[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 214 (Monday, November 7, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66948-66954]
[FR Doc No: 2022-24242]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 73

[Docket No. FAA-2020-0755-; Airspace Docket No. 19-AAL-83]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of R-2206 and Establishment of Restricted Areas R-
2206B, R-2206C, R-2206D, R-2206E, R-2206F, and R-2206G; Clear, AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends restricted area R-2206 by renaming it R-
2206A and establishes six new restricted areas R-2206B, R-2206C, R-
2206D, R-2206E, R-2206F, and R-2206G, over Clear, AK. The FAA has
determined that these actions are necessary to protect aircraft from
the hazardous High-Intensity Radiated Field (HIRF) produced by the Long
Range Discrimination Radar (LRDR) and segregate non-participating
aircraft.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, December 29, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Abbott, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it amends an existing restricted area and establishes
restricted areas over Clear, AK, to protect operators from activities
deemed hazardous to nonparticipating aircraft.

History

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    The FAA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the
Federal Register (86 FR 11194; February 24, 2021), amending R-2206 by
renaming it and establishing restricted areas R-2206B, R-2206C, R-
2206D, R-2206E, R-2206F, and R-2206G over Clear, AK. Interested parties
were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting
written comments on the proposal.

History of R-2206 and Clear Airport

    R-2206 was initially established as R-20 on January 1, 1961 (25 FR
12174), over the Clear Air Force Station (AFS) \1\ at Clear, AK, to
protect the National Airspace System (NAS) while a potential radiation
hazard caused by the Ballistic Missile Early Warning System (BMEWS) was
assessed by the United States Air Force (USAF). On May 12, 1962, the
designation of R-2206 was amended to extend the duration for an
indefinite period (27 FR 4553) due to ongoing concern regarding the
radiation hazard associated with the BMEWS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On June 15, 2021, Clear AFS was renamed Clear Space Force
Station. The renaming was part of ongoing efforts to develop the
United States Space Force (USSF). Throughout this document, for
continuity with the proposal and clarity, the FAA will use term
Clear AFS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Initially established for private use by the military in support of
the BMEWS mission, Clear Airport (PACL) is located less than a \1/2\
Nautical Mile (NM) from the eastern boundary of R-2206. The airport was
leased by the Secretary of the Air Force to the State of Alaska on
December 20, 1974. The FAA performed an airspace review and issued a
letter of ``no objection'' to convert the airport from private to
public use on January 20, 1976.\2\ Subsequently, the land (1,814 acres)
on which PACL is located was declared surplus by the USAF and conveyed
to the State of Alaska in the late 1980s. PACL has remained in its
original location since its conversion to a public use airport.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ A copy of this letter is in the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA did not object to the proximity of R-2206 to the airport
when it was converted to a public use airport because, at the time of
conversion, there was no established standard to separate restricted
areas and public use airports. The FAA later established that a
restricted area must exclude airspace 1,500 feet above ground level
(AGL) and below that is within a 3 NM radius of airports available for
public use (``1,500AGL/3NM'') in the September 16, 1993, edition of FAA
Order JO 7400.2, Procedures for Handling Airspace Matters.\3\ The FAA
therefore considers the original R-2206 as excepted from the
subsequently established ``1,500AGL/3NM'' restricted area exclusion in
FAA Order JO 7400.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The current version of this Order is accessible at: https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/7400.2M_Bsc_w_Chg_1_2_dtd_7_16_20.pdf. See sub-section 23-1-4,
Restricted Area Floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Drivers for Missile Defense Agency's (MDA) LRDR

    Section 235(a)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
for Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 required Missile Defense Agency to deploy a
LRDR to protect the United States against long-range ballistic missile
threats from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea)
and to locate the LRDR ``at a location optimized to support the defense
of the homeland of the United States.'' Public Law 113-66; 10 U.S.C.
2431 (Dec. 26, 2013). Section 235(b)(1) of the NDAA for FY 2014 also
required the Secretary of Defense to ensure the capability ``to deploy
additional tracking and discrimination sensor capabilities to support
the defense of the homeland of the United States from future long-range
ballistic missile threats that emerge from Iran.''
    Section 1684 of the NDAA for FY 2016 expressed ``the sense of
Congress that additional missile defense sensor discrimination
capabilities are needed to enhance the protection of the United States
homeland against potential long-range ballistic missiles from Iran
that, according to the Department of Defense, could soon be obtained by
Iran as a result of its active space launch program.'' Public Law 114-
92; 10 U.S.C. 2431 (Jan. 6, 2015). Moreover, Section 1684(d)(1) of the
NDAA for FY 2016 established a December 31, 2020, deadline for the
deployment of a defensive system.
    After a detailed evaluation of cost, schedule, and performance as
well as other mission related factors, the Department of Defense (DoD)
determined that Clear AFS was the preferred site for the LRDR and
designated the USAF as the lead service for LRDR.

Mission of LRDR Program

    The mission of the LRDR program is to define, develop, acquire,
test, field, and sustain the LRDR as an element of the DoD Ballistic
Missile Defense System (BMDS) in support of the Ground-Based Midcourse
Defense (GMO) program's Homeland Defense Capability. The LRDR will
provide persistent long-range midcourse discrimination, precision
tracking, and hit assessment to support the GMO capability against
long-range missile threats originating from North Korea and Iran. LRDR
contributes to MDA's mission of developing and deploying a layered BMDS
to defend the United States from ballistic missile attacks of all
ranges in all phases of flight. LRDR's improved discrimination
capability increases the defensive capacity of the homeland defense
interceptor inventory by enabling the conservation of ground-based
interceptors. LRDR also supports additional DoD mission areas such as
Space Situational Awareness and Intelligence Data Collection. Changes
in operational posture due to the evolving threat, which would result
in LRDR deployment with unacceptable levels of HIRF exposure for
aviation, necessitate the requirement for additional restricted
airspace to support LRDR's critical national defense mission at Clear
AFS.

USAF Proposal to the FAA

    By memorandum dated September 30, 2019, the USAF submitted a
proposal to the FAA to establish two new restricted areas in the
vicinity of Clear AFS, to protect the NAS from the HIRF produced by the
LRDR. The proposed restricted area requires lateral and vertical limits
larger than the current R-2206 to support the deployment of the DoD's
LRDR to meet increased warfighter defense and readiness postures. This
rule maintains the existing restricted area R-2206 in its current
configuration but renames it R-2206A, and supplements this area with
six new restricted areas designated R-2206B, R-2206C, R-2206D, R-2206E,
R-2206F, and R-2206G. The FAA identified the need for one of the new
restricted areas (i.e., R-2206F) that provides an additional 1,100 feet
of navigable airspace along Parks Highway to the Northeast of Clear,
AK. This additional restricted area allows for a visual route following
a known landmark during normal operations. The addition of the new
restricted area lead the FAA to re-letter the restricted areas for a
more logical sequence (i.e., from low to high on the west side and then
from low to high on the east side).
    The rule applies the ``1,500AGL/3NM'' restricted area exclusion for
PACL for the new restricted areas, with exceptions. The FAA approved a
limited deviation from its ``1,500AGL/3NM'' restricted area exclusion
standard, published in FAA Order JO 7400.2, paragraph 23-1-4.c., for R-
2206D and R-2206E, given the extraordinary nature of the LRDR national
defense mission required by Congressional mandate, the limited citing
options available to the USAF to achieve its mission, and FAA's ability
to identify and implement airspace safety and access mitigations at
Clear, AK.
    As previously explained, the NDAA for FY 2014 required MDA to
deploy a LRDR ``at a location optimized to support the defense of the
homeland of the United States.'' Public Law 113-66; 10 U.S.C. 2431
(Dec. 26, 2013). Moreover, MDA was subsequently directed to deploy the
system by December 31, 2020. The NDAA for FY 2016 created the LRDR
program of record and required ``in a location optimized to support the
defense of the homeland of the United States from emerging long-range
ballistic missile threats from Iran.'' Public Law 114-328; 10 U.S.C.
2431 (Dec. 23, 2016). To support implementation of this mission, the
MDA narrowed the LRDR site selection from 50 possible locations to two
locations in Alaska based on evaluative criteria that included,
construction and schedule timelines in light of the NDAA mandate,
mission assurance, impacts to existing civilian and military
infrastructure, and other resource considerations. Of the two remaining
sites, only Clear AFS met all of the levied LRDR requirements. The
alternative option in Alaska, Eareckson AFS, was ruled out due to
remote geographical concerns, which added unacceptable risk to timely
and successful deployment as compared to Clear AFS. Moreover, the MDA
concluded that the Clear AFS location in Central Alaska offered
expanded engagement space necessary to fulfill the LRDR mission. This
additional engagement space affords more visibility of hostile threat
complexes and greater time to track, discriminate and target lethal
incoming objects and results in a much greater probability of
successful target intercept. The siting recommendation of Clear AFS was
approved in 2016 by the USAF and funding for LRDR at Clear AFS was
approved in the NDAA for FY17.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The FAA uploaded a graphical depiction of the restricted
areas to the docket for this rulemaking during the NPRM phase.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA emphasizes that any deviations from an FAA Order is
reserved for extraordinary circumstances. In this case, the FAA
determined that the national defense benefits of a deviation outweigh
the costs of any additional airspace safety and access mitigations to
manage the safe and efficient operation of the NAS and impacts to PACL.
The decision to deviate from FAA Order JO 7400.2 in this rulemaking
action is not binding on future determinations by the FAA concerning
whether to approve a deviation as each deviation is reviewed on a case-
by-case basis. The FAA will review any future requests on their merits,
based on the facts and circumstances available at that time and
consistent with the FAA's statutory responsibilities.

Activities Within R-2206A-G

    The activity to be performed at Clear, AK, within the restricted
areas is Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) of the United States. System
testing started in early 2021 and will continue until it is fully
integrated into the DoD BMDS. During the system testing phase, the FAA
established Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 99.7, special
security instructions (SSI), implemented as temporary flight
restrictions, as an interim airspace mitigation to protect aviation
from the HIRF produced by the LRDR system not covered by R-2206. LRDR
is a unique and vital component of the BMDS and will be available
continuously both as an early-warning sensor and as an enabler for more
effective employment of ground-based interceptors. The LRDR design
features high system availability and maintain-while-operate
architecture; this ensures that LRDR will be in a continual posture to
fight in response to real-word, no-notice events. LRDR also supports
additional mission areas including Space Situational Awareness and
Intelligence Data Collection.
    In routine or normal defensive posture, LRDR will operate at
reduced HIRF levels within the restricted areas that provide for the
``1,500AGL/3NM'' restricted area exclusion. This will be accomplished
by enforcing main beam elevation limits in the direction of Clear
Airport to provide a minimum of 1,500 feet AGL under the portions of
restricted areas within 3 NM of the airport. Prescheduled maintenance
and calibration activities will also occur during routine or normal
posture and would require activation of the additional restricted areas
during a few periods per week for a couple of hours at a time. These
activities will be scheduled when expected air traffic

around Clear Airport is minimal, with scheduled times openly
distributed by Notice to Air Missions (NOTAM) and other outreach
mechanisms.
    In heightened defensive posture, MDA may require use of all the
restricted areas to conduct missile defense or other activities in
response to real-world events. During these periods of heightened
defensive posture, LRDR will be activated with access to its full field
of coverage, which may necessitate activation of all restricted areas;
this provides LRDR access to the airspace for defensive actions within
3NM of Clear Airport at and above 400 feet AGL. Besides conducting
actual BMDS engagements, LRDR activities that may require temporary
activation of all restricted areas include BMDS tests, unique
intelligence collection activities such as new foreign space launches,
or critical space activities such as collision avoidance involving
manned space-flight, satellite break-ups, and satellite deorbits.

Required Coordination Between the FAA, MDA, and USSF

    The FAA, MDA, and United States Space Force (USSF) currently have a
Letter of Agreement (LOA) in place setting forth the air traffic
control (ATC) procedures to use while the SSI implemented as temporary
flight restrictions are in place. The LOA establishes authorities,
responsibilities, and procedures associated with the coordination of
air ambulance flights or other contingencies required for aircraft to
fly into and out of the Clear Airport and Healy River Airport (PAHV)
during the LRDR operation.
    The FAA, MDA, and USSF are currently developing a Letter of
Procedure (LOP) that will be effective when the rule goes into effect
replacing the LOA now in place for the SSI implemented as temporary
flight restrictions. This LOP will remain in place until the LRDR
system is fully integrated into the DoD's BMDS. The LOP will address
emergency or extraordinary events. The LOP will also address pre-
determined NOTAMs to handle the activation and scheduling of the three
non-continuous restricted areas (R-2206D-F). The LOP will include
procedures for handling national defense no-notice activation from
NORAD-USNORTHCOM Command Center, as well as notification times for all
other requests, to ensure a NOTAM and notifications to the surrounding
areas and aviators can take place with reasonable advance notice prior
to activation. Pre-determined actions will provide the framework for
rapid adaptation of the special use airspace to handle extraordinary
events. The LOP will also address the maintenance of the alert system
discussed below. After the LRDR system is fully integrated into the
DoD's BMDS, the FAA and the USSF will enter into a new LOP.

Impact on IFR (Instrument Flight Rules) and VFR (Visual Flight Rules)
Terminal Ops

    In the NPRM, the FAA noted the R-2206 restricted areas would impact
IFR routes between Anchorage and Fairbanks, Alaska, including Jet Route
J-125, VOR Federal Airway V-436, and Area Navigation (RNAV) Route Q-41.
The FAA identified the need for mitigations altering the current
airway/route structure to revise the affected airways around the
expansion of R-2206. Subsequent to the NPRM, the FAA published a rule
for Docket No. FAA-2021-0245 in the Federal Register (87 FR 65675,
November 1, 2022) amending J-125 and V-436. The rule amended J-125 by
removing the route segment between the Anchorage, AK, VHF
Omnidirectional Range/Distance Measuring Equipment (VOR/DME) and the
Nenana, AK VOR/Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC) navigational aids
because adjacent air traffic service routes J-115, Q-43, and Q-
41provided the same enroute capability. The rule also amended V-436 by
removing the airway segment between the Talkeetna, AK, VOR/DME and the
Nenana, AK, VORTAC navigational aids and replaced it with an airway
segment that extends between the Talkeetna VOR/DME and the Fairbanks,
AK, VORTAC which moved the airway to transition east of the R-2206
restricted areas. Lastly, Q-41 currently and after the effective date
of the rule will remain as published. However, ATC currently and after
publication will require radar surveillance in certain segments as a
mitigation due to the proximity of the route to the current SSI
implemented as temporary flight restrictions and the R-2206 restricted
areas.
    Anchorage Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC) published that
requirement in its Operations Bulletin and briefed all the ARTCC air
traffic controllers. With the establishment of the R-2206 restricted
areas by this rule, the radar surveillance requirement for aircraft
filing and flying the Q-41 route segment affected by the restricted
areas will be published in the Anchorage ARTCC's Standard Operating
Procedures (SOP) guidance replacing the Operation Bulletin.
    As addressed in the NPRM, the FAA reviewed the USAF proposal for
impact on arrival and departure flows, Standard Terminal Arrival Route
(STAR), Standard Instrument Departure (SID), and departure procedures,
and identified a number procedures that needed to be revised to avoid
the R-2206 restricted areas. The affected SIDs at Fairbanks
International Airport were amended and published in the Flight
Information Publication (FLIP) effective August 12, 2021. The affected
STARs at Ted Stevens International Airport and the affected instrument
approach procedures and obstacle departure procedure at Healy River
Airport were amended and are being held to publish in the FLIP
effective December 29, 2022. Amendment and publication in the FLIP of
the affected SIDs, STARs, instrument approach procedures, and obstacle
departure procedure listed in the NPRM ensures the IFR and VFR terminal
operations at Fairbanks International Airport, Ted Stevens
International Airport, and Healy River Airport are unaffected by the
restricted areas.

United States Space Force

    The USSF was established on December 20, 2019, when the NDAA for FY
2020 was signed into law. As part of the establishment of the USSF, the
using agency unit proposed in the NPRM, 13th Missile Warning Squadron,
transitioned from the Air Force Space Command within the USAF to the
USSF and was renamed the 13th Space Warning Squadron. The USSF will
oversee the LRDR operations at Clear AFS once the system is fully
integrated into the DoD's BMDS. Finally, on June 15, 2021, Clear AFS
was renamed to Clear Space Force Station (SFS).

Differences From the NPRM

    In the NPRM published for Docket No. FAA-2020-0755, the FAA
identified an editorial error in describing the proposed altitude floor
for restricted area R-2206C. In the preamble of the NPRM, the altitude
floor for R-2206C was described incorrectly as 1,100 feet mean sea
level (MSL). The correct altitude floor for R-2206C is 1,600 feet MSL.
Although the altitude floor for R-2206C was described incorrectly in
the preamble of the NPRM, it was described correctly in the proposed
regulatory text of the NPRM as 1,600 feet MSL. Therefore, this rule
retains the R-2206C designated altitudes listed in the description in
the regulatory text as proposed.
    Also in the NPRM for Docket No. FAA-2020-0755, editorial errors in
describing the proposed altitude floors for restricted areas R-2206B
and R-2206D, were identified. In the preamble of the NPRM, the altitude

floors were described incorrectly as 1,100 feet MSL. The correct
altitude floor for R-2206B and R-2206D is 1,000 feet MSL. Although the
altitude floors for R-2206B and R-2206D were described incorrectly in
the preamble of the NPRM, they were described correctly in the proposed
regulatory text of the NPRM as 1,000 feet MSL. Therefore, this rule
retains the R-2206B and R-2206D designated altitudes listed in the
descriptions in the regulatory text as proposed.
    Lastly, in the NPRM for Docket No. FAA-2020-0755, the using agency
for the restricted area descriptions in the regulatory text was listed
as, ``Commander 13th Missile Warning Squadron, Clear, AK.'' However, as
a result of the establishment of the USSF and the renaming of the unit
to 13th Space Warning Squadron, as noted above, this rule corrects the
restricted areas using agency to Commander, 13th Space Warning
Squadron, Clear, AK.

Discussion of Comments

    The FAA received eleven comments on the NPRM. Ten of the comments
were submitted by individuals and one comment was submitted by the
Alaska Airmen's Association.
    The Alaska Airmen's Association and three other commenters stated
that the proposed airspace design may be too complicated based on the
FAA's interim approach of establishing Special Security Instructions
(SSI) in accordance with 14 CFR 99.7, implemented as a temporary flight
restriction, to protect aviation from the HIRF produced during the
testing phases of the LRDR. The Alaska Airmen's Association commented
that none of the third-party mapping applications are able to display
correctly a graphic depiction of the current SSI implemented as
temporary flight restrictions identified in the NOTAMs. Commenters also
noted that without the ability to precisely determine the status (i.e.,
active or inactive) of the SSI implemented as temporary flight
restrictions, it will likely cause inadvertent and repeated incursions
into the temporary flight restrictions.
    The FAA acknowledged the concerns about SSI as implemented as
temporary flight restrictions and took action to address the issues
with the interim approach while developing this final rule. Two NOTAMs
were published as an interim approach to protecting aircraft during the
LRDR testing phase, one for the continuously active SSI implemented as
temporary flight restrictions, which correlate with the designation of
R-2206B, C, and G restricted areas and one for the non-continuously
active SSI implemented as temporary flight restrictions, which
correlate with designation of R-2206D-F restricted areas.
    The FAA determined the source of the confusion with these NOTAMs
and lack of charted depictions came from the overlapping altitudes of
the temporary flight restrictions. The overlapping altitudes of the two
SSI implemented as temporary flight restrictions caused errors in the
shape files that resulted in the graphical depictions of the flight
restricted areas not being displayed on the FAA's Temporary Flight
Restriction (TFR) website or third part charting applications. The FAA
adjusted the overlapping altitudes of the SSI implemented as temporary
flight restrictions and republished the NOTAMs with the changed
altitudes on May 7, 2021. As a result, the FAA's TFR website and all
third-party charting applications were able to display the SSI
implemented as temporary flight restrictions correctly. Pilots have
been able to better familiarize themselves with the SSI temporary
flight restrictions since May 2021.
    The concerns associated with the SSI as implemented as temporary
flight restrictions graphical depictions not displaying properly will
not carry forward with the establishment of the new restricted areas R-
2206A-G pursuant to Part 73. The restricted areas will be depicted
correctly on the associated aeronautical charts following the effective
date of this rule.
    Five individual commenters expressed concerns that the proposed
restricted areas (R-2206A-G) would lead to the closure of PACL and
remove the ability to navigate under visual flight rules (VFR) via the
Parks Highway (Alaska Highway 3) when the restricted areas are
active.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The agency notes that one additional individual commenter
simply expressed that adopting the proposal would make life a lot
harder for pilots conducting VFR operations, with no further
explanation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FAA previously considered this issue and addressed the concern
in a Letter of Agreement (LOA) \6\ between the FAA, MDA, and USSF. The
procedures in the LOA requires MDA to halt its activities to allow for
flights to access PACL. With the establishment of the restricted areas
by this rule, the FAA, MDA, and USSF will establish a Letter of
Procedure (LOP) to reflect the restricted areas airspace instead of the
SSI implemented as temporary flight restrictions. To further mitigate
impacts, the low-altitude restricted areas R-2206D-F will only be
utilized for testing between 0200-0400 Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday
to support scheduled calibration. Outside of the scheduled times for
testing, the FAA anticipates that the airspace would likely only be
activated in the interest of the national defense of the United States
as a result of a real world event. When the restricted areas are not
active, pilots can land and depart PACL unrestricted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In the NPRM, the FAA referenced a Letter of Procedure being
in place prior to the final rule. However, the proper term is Letter
of Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also, in response to comments received during the FAA Safety Risk
Management Panel (SRMP) requesting increased navigable airspace
surrounding Parks Highway, the FAA, MDA, and USAF collaborated on the
development of R-2206F and the FAA added R-2206F to the proposal. R-
2206F allows VFR navigation via the Parks Highway without impacting the
overall design of the restricted areas. Finally, the short activation
times for R-2206F will further mitigate and minimize impacts to pilots
conducting such VFR operations, navigating via the Parks Highway.
    Two individual commenters expressed their concerns that instrument
flight rules (IFR) procedures into Healy River Airport (HRR) will be
eliminated. The FAA retained the IFR procedures into HRR and kept them
available for use, as needed. The FAA also developed an interim
procedure, in collaboration with the MDA, which allows for activities
occurring within the SSI implemented as temporary flight restrictions
to be temporarily halted, as necessary, to enable IFR flights into HRR.
Finally, the FAA developed new, permanent HRR approach and departure
procedures that will not be affected by the R-2206A-G restricted areas
once they are established. The new HRR IFR approach and departure
procedures are planned to be published in the FLIP concurrent with the
effective date of this rule establishing the R-2206 restricted areas.
    The Alaska Airmen's Association expressed concerns that when the
LRDR becomes operational, R-2206D-F could go active without warning,
for a real world event. They further cited the MDA stating that for
reasons of operational security, there can be no prior notification for
activating the lower zones.
    At the time that the NPRM published, neither the FAA nor MDA had a
mechanism in place to notify pilots when R-2206D-F activate outside of
prescheduled periods. The communications coverage for real-time
notifications by air traffic control near the Clear LRDR and PACL
airport was deficient. Anchorage ARTCC has no

communications coverage and the local Flight Service Station's
communications was intermittent. As such, without other communications
measures in place, there was an unacceptable risk for airspace users
flying near the LRDR area, entering the low-altitude restricted
airspace in R-2206D-F while it was active. Accordingly, to overcome
this problem, the FAA, again, in collaboration with the MDA,
implemented an actionable and timely notification system that is
currently operational. The system includes a dedicated frequency
(133.25 VHF) and a visual warning light with daytime and nighttime
patterns. The dedicated frequency continually broadcasts a message to
aviators on the status of the SSI implemented as temporary flight
restrictions currently and will for the restricted areas established by
this rule. The transmission is audible from the PACL for aircraft
holding short of all runway entry points; the PACL north ramp for
helicopter operations by the Bureau of Land Management; while flying
northbound from Healy River Airport (PAHV) over the city of Ferry, AK;
and while flying southbound from Nenana Airport (PANN) along the Parks
Highway. The visual warning light is visible, day and night, while
flying southbound from PANN airport between 1,000 feet and 2,600 feet
AGL and along the Parks Highway. It is also visible while flying toward
PACL between 500 feet and 1,500 feet AGL at 4 NM from headings of
090[deg], 120[deg], and 180[deg]; and while flying towards PACL between
500 feet and 1,500 feet AGL at 5.1 NM and 7.3 NM, respectively, from a
heading of 360[deg]. The warning light is not visible from the surface;
however, aircraft on the ground are encouraged to use the dedicated
frequency, 133.25 VHF, for restricted area status updates.
Additionally, the Alaska Department of Transportation installed 4 signs
on PACL at each of the 3 runway hold short lines and 1 at the north
ramp, where helicopters depart, to notify pilots, prior to departure,
of the dedicated alerting frequency that is broadcasting the SSI
implemented as temporary flight restrictions status currently and the
restricted areas established by this rule status as further
encouragement.

The Rule

    This action amends 14 CFR part 73 by renaming R-2206 to R-2206A and
establishing 6 new restricted areas R-2206B, R-2206C, R-2206D, R-2206E,
R-2206F, and R-2206G, over the Clear SFS at Clear, AK. The FAA has
determined that the action is necessary to protect aircraft from the
hazardous HIRF produced by the MDA's LRDR and segregate non-
participating aircraft. Full legal descriptions of the restricted areas
are contained in ``The Amendment'' section as set forth below.
    R-2206A: R-2206 is amended by renaming it R-2206A. There is no
change to the boundaries as established under R-2206. The designated
altitudes extend upward from the surface to 8,800 feet MSL. R-2206A is
active continuously.
    R-2206B: R-2206B is established west of PACL, fanning clockwise
from the southwest to the northwest, excluding the portion within R-
2206A, with the eastern boundary located 3 NM west of PACL. The
designated altitudes extend upward from 1,000 feet MSL to, but not
including 1,600 feet MSL. R-2206B is active continuously.
    R-2206C: R-2206C is established west of PACL, fanning clockwise
from the southwest to the northwest, excluding the portion within R-
2206A, with the eastern boundary located 3 NM west of PACL. The
designated altitudes extend upward from 1,600 feet MSL to 32,000 feet
MSL. R-2206C is active continuously.
    R-2206D: R-2206D is established northwest of PACL, fanning
clockwise from the northwest to north, excluding the portion within R-
2206A, with the eastern boundary located \1/2\ NM west of PACL. The
designated altitudes extend upward from 1,000 feet MSL to, but not
including 1,600 feet MSL. R-2206D activation times are 0200-0400 local
time, Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday; other times by NOTAM.
    R-2206E: R-2206E is established north of PACL, fanning clockwise
from the northwest to the northeast, excluding the portion within R-
2206A, with the eastern boundary located \1/2\ NM west of PACL. The
designated altitudes extend upward from 1,600 feet MSL to, but not
including 2,100 feet MSL. R-2206E activation times are 0200-0400 local
time, Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday; other times by NOTAM.
    R-2206F: R-2206F is established northeast of PACL, enabling VFR
aircraft to transition along Alaska Highway 3 (the Parks Highway) with
the southern boundary located 3 NM north of PACL. The designated
altitudes extend upward from 2,100 feet MSL to 3,200 feet MSL. R-2206F
activation times are 0200-0400 local time, Tuesday, Thursday, and
Saturday; other times by NOTAM.
    R-2206G: R-2206G is established north of PACL, fanning clockwise
from the northwest to the northeast, excluding the portions within R-
2206A and R-2206F, with the eastern boundary located \1/2\ NM west of
PACL. The designated altitudes extend upward from 2,100 feet MSL to
32,000 feet MSL. R-2206G is active continuously.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

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

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that this rulemaking action of renaming
restricted area R-2206 to R-2206A and establishing six new restricted
areas R-2206B, R-2206C, R-2206D, R-2206E, R-2206F, and R-2206G, over
Clear, AK qualifies for categorical exclusion under the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its implementing
regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in accordance with FAA Order
1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures, paragraph 5-
6.5a, which categorically excludes from further environmental impact
review rulemaking actions that designate or modify classes of airspace
areas, airways, routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71,
Designation of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic
Service Routes; and Reporting Points). As such, this rulemaking action
is not expected to cause or result in any potentially significant
environmental impacts. In accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph
5-2 regarding Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this
rulemaking action for factors and circumstances in which a normally
categorically excluded action may have a significant environmental
impact requiring further analysis, and has determined that no
extraordinary circumstances exist warranting preparation of an
environmental assessment or environmental impact study.
    On May 7, 2021, the MDA, as the lead agency, announced the
availability of its

Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Long Range
Discrimination Radar (LRDR) located at Clear Air Force Station (CAFS),
Alaska. 86 FR 24599-24600. The FAA and the Department of the Air Force
(DAF) are cooperating agencies to the Final EIS. The MDA's EIS analyzed
the operational impacts of the LRDR, including airspace restrictions
necessary to ensure that aircraft would not encounter high intensity
radiation fields (HIRF) resulting from the LRDR operations that exceed
FAA's HIRF certification standards for aircraft electrical and
electronic systems. The proposed airspace restrictions include
expansion of the existing restricted area (R-2206) at CAFS by adding
six new restricted areas. The preferred alternative is to operate the
LRDR continuously under the changed operational concept and to
implement the associated proposed airspace restrictions as described in
the Proposed Action analyzed in the Final EIS.
    On June 24, 2021, the MDA as lead agency, with the DAF as a
cooperating agency, issued a joint Record of Decision (ROD) to
implement changes in operational concept for the LRDR at CAFS, Alaska.
86 FR 33240. The ROD includes modification of the LRDR operational
requirements and procedures to reflect continuous operations in
response to emerging threats. The action enables the MDA to meet its
congressional mandate to fully support the primary mission of the
layered Missile Defense System (MDS) to provide continuous and precise
tracking and discrimination of long-range missile threats launched
against the United States. The FAA is a cooperating agency on the LRDR
CAFS EIS because it has special expertise and jurisdiction by law,
pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 40101 et seq., for aviation and regulation of air
commerce in the interests of aviation safety and efficiency. The MDA
requested that the FAA, as a cooperating agency, consider and adopt, in
whole or in part, the Final EIS as the required NEPA documentation to
support FAA decisions on the establishment of restricted areas. The
airspace associated with the proposed action and alternative lies
within the jurisdiction of the FAA Anchorage Air Route Traffic Control
Center. FAA established 6 new restricted areas and made related changes
in airspace management.
    On July 6, 2021, the FAA adopted the airspace portion of the MDA's
EIS per FAA's policy for Adoption of Other Agencies' NEPA Documents in
FAA Order 1050.1F, Paragraph 8-2. On August 23, 2021, the FAA issued a
Notice of Availability for its adoption of MDA's Final EIS for LRDR
Operations, Clear Air Force Station, Alaska (CAFS), and Record of
Decision for FAA actions to accommodate testing and operation of the
LRDR at CAFS under the MDA's Modified Operational Concept; Adoption of
the Missile Defense Agency's Final Environmental Impact Statement for
Long Range Discrimination Radar (LRDR) Operations, Clear Air Force
Station, Alaska (CAFS), and Record of Decision for Federal Aviation
Administration Actions to Accommodate Testing and Operation of the LRDR
at CAFS under the Missile Defense Agency's Modified Operational
Concept, which addresses the FAA's decision to establish additional
restricted areas to protect aviation from HIRF generated during the
LRDR testing and operation, implement temporary flight restrictions
until the restricted areas are in effect, and make changes to federal
airways and instrument flight procedures to accommodate the new
restricted areas (86 FR 47195, August 23, 2021).

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 73

    Airspace, Prohibited areas, Restricted areas.

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 73 as follows:

PART 73--SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 73 continues to read as
follows:

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

Sec.  73.22   [Amended]

0
2. Section 73.22 is amended as follows:
* * * * *

R-2206 Clear, AK [Removed]

R-2206A Clear, AK [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 64[deg]19'44'' N, long.
149[deg]15'42'' W; to lat. 64[deg]19'44'' N, long. 149[deg]10'18''
W; thence south, 100 feet west of and parallel to the Alaska
Railroad to lat. 64[deg]16'17'' N, long. 149[deg]10'14'' W; to lat.
64[deg]16'17'' N, long. 149[deg]15'42'' W; to the point of
beginning.
    Designated Altitudes. Surface to 8,800 feet MSL.
    Time of designation. Continuous.
    Controlling agency. FAA, Anchorage ARTCC.
    Using agency. Commander 13th Space Warning Squadron, Clear, AK.

R-2206B Clear, AK [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 64[deg]20'13'' N, long.
149[deg]13'12'' W; to lat. 64[deg]17'20'' N, long. 149[deg]11'25''
W; to lat. 64[deg]14'31'' N, long. 149[deg]13'43'' W; thence
clockwise along a 3.0 NM arc radius centered at lat. 64[deg]17'20''
N, long. 149[deg]11'25'' W; thence to the point of beginning;
excluding that portion wholly contained in R-2206A.
    Designated Altitudes. 1,000 feet MSL to, but not including
1,600' MSL.
    Time of designation. Continuous.
    Controlling agency. FAA, Anchorage ARTCC.
    Using agency. Commander 13th Space Warning Squadron, Clear, AK.

R-2206C Clear, AK [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 64[deg]19'27'' N, long.
149[deg]20'22'' W; thence clockwise along a 4.0 NM arc radius
centered at lat. 64[deg]20'22'' N, long. 149[deg]11'25'' W; to lat.
64[deg]23'56'' N, long. 149[deg]15'30'' W; to lat. 64[deg]17'20'' N,
long. 149[deg]11'25'' W; to lat. 64[deg]14'10'' N, long.
149[deg]14'01'' W; thence along a 3.0 NM arc radius centered at lat.
64[deg]16'55'' N, long. 149[deg]16'41'' W; to the point of
beginning; excluding that portion wholly contained in R-2206A.
    Designated Altitudes. 1,600 feet MSL to 32,000 feet MSL.
    Time of designation. Continuous.
    Controlling agency. FAA, Anchorage ARTCC.
    Using agency. Commander 13th Space Warning Squadron, Clear, AK.

R-2206D Clear, AK [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 64[deg]20'13'' N, long.
149[deg]13'12'' W; thence clockwise along a 3.0 NM arc radius
centered at lat. 64[deg]17'20'' N, long. 149[deg]11'25'' W; to lat.
64[deg]18'47'' N, long. 149[deg]05'23'' W; to lat. 64[deg]17'20'' N,
long. 149[deg]11'25'' W; thence to point of beginning; excluding
that portion wholly contained in R-2206A.
    Designated Altitudes. 1,000 feet MSL to but not including 1,600
feet MSL.
    Time of designation. 0200-0400 local time, Tuesday, Thursday and
Saturday; other times by NOTAM.
    Controlling agency. FAA, Anchorage ARTCC.
    Using agency. Commander 13th Space Warning Squadron, Clear, AK.

R-2206E Clear, AK [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 64[deg]23'56'' N, long.
149[deg]15'30'' W; thence clockwise along a 4.0 NM arc radius
centered at lat. 64[deg]20'22'' N, long. 149[deg]11'25'' W; to lat.
64[deg]19'29'' N, long. 149[deg]02'27'' W; to lat. 64[deg]17'20'' N,
long. 149[deg]11'25'' W; thence to point of beginning; excluding
that portion wholly contained in R-2206A.
    Designated Altitudes. 1,600 feet MSL to but not including 2,100
feet MSL.
    Time of designation. 0200-0400 local time, Tuesday, Thursday and
Saturday; other times by NOTAM.
    Controlling agency. FAA, Anchorage ARTCC.
    Using agency. Commander 13th Space Warning Squadron, Clear, AK.

R-2206F Clear, AK [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 64[deg]22'07'' N, long.
149[deg]03'09'' W; thence clockwise along the 4.0 NM arc radius
centered at lat. 64[deg]20'22'' N, long. 149[deg]11'25'' W; to lat.

64[deg]19'29'' N, long. 149[deg]02'27'' W; to lat. 64[deg]19'19'' N,
long. 149[deg]03'07'' W; to lat. 64[deg]19'36'' N, long.
149[deg]03'18'' W; thence north, along a path \1/2\ NM west of
Highway 3, Parks Highway; to lat. 64[deg]21'42'' N, long.
149[deg]03'37'' W; to the point of beginning;
    Designated Altitudes. 2,100 feet MSL to 3,200 feet MSL.
    Time of designation. 0200-0400 local time, Tuesday, Thursday and
Saturday; other times by NOTAM.
    Controlling agency. FAA, Anchorage ARTCC.
    Using agency. Commander 13th Space Warning Squadron, Clear, AK.

R-2206G Clear, AK [New]

    Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 64[deg]23'56'' N, long.
149[deg]15'30'' W; thence clockwise along a 4.0 NM arc radius
centered at lat. 64[deg]20'22'' N, long. 149[deg]11'25'' W; to lat.
64[deg]19'29'' N, long. 149[deg]02'27'' W; to lat. 64[deg]17'20'' N,
long. 149[deg]11'25'' W; thence to point of beginning; excluding;
(1) that portion wholly contained in R-2206A; (2) that portion
wholly contained in R-2206F.
    Designated Altitudes. 2,100 feet MSL to 32,000 feet MSL.
    Time of designation. Continuous.
    Controlling agency. FAA, Anchorage ARTCC.
    Using agency. Commander 13th Space Warning Squadron, Clear, AK.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 2, 2022.
Scott M. Rosenbloom,
Manager, Airspace Rules and Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2022-24242 Filed 11-3-22; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


                        Form Approved OMB No. 2050-0192
                              Expires: xx-xx-xxxx
                        Form Approved OMB No. 2050-0192
                              Expires: xx-xx-xxxx
United States               ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                             Washington, DC 20460
        	JOB TRAINING REPORTING FORM
       Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 4 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate -- o r any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden -- to the Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Information, Code 2822T, Washington, DC 20460 and to the Paperwork  Reduction Project, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. DO NOT RETURN your form to either of these addresses. Send your completed form to the address provided by the issuing office.

           PART I - COOPERATIVE AGREEMEMENT RECIPIENT INFORMATION
     PART I - COOPERATIVE AGREEMEMENT RECIPIENT INFORMATION

 Cooperative Agreement Recipient Name:
 Cooperative Agreement Number:

        	PART II - PERFORMANCE MEASURES INFORMATION
                                                              This Federal Fiscal
                                                             QUARTER	CUMULATIVE
 Number of Participants Entering Training

       3a. Number of Veterans Entering Training

 Number of Participants Completing Training

       5a. Number of Participants Obtaining Employment
       5b. Number of Individuals that did not Obtain Employment but are Pursuing Education (e.g., GED, college courses, etc.)
 Average Hourly Wage of Participants Obtaining Employment

 Funds Leveraged (total)

         7-1. Funding Source Name:

         7-2. Activity Funded:

         7-1. Funding Source Name:

         7-2. Activity Funded:

         7-1. Funding Source Name:

         7-2. Activity Funded:

        Supplemental Performance Measures Information (optional):

        	PART III - APPROVALS
 Cooperative Agreement Recipient Project Manager:
       Name (please print)	Signature:	Date:

        U.S. EPA Regional Representative:
       Name (please print)	Signature:

                                     Date

                           INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING JOB TRAINING REPORTING FORM

                             GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

 Overview:
 As specified in your cooperative agreement terms and conditions, all Job Training cooperative agreement recipients must report to EPA on a regular basis. This OMB and EPA approved reporting form (OMB No. 2050-0192, EPA Form 6200-04) supplements your Quarterly Reports with information about specific activities and accomplishments that EPA deems necessary to adequately monitor and evaluate progress toward goals defined in cooperative agreements. Please contact your EPA Regional representative if you have any questions when completing this form.  Please note that, in most instances, all reported information is accessible by the public under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and may be distributed by EPA to the public unless an FOIA exclusion is applicable.

Compared to the Quarterly Reports, the Job Training Reporting Form (JT Reporting Form or JT Form) contains quantitative information on four specific measures of recipient performance. Reporting on these specific activities and accomplishments must be provided in the attached JT Reporting Form rather than in the Quarterly Reports. Additional voluntary and/or narrative information may be provided in Part II of this form or in the Quarterly Report.

When to Submit:
Original JT Reporting Forms. Cooperative agreement recipients must develop the first JT Reporting Form when the first specified accomplishment has occurred (e.g., when the first class of trainees "graduates" from the training program provided under the cooperative agreement, or when leveraged funding is committed to supplement the cooperative agreement activities).

Updated JT Reporting Forms. JT Reporting Forms should be updated and delivered as additional accomplishments occur.  In addition, an updated form should be provided when the cooperative agreement is being closed out. Cooperative agreement recipients should provide ample time to report job placement activities prior to the closeout of the project period. If you have data to report after the closeout of the cooperative agreement, please contact the ACRES Help desk at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
To Whom to Submit:
Cooperative agreement recipients must submit JT Reporting Forms to their EPA Regional Representative identified in the terms and conditions of the cooperative agreement. If data is entered online it will automatically be delivered to the EPA Regional Representative.

How to Submit:
The Assessment, Cleanup, and Redevelopment Exchange System (ACRES) is available online and is the preferred method for Job Training cooperative agreement recipients to enter and submit the JT Reporting Form. Electronic reporting is optional. The JT Reporting Form may also be submitted in hard copy with the next required Quarterly Report or via e-mail to the EPA Regional Representative.

DETAILED INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING EACH ITEM ON FORM PART I  -  COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT RECIPIENT INFORMATION
 Cooperative Agreement Recipient Name. Enter the cooperative agreement recipient name. Use the official name provided in the cooperative agreement, unless otherwise directed by the EPA Regional Representative.

 Cooperative Agreement Number. Enter the cooperative agreement number. Use the number as provided in the cooperative agreement.

PART II - PERFORMANCE MEASURES INFORMATION

This section contains two parts -- one mandatory, for performance measures information; the other optional, for narrative information to supplement the quantitative information provided (Field 8).

Mandatory Performance Measures.
Provide all quantitative information relating to each of the mandatory performance measures. For each measure, enter amounts in column (a)  --  This Federal Fiscal Quarter  --   to reflect the incremental accomplishments attained during the current federal fiscal reporting quarter and column (b)  --  Cumulative
 --  to reflect the total accomplishments attained to date during the term of the  cooperative agreement. Note: quantitative information relating to these performance measures should only be provided in the JT Form (i.e., not in narrative reporting contained in the Quarterly Report).

 Number of Participants Entering Training. Enter the number of participants who entered a cooperative agreement funded training program.

 3a. Number of Veterans Entering Training. Enter the number of participants who entered a cooperative agreement funded training program that are Veterans.

 Number of Participants Completing Training. Enter the number of participants taking the cooperative agreement funded training who have completed the training program.

5a. Number of Participants Obtaining Employment. Enter the number of graduates from the cooperative agreement funded training program who have obtained employment of any kind. Self-employed graduates should be included in this count. The cumulative total number inserted in column (b) should only increase during the term of the cooperative agreement; the recipients' reporting of the cumulative total should not reflect any decreases for graduates who had obtained employment but later reported losing their jobs. If desired, provide a brief narrative description in section 8 for any reported job losses.

 5b. Number of Individuals that did not Obtain Employment but are Pursuing Education (e.g., GED, college courses, etc.). Enter the number of graduates from the cooperative agreement funded training program who have not obtained employment but are pursuing an education. Education can include GED classes, college courses, vocational training, etc.

 Average Hourly Wage. Enter the average hourly wage of job training graduates in their initial post- training employment. Provide the hourly wage for the first job that each employed graduate secures after completing the job training program. Anecdotal information about subsequent jobs and wages may also be narratively provided.

 Funds Leveraged. Enter the total amount of funding leveraged as a result of cooperative agreement activities.  Capture the total number of non-cooperative agreement dollars linked and leveraged to support additional, related activities of the recipient. To be reportable, there must be a demonstrable link or connection between the EPA funded activity and the leveraged funding.  Funding can occur through direct financial assistance and/or through in-kind services or supplies.  Usually, leveraged funding that was committed prior to the award of the EPA recipient should not be reported as leveraged. In addition, leveraged funding should not be reported in this section until the funding has been committed. These leveraged funds may be used to support activities that cannot be funded by the EPA cooperative agreement (e.g., transportation or child care for job training students).

In addition to the total leveraged funds, also describe the source(s) and amount of funding leveraged, and the types of activities it funded. For each funding source (7-1), also list the type of activity funded (7-2) and the amount of funding leveraged per source in columns (a) and (b). As necessary, add additional lines for 7-1 and 7-2.

       7-1. Funding Source Name(s). For each funding source, enter the name of the organization providing the funds and/or in-kind services. Examples of sources of leveraged funding include other EPA programs; private organizations; state environmental, labor, or economic agencies; tribal governments; local governments (including community development corporations); and other federal agencies.

       7-2. Activity Funded. For each funding source listed under 7-1, provide the type of activity that was supported.  Examples of leveraged activities include additional curricula development/training (e.g., environmental and non-environmental), supplies/equipment, transportation for students, and child care for students.

 Supplement Performance Measures Information (Optional). Provide a brief narrative description to supplement the required performance measures reporting, including, for example: demographic information (e.g., gender, age, ethnicity, education); description of the training curricula; information on the types of jobs obtained by the participants entering/completing the training; names of employers; names of brownfield sites graduates are placed at; availability of photographs/video footage of the training/graduation/post-training employment; and/or other milestones tracked by the recipient for its own management.

PART III - APPROVALS

 Cooperative Agreement Recipient Project Manager. Type or print the name of the cooperative agreement recipient project manager. The project manager should also sign and date the completed JT Reporting Form before submission.

 U.S. EPA Regional Representative. Type or print the name of the EPA Regional Representative. The EPA Representative should also sign and date the reviewed JT Reporting Form.


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 55 (Friday, March 20, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 16093]
[FR Doc No: 2020-05882]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9049-9]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or https://www.epa.gov/NEPA.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements (EIS)
Filed March 9, 2020, 10 a.m. EST Through March 16, 2020, 10 a.m. EST
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment
letters on EISs are available at: https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.

EIS No. 20200067, Draft, NRC, NM, Holtec International's License
Application for a Consolidated Interim Storage Facility for Spent
Nuclear Fuel and High Level Waste, Comment Period Ends: 05/22/2020,
Contact: Jill Caverly<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20200068, Draft, NMFS, MA, Northeast Multispecies Fishery
Management Plan Draft Amendment 23, Comment Period Ends: 05/19/2020,
Contact: Mark Grant<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20200069, Draft, BLM, NV, Yellow Pine Solar Project, Comment
Period Ends: 05/04/2020, Contact: Augrelio Herman Pinales<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20200070, Draft Supplement, BLM, AK, Willow Master Development
Plan Environmental Impact Statement Supplement to the Draft, Comment
Period Ends: 05/04/2020, Contact: Racheal Jones<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 17, 2020.
Cindy S. Barger,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2020-05882 Filed 3-19-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 236 (Thursday, December 8, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76702-76703]
[FR Doc No: 2011-31515]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC12-2-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities, Proposed Collection
(FERC-550); Comment Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Information Collection and Request for
Comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of Section 3506 (c)(2)(a)
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13), the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) is soliciting public
comment on the specific aspects of the information collection described
below.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due by February 6,
2012.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be filed either electronically (eFiled) or in
paper format. The comments should refer to Docket No. IC12-2-000.
Documents must be prepared in an acceptable filing format and in
compliance with Commission submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. eFiling instructions are
available at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. First time
users must follow eRegister instructions at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/eregistration.asp, to establish a user name and password before
eFiling. The Commission will send an automatic acknowledgement to the
sender's email address upon receipt of eFiled comments. Commenters
making an eFiling should not make a paper filing. Commenters that are
not able to file electronically must send an original of their comments
to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission,
888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    Users interested in receiving automatic notification of activity in
this docket may do so through eSubscription at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp. All comments and FERC issuances may be
viewed, printed or downloaded remotely through FERC's eLibrary at:
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp, by searching on Docket
No. IC12-2-000. For user assistance, contact FERC Online Support by
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission uses the information
collected under the requirements of FERC-550, ``Oil Pipeline Rates:
Tariff Filings'' (OMB No. 1902-0089), to implement the statutory
provisions of Parts 1, 6, and 15 of the Interstate Commerce Act (ICA)
(Pub. L. 337, 34 Stat. 584). Jurisdiction over oil pipelines as it
relates to the establishment of valuations for pipelines was
transferred from the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) to FERC,
pursuant to sections 306 and 402 of the Department of Energy
Organization Act (DOE Act), 42 U.S.C. 7155 and 7172, and Executive
Order No. 12009, 42 FR 46267 (September 17, 1977).
    18 CFR Parts 341-348 specifies the filing requirements for proposed
oil pipeline rates. The data that oil pipelines file is the basis for
Commission analyses of the rates they plan to charge to transport crude
oil and petroleum products. The Commission uses its analyses: (1) To
determine if the proposed charges result in just and reasonable rates
for the oil pipeline's transportation services and (2) to help the
Commission decide whether it should suspend, accept or reject the
proposed rates.
    Action: The Commission is requesting a three-year extension of the
current expiration date with no changes to the existing collection. The
information filed with the Commission is mandatory.
    Burden Statement: Public Reporting Burden for this information
collection is estimated as:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Number of     Average  burden    Total annual
              Number of respondents annually (1)                responses  per     hours  per      burden hours
                                                                respondent (2)    response (3)         (4)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
128..........................................................               4               11             5632
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The total annual cost of filing FERC-550 is: 5,632 hours/2080 hours
\1\ x $142,372 \2\ equals $385,500. The annual cost of filing FERC-550
per respondent is $3,012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Number of hours an employee works in a year.
    \2\ Average annual salary per employee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The reporting burden includes the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide
the information including: (1) Reviewing instructions; (2) developing,
acquiring, installing, using technology and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, verifying, processing, maintaining, disclosing
and providing information; (3) adjusting the existing ways to comply
with any previously applicable filing instructions and requirements;
(4) training personnel to respond to a collection of information; (5)
searching data sources; (6) completing and reviewing the collection of
information; and (7) transmitting, or otherwise disclosing the
information.
    The Commission bases the cost estimate for respondents upon
salaries within the Commission for professional and clerical support.
This cost estimate includes respondents' total salary and employment
benefits.
    Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms
of information technology e.g. permitting electronic submission of
responses.

    Dated: December 2, 2011.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-31515 Filed 12-7-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 85 (Tuesday, May 3, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26541-26542]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10246]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2457-041]

Public Service Company of New Hampshire: Notice of Application
Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Motions To Intervene and Protests,
Ready for Environmental Analysis, and Soliciting Comments,
Recommendations, Preliminary Terms and Conditions, and Preliminary
Prescriptions

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: New Major License.
    b. Project No.: 2457-041.
    c. Date filed: December 18, 2015.
    d. Applicant: Public Service Company of New Hampshire (PSNH).
    e. Name of Project: Eastman Falls Hydroelectric Project (Eastman
Falls Project).
    f. Location: The existing project is located on the Pemigewasset
River in Merrimack and Belknap Counties, New Hampshire. The project
boundary includes approximately 476 acres of federal land.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Curtis R. Mooney, Project Manager, Public
Service Company of New Hampshire, 780 North Commercial Street, P.O. Box
330, Manchester, NH 03105-0330; Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Steve Kartalia,<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing motions to intervene, protests, comments,
recommendations, preliminary terms and conditions, and preliminary
prescriptions: 60 days from the issuance date of this notice; reply
comments are due 105 days from the issuance date of this notice.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene, protests, comments, recommendations, preliminary
terms and conditions, and preliminary prescriptions using the
Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000
characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your
name and contact information at the end of your comments. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-2457-041.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing
documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each
person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an
intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to
the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a
particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document
on that resource agency.
    k. This application has been accepted for filing and is now ready
for environmental analysis.
    l. The Project Description: The Eastman Falls Project has a total
installed capacity of 6.4-megawatts (MW). The project's average annual
generation is 27,871 megawatt-hours. The power generated by the project
is sold to PSNH's electrical distribution customers.
    The dam for the Eastman Falls Project is located approximately 1.5
miles downstream of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) Franklin
Falls Flood Control Dam (Franklin Falls Dam). While the project
boundary for the Eastman Falls Project extends through and upstream of
Franklin Falls Dam, it does not encompass Franklin Falls Dam or any
Corps facilities.
    The existing project consists of: (1) A 341-foot-long, 37-foot-high
concrete gravity dam that includes: (i) A 341-foot-wide spillway with a
crest elevation of 301 feet above mean sea level (msl) (ii) 6-foot-high
steel flashboards with a crest elevation of 307 feet msl; and (iii) a
concrete waste gate with a 16-foot-high, 30-foot-wide steel slide gate;
(2) a 582-acre impoundment with a normal maximum pool elevation of 307
feet msl; (3) a 342-foot-long, 8-foot-deep floating louver array; (4)
generating facility No. 1 that includes: (i) A 12.5-foot-high, 15-foot-
wide headgate structure with a 23.75-foot-high, 17-foot-wide trashrack
with 3.5-inch clear-bar spacing; (ii) a 12.5-foot-high, 12.5-foot-wide,
21-foot-long concrete penstock; (iii) a 40-foot-high, 20-foot-wide stop
log slot; (iv) a 29-foot-long, 29-foot-wide, 34-foot-high concrete and
masonry powerhouse containing a single 1.8-MW turbine-generator unit;
and (v) a 23-foot-wide, 14.5-foot-high, 60-foot-long draft tube; (5)
generating facility No. 2 facility that includes: (i) An intake
structure with a

20-foot-high, 21-foot-wide headgate with two 12.3-foot-wide, 9.3-foot-
high trashracks with 3.5-inch clear-bar spacing; (ii) a 20.8-foot-high,
22.4-foot-wide stop log slot; (iii) an 88-foot-long, 78-foot-wide, 56-
foot-high concrete and masonry powerhouse containing a single 4.6 MW
turbine-generator unit; and (iv) a 23-foot-wide, 14.5-foot-high, 60-
foot-long draft tube; (6) two 245-foot-long, 2.4-kilovolt (kV)
generator leads that connect the turbine-generator in generating
facility No. 1 to a generator bus in generating facility No. 2; (7)
four 110-foot-long, 2.4-kV generator leads that connect the turbine-
generator in generating facility No. 2 to a generator bus in generating
facility No. 2; (8) a 100-foot-long, 2.4-kV transmission line that
connects the generator bus in generating facility No.2 to the regional
grid; and (9) appurtenant facilities.
    The Eastman Falls Project operates in a run-of-river mode. The
existing license (Article 401) requires that the project release a
continuous minimum flow of 410 cubic feet per second, or inflow
(whichever is less). PSNH proposes to continue run-of-river operation
and to eliminate the requirement to release a minimum flow.
    m. A copy of the 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, contact
FERC Online Support at FERCOnlineSupport. A copy of the application is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h
above.
    Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    n. Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene
in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure,
18 CFR 385.210, .211, and .214. In determining the appropriate action
to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments
filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with
the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any
comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or
before the specified comment date for the particular application.
    All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title
``PROTEST'', ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', ``COMMENTS,'' ``REPLY COMMENTS,''
``RECOMMENDATIONS,'' ``PRELIMINARY TERMS AND CONDITIONS,'' or
``PRELIMINARY PRESCRIPTIONS;'' (2) set forth in the heading the name of
the applicant and the project number of the application to which the
filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of
the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the
requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments,
recommendations, terms and conditions or prescriptions must set forth
their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of
18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly
from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must
be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the
particular application. A copy of all other filings in reference to
this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons
listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this
proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.
    o. Procedural Schedule:
    The application will be processed according to the following
revised Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to the schedule may be made
as appropriate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Milestone                           Target date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Filing of recommendations, preliminary   June 2016.
 terms and conditions, and preliminary
 prescriptions.
Commission issues Environmental          October 2016.
 Assessment.
Comments on Environmental Assessment...  November 2016.
Modified terms and conditions..........  December 2016.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    p. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the
Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of this notice.
    q. A license applicant must file no later than 60 days following
the date of issuance of the notice of acceptance and ready for
environmental analysis provided for in 5.22: (1) A copy of the water
quality certification; (2) a copy of the request for certification,
including proof of the date on which the certifying agency received the
request; or (3) evidence of waiver of water quality certification.

     Dated: April 26, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-10246 Filed 5-2-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 71 (Friday, April 12, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14935-14936]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07288]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC19-7-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-915); Comment
Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or
FERC) is soliciting public comment on the currently approved
information collection FERC-915 (Public Utility Market-Based Rate
Authorization Holders--Records Retention Requirements) and submitting
the information collection to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review. Any interested person may file comments directly with OMB
and should address a copy of those comments to the Commission as
explained below. On February 20, 2019, the Commission published a
Notice in the Federal Register in Docket No. IC19-7-000 requesting
public comments. The Commission received no public comments and is
noting that in the related submittal to OMB.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due May 13, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Comments filed with OMB, identified by OMB Control No. 1902-
0250, should be sent via email to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs: [email protected]. Attention: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission Desk Officer.
    A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Commission, in
Docket No. IC19-7-000, by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Website: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance, contact FERC Online Support
by email at [email protected], or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-915, Public Utility Market-Based Rate Authorization
Holders--Records Retention Requirements.
    OMB Control No. 1902-0250.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-915 information
collection requirements with no changes to the current record retention
requirements.
    Abstract: In accordance with the Federal Power Act, the Department
of Energy Organization Act (DOE Act), and the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(EPAct 2005), the Commission regulates the transmission and wholesale
sales of electricity in interstate commerce, monitors and investigates
energy markets, uses civil penalties and other means against energy
organizations and individuals who violate FERC rules in the energy
markets, administers accounting and financial reporting regulations,
and oversees conduct of regulated companies.
    The Commission imposes the FERC-915 record retention requirements,
in 18 CFR 35.41(d), on applicable sellers to retain, for a period of
five years, all data and information upon which they bill the prices
charged for ``electric energy or electric energy products it sold
pursuant to Seller's market-based rate tariff, and the prices it
reported for use in price indices.''
    The record retention period of five years is necessary due to the
importance of records related to any investigation of possible
wrongdoing and related to assuring compliance with the codes of conduct
and the integrity of the market. The requirement is necessary to ensure
consistency with the rule prohibiting market manipulation (adopted in
Order No. 670) and the generally applicable five-year statute of
limitations where the Commission seeks civil penalties for violations
of the anti-manipulation rules or other rules, regulations, or orders
to which the price data may be relevant.
    Type of Respondent: Public Utility Market-Based Rate Authorization
Holders.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: \1\ The Commission estimates the annual
public

reporting burden and cost \2\ (rounded) for the information collection
as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. For
further explanation of what is included in the information
collection burden, refer to 5 CFR 1320.3.
    \2\ The estimated hourly cost (for wages plus benefits) provided
in this section are based on the figures posted by the Bureau of
Labor Statistics (BLS) for the Utilities section available (at
https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm) and benefits
information (for December 2017, issued March 20, 2018, at https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm). The hourly estimates for
salary plus benefits are:
     File Clerk (Occupation code: 43-4071), $33.39 an hour. We are
rounding the hourly cost to $33.00.

                            FERC-915, Public Utility Market-Based Rate Authorization Holders--Records Retention Requirements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Annual number
      FERC requirement            Number of       of responses    Total number  of   Average burden  & cost     Total annual  burden    Annual cost  per
                                 respondents     per respondent       responses           per  response             hours  & cost        respondent ($)
                                           (1)               (2)   (1) * (2) = (3)  (4).....................  (3) * (4) = (5).........         (5) / (1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERC-915....................             2,510                 1             2,510  1 hr.; $33.00...........  2,510 hrs.; $82,830.....            $33.00
                             ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...................  ................  ................             2,510  ........................  2,510 hrs.; $82, 830....  ................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, there are records storage costs. For all respondents,
we estimate a total of 65,000 cu. ft. of records in off-site storage.
Based on an approximate storage cost of $0.24 per cubic foot, we
estimate total annual storage cost to be $15,600.00 (or $6.22 annually
per respondent). The total annual cost for all respondents (burden cost
plus off-site storage) is $98,430.00 (or $82,830 + $15,600); the
average total annual cost per respondent is $39.22 ($6.22 + $33.00).
    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: April 8, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-07288 Filed 4-11-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 117 (Wednesday, June 17, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36492-36494]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12089]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2020-0252]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
the navigable waters in the vicinity of the General Dynamics NASSCO
shipyard in San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA, during the launch of the M/V
Matsonia. The safety zone is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and
the marine environment from potential hazards associated with the
launching and subsequent berthing of the M/V Matsonia. Entry of vessels
or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized
by the Captain of the Port San Diego.

DATES: This rule is effective from 6 p.m. through 9 p.m. on July 2,
2020.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2020-0252 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 Lieutenant Briana Biagas, Waterways Management, U.S.
Coast Guard Sector San Diego, CA; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

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

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because it is impracticable. This urgent
safety zone is required to protect the maritime public and the
surrounding waterways from hazards associated with the launching of the
M/V Matsonia. It is impracticable to publish an NPRM because the Coast
Guard must establish this safety zone by July 2, 2020. The Coast Guard
lacks sufficient time to provide a reasonable comment period and then
consider those comments before issuing the rule.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable because this rule is needed to protect
mariners, commercial and recreational waterway users, and the M/V
Mastonia from dangers associated with the launching and berthing of the
M/V Matsonia on July 2, 2020.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port San Diego
(COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with launching
of the M/V Matsonia on July 2, 2020, will be a safety concern for
anyone in the vicinity of the General Dynamics NASSCO shipyard. This
rule is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine
environment in the navigable waters within the safety zone while the M/
V Matsonia is being launched and towed to a nearby berth.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 6 p.m. until 9 p.m. on
July 2, 2020. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters of the
San Diego Bay created by connecting the following points: Beginning at
32[deg]41'23.4'' N, 117[deg]8'39.6'' W (Point A); thence running
northwesterly to 32[deg]41'14.4'' N, 117[deg]9'3'' W (Point B); thence
running southeasterly to 32[deg]41'3'' N, 117[deg]8'43.8'' W (Point C);
thence running east to 32[deg]41'12'' N, 117[deg]8'20.4'' W (Point D);
thence running north to the beginning point. The duration of the zone
is intended to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment
in these navigable waters while the M/V Matsonia is being launched,
then towed to berth. No vessel or person will be permitted to enter the
safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated
representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. 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, location
and limited duration of the safety zone. This safety zone impacts a
small designated area of the San Diego Bay for a very limited period
during the evening when vessel traffic is normally low. Moreover, the
Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM
marine channel 16 about the zone, and the rule would allow vessels to
seek permission to enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

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

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

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

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-024 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-024  Safety Zone; San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone. All waters of
San Diego Bay, from surface to bottom, encompassed by a line connecting
the following points beginning at 32[deg]41'23.4'' N, 117[deg]8'39.6''
W (Point A); thence running northwesterly to 32[deg]41'14.4'' N,
117[deg]9'3'' W (Point B); thence running southeasterly to
32[deg]41'3'' N, 117[deg]8'43.8'' W (Point C); thence running east to
32[deg]41'12'' N, 117[deg]8'20.4'' W (NAD 83) (Point D); thence running
north to the beginning point.
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain,
petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a
Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port San Diego (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety
zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in
subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative.
    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's
representative by VHF Channel 16. Those in the safety zone must comply
with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative.
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 6 p.m.
through 9 p.m. on July 2, 2020.

    Dated: May 29, 2020.
T. J. Barelli,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector San Diego.
[FR Doc. 2020-12089 Filed 6-16-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P