-2009-0154;
FMCSA-2011-0092; FMCSA-2011-0124; FMCSA-2011-0140; FMCSA-2011-0141;
FMCSA-2013-0027; FMCSA-2013-0028; FMCSA-2013-0029; FMCSA-2013-0030;
FMCSA-2014-0007; FMCSA-2014-0300; FMCSA-2014-0304; FMCSA-2015-0048;
FMCSA-2015-0052; FMCSA-2015-0053; FMCSA-2015-0055]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 86
individuals from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) for interstate commercial motor vehicle
(CMV) drivers. The exemptions enable these individuals to continue to
operate CMVs in interstate commerce without meeting the vision
requirement in one eye.

DATES: Each group of renewed exemptions were applicable on the dates
stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates stated in
the discussions below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected], FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have
questions regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket,
contact Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Electronic Access

    You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at: http://www.regulations.gov.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov and/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., e.t., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    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 of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed
at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On June 18, 2018, FMCSA published a notice announcing its decision
to renew exemptions for 86 individuals from the vision requirement in
49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) to operate a CMV in interstate commerce and
requested comments from the public (83 FR 28307). The public comment
period ended on July 18, 2018, and no comments were received.
    As stated in the previous notice, FMCSA has evaluated the
eligibility of these applicants and determined that renewing these
exemptions would achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater
than the level that would be achieved by complying with the current
regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding vision
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has distant visual acuity of at
least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual
acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with
corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen)
in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at
least 70[deg] in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability
to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing red,
green, and amber.

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this preceding.

IV. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the 86 renewal exemption applications
and comments received, FMCSA confirms its' decision to exempt the
following drivers from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41 (b)(10):
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following
groups of drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of September
and are discussed below:
    As of September 6, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 35 individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in
the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (65 FR 78256; 66 FR 16311; 66 FR
30502; 66 FR 41654; 68 FR 13360; 68 FR 44837; 70 FR 17504; 70 FR 25878;
70 FR 30997; 70 FR 41811; 72 FR 12666; 72 FR 21313; 72 FR 25831; 72 FR
27624; 72 FR 28093; 72 FR 32703; 72 FR 40362; 74 FR 19270; 74 FR 23472;
74 FR 26461; 74 FR 26464; 74 FR 34395; 74 FR 34630; 76 FR 25762; 76 FR
25766; 76 FR 32017; 76 FR 34135; 76 FR 37168; 76 FR 37169; 76 FR 37885;
76 FR 44652; 76 FR 50318; 78 FR 24798; 78 FR 26106; 78 FR 27281; 78 FR
32708; 78 FR 34140; 78 FR 34143; 78 FR 37270; 78 FR 41188; 78 FR 41975;
78 FR 46407; 78 FR 51269; 78 FR 52602; 78 FR 56986; 78 FR 56993; 79 FR
4531; 79 FR 38659; 79 FR 53514; 80 FR 2473; 80 FR 14223; 80 FR 18693;
80 FR 26139; 80 FR 26320; 80 FR 29154; 80 FR 31640; 80 FR 33007; 80 FR
33009; 80 FR 33011; 80 FR 35699; 80 FR 36395; 80 FR 37718; 80 FR 40122;
80 FR 44185; 80 FR 44188; 80 FR 48404; 80 FR 48409; 80 FR 50917; 80 FR
62161; 80 FR 62163):

Robert D. Arkwright (MS)
Roger Bell (IL)
Phillip J. Boes (MN)
Dale E. Bunke (ID)
Daniel G. Cohen (VT)
Jeffrey W. Cotner (OR)
Jeffrey S. Daniel (VA)
John J. Davis (SC)
Roy H. Degner (IA)
David S. Devine (ID)
John C. Dimassa (WA)
Mark J. Dufresne (NH)
Donnie H. Eagle (WV)
Dennis C. Edler (PA)
Steven G. Garrett (CA)
Eric M. Grayson (KY)

William K. Gullett (KY)
David A. Hayes (GA)
John T. Johnson (NM)
Jay D. Labrum (UT)
Spencer E. Leonard (OH)
Brian P. Millard (SC)
Gonzalo Pena (FL)
Richard E. Perry (CA)
Timothy J. Slone (KY)
Hoyt V. Smith (SC)
Dennis W. Stubrich (PA)
Lee T. Taylor (FL)
Michael J. Thane (OH)
Jon C. Thompson (TX)
James L. Tinsley, Jr. (VA)
George F. Treece (IL)
Harlon C. VanBlaricom (MN)
Jeff L. Wheeler (IA)
Zachary J. Workman (ID)

    The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2000-8398; FMCSA-
2001-9561; FMCSA-2005-20560; FMCSA-2007-27333; FMCSA-2007-27515; FMCSA-
2009-0121; FMCSA-2011-0092; FMCSA-2011-0140; FMCSA-2013-0027; FMCSA-
2013-0028; FMCSA-2013-0029; FMCSA-2013-0030; FMCSA-2014-0007; FMCSA-
2014-0300; FMCSA-2014-0304; FMCSA-2015-0048; FMCSA-2015-0052; FMCSA-
2015-0053; FMCSA-2015-0055. Their exemptions are applicable as of
September 6, 2017, and will expire on September 6, 2019.
    As of September 7, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following four individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in
the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (76 FR 34136; 76 FR 37169; 76 FR
50318; 76 FR 55463; 78 FR 78477; 80 FR 50915):

Charles E. Carter (MI)
James A. Ellis (NY)
Dale L. Giardine (PA)
Peter M. Shirk (PA)

    The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2011-0124; FMCSA-
2011-0140. Their exemptions are applicable as of September 7, 2017, and
will expire on September 7, 2019.
    As of September 13, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following ten individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in
the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (63 FR 66226; 64 FR 16517; 66 FR
41656; 68 FR 44837; 70 FR 41811; 72 FR 39879; 72 FR 40362; 72 FR 52419;
74 FR 41971; 76 FR 54530; 78 FR 78477; 80 FR 48402):

John A. Bridges (GA)
Brian W. Curtis (IL)
Tomie L. Estes (MO)
Ray C. Johnson (AR)
James J. Mitchell (NC)
Andrew M. Nurnberg (GA)
Joshua R. Perkins (ID)
Craig R. Saari (MN)
Jerry L. Schroder (IL)
Larry D. Steiner (MN)

    The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-1998-4334; FMCSA-
2007-27897. Their exemptions are applicable as of September 13, 2017,
and will expire on September 13, 2019.
    As of September 16, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 11 individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in
the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (78 FR 27281; 78 FR 34143; 78 FR
41188; 78 FR 41975; 78 FR 52602; 78 FR 56986; 80 FR 48411):

Carl Block (NY)
Christopher Brim (TN)
John Camp (GA)
Ralph Carr (PA)
Phyllis Dodson (IN)
Juan M. Guerrero (TX)
Berl C. Jennings (VA)
Udum Khamsoksavath (WA)
Vincent Marsee, Sr. (NC)
Jerome Paintner (ND)
David Snellings (MD)

    The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2013-0028; FMCSA-
2013-0029; FMCSA-2013-0030. Their exemptions are applicable as of
September 16, 2017, and will expire on September 16, 2019.
    As of September 22, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following 15 individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in
the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (68 FR 19598; 68 FR 33570; 70 FR
17504; 70 FR 25878; 70 FR 30997; 72 FR 28093; 72 FR 40362; 74 FR 20523;
74 FR 34394; 74 FR 37295; 74 FR 48343; 76 FR 34136; 76 FR 53708; 76 FR
54530; 76 FR 55463; 78 FR 78477; 80 FR 49302):

Michael K. Adams (OH)
Eleazar R. Balli (TX)
Darrell W. Bayless (TX)
Lloyd D. Burgess (OH)
Clifford D. Carpenter (MO)
Cecil A. Evey (ID)
Kamal A. Gaddah (OH)
Eric M. Kousgaard (NE)
James F. McMahon, Jr. (NH)
Samuel A. Miller (IN)
Larry T. Rogers (IL)
Marcial Soto-Rivas (OR)
Boyd D. Stamey (NC)
David C. Sybesma (ID)
Matthew K. Tucker (MN)

    The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2003-14504;
FMCSA-2005-20560; FMCSA-2009-0154; FMCSA-2011-0124. Their exemptions
are applicable as of September 22, 2017, and will expire on September
22, 2019.
    As of September 23, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following nine individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in
the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (64 FR 27027; 64 FR 51568; 66 FR
48504; 68 FR 19598; 68 FR 33570; 68 FR 37197; 68 FR 48989; 68 FR 54775;
70 FR 30999; 70 FR 42615; 70 FR 46567; 70 FR 53412; 72 FR 39879; 72 FR
52419; 72 FR 62896; 74 FR 43221; 76 FR 53708; 78 FR 78477; 80 FR
53383):

Linda L. Billings (NV)
Weldon R. Evans (OH)
Orasio Garcia (TX)
Leslie W. Good (OR)
James P. Guth (PA)
Gregory K. Lilly (WV)
Kenneth A. Reddick (PA)
Leonard Rice, Jr. (GA)
James T. Sullivan (KY)

    The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-1999-5578; FMCSA-
2003-14504; FMCSA-2003-15268; FMCSA-2005-21254; FMCSA-2007-27897. Their
exemptions are applicable as of September 23, 2017, and will expire on
September 23, 2019.
    As of September 27, 2017, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315, the following two individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision requirement in
the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (72 FR 46261; 72 FR 54972; 74 FR
43223; 76 FR 40445; 76 FR 53710; 76 FR 55469; 78 FR 78477): Joe M.
Flores, (NM); Kenneth D. Perkins, (NC).
    The drivers were included in docket numbers FMCSA-2007-28695;
FMCSA-2011-0141. Their exemptions are applicable as of September 27,
2017, and will expire on September 27, 2019.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315, each exemption will be valid
for two years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and
31315.

    Issued on: August 8, 2018.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-17602 Filed 8-14-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: August 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 160)]
[Notices]
[Page 47796]
[DOCID:fr18au06-67]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP05-357-003]

Cheniere Creole Trail Pipeline, L.P.; Notice of Amendment

August 11, 2006.
    Take notice that on August 4, 2006, Cheniere Creole Trail Pipeline,
L.P. (Cheniere), 717 Texas Avenue, Suite 3100, Houston, Texas 77002,
filed in Docket No. CP05-357-003, pursuant to section 7(c) of the
Natural Gas Act and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations, an
application to amend its certificate of public convenience and
necessity issued in Docket Nos. CP05-357-000, et al., on June 15, 2006.
Cheniere proposes to extend the Cheniere Creole Trail Pipeline by
adding 18.1 miles of natural gas pipeline facilities with appurtenances
to connect the previously-authorized Cheniere pipeline with the
Cheniere Sabine Pass Pipeline system. Cheniere also requested
authorization for certain accounting and rate treatment related to the
subject pipeline, all as more fully set forth in the application.
    The application is on file with the Commission and open for public
inspection. This application is available for review at the Commission
in the Public Reference Room or may 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
field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC
Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at (866) 208-
3676, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding the application should be directed to
Patricia Outtrim, Cheniere LNG, Inc., 717 Texas Avenue, Suite 3100,
Houston, Texas 77002,<PHONE_NUMBER> or Lisa Tonery, King & Spalding
LLP, 1185 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10036,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date listed below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of this filing and all subsequent filings made with
the Commission and must mail a copy of all filing to the applicant and
to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding
can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.
    However, other persons do not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to this
project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties
directly involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project, or in support of or in opposition to this project, should
submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of
the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the
Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the
environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated
with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental
commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on
all other parties. The Commission's rules require that persons filing
comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests
only to the applicant. However, the non-party commenters will not
receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the
Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by
the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the
Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests, and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a) (1) (iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-Filing'' link.

    Comment Date: September 1, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-13625 Filed 8-17-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 184 (Monday, September 25, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65620-65621]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20666]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2022-0307; FRL-10892-03-R6]

Air Plan Approval; Texas; Updates to Public Notice and Procedural
Rules and Removal of Obsolete Provisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is correcting a
final rule that appeared in the Federal Register on August 24, 2023.
The document issued a final rule approving portions of three revisions
to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) on July 9, 2021, and January
21, 2022, that update the air permitting program by removing obsolete
provisions and enhancing public notice requirements of the air
permitting program. This correction addresses errors in the amendatory
language instructions published on August 24, 2023.

DATES: This rule is effective on September 25, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adina Wiley, EPA Region 6 Office, Air
Permits Section,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected]. Please call or
email the contact listed above if you need alternative access to
material indexed but not provided in the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. 2023-17945 appearing in the
Federal Register on Thursday, August 24, 2023, the following
corrections are made:

Sec.  52.2270  [Corrected]

0
1. On page 57884, in the third column, in amendment 2, the instruction
(i) is corrected to read ``Revising the entries for Sections 39.405,
39.411, 39.412, 39.418, 39.419, 39.420, 39.601, 39.602, 39.603, 39.604,
55.154, 55.156, 101.306, 116.111, 116.112, 116.164, 116.196, 116.198,
116.310, 116.611, 116.615, 116.910, 116.911, 116.912, 116.916, 116.917,
116.918, 116.920, 116.930, and 116.1530.
0
2. On page 57885, in the third column, in amendment 2, instruction
(iii) is added to read ``iii. Adding an entry for section 39.426'' in
numeric order under the headings Chapter 39--Public Notice; Subchapter
H--Applicability and General Provisions.

    Dated: September 18, 2023.
Earthea Nance,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2023-20666 Filed 9-22-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P