[Federal Register: July 15, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 135)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 41078-41084]
[DOCID:fr15jy10-6]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

15 CFR Parts 742 and 774

[Docket No. 080721866-0167-02]
RIN 0694-AE42

Revisions to the Commerce Control List To Update and Clarify
Crime Control License Requirements

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.

ACTION: Final Rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule updates and clarifies export and reexport license
requirements on striking weapons, restraint devices, shotguns and
parts, optical sighting devices, and electric shock devices. It also
adds equipment designed for the execution of humans to the Commerce
Control List. This rule makes no changes to the longstanding policy of
denial of applications to export or reexport specially designed
implements of torture. The rule provides additional illustrative
examples of such items and adopts a definition of torture used in a
U.S. statute that implements the United Nations Convention against
Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
BIS is publishing this rule as part of an ongoing review of crime
control license requirements and policy.

DATES: This rule is effective July 15, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this rule may be submitted by e-mail directly to
BIS at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(refer to Regulatory Identification
Number (RIN) 0694-AE42 in the subject line), or on paper to the
Regulatory Policy Division, Office of Exporter Services, Bureau of
Industry and Security, Room H2705, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW. Washington, DC 20230. Refer to RIN
0694-AE42 in all comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron Rolfe, Office of Non-proliferation
and Treaty Compliance, Bureau of Industry and Security, telephone: 202
482-4563; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Export Administration Regulations (EAR) (15 CFR parts 730-774)
impose license requirements for certain exports from the United States
and reexports from other countries for, among other reasons, ``crime
control.'' The crime control license requirements are intended for the
``support of U.S. foreign policy to promote human rights throughout the
world'' (15 CFR 742.7(a)). Publication of this rule is part of BIS's
ongoing effort to review and, where appropriate, revise the crime
control license requirements in the EAR. As part of that effort, BIS
published a notice of inquiry seeking public comments on whether the
scope of items and destinations that are subject to crime control
license requirements should be changed (73 FR 14769, March 19, 2008).
After reviewing those comments, and conducting its own internal
deliberations, BIS decided to proceed in stages. This final rule is the
culmination of the first stage, which began with the publication of a
proposed rule (74 FR 40117, August 11, 2009). This first stage
addresses relatively simple extensions, modifications or removals of
items currently on the Commerce Control List or additions to that List
of items that have an easily identified crime control or law
enforcement nexus.
    BIS plans to publish a subsequent proposed rule that will identify
potential expansion of certain Export Control Classification Numbers as
suggested in the comments to this proposed rule; whether, and, if so,
the extent to which biometric measuring devices, integrated data
systems, simulators, and communications equipment should be added to
the Commerce Control List; the degree to which software and technology
related to commodities on the Commerce Control List should be listed
and how such software and technology should be described; and general
policy issues such as whether the range of destinations to which crime
control license requirements apply should be modified.

Summary of the Comments on the Proposed Rule and BIS's Response to
Those Comments

    BIS received comments from two commenters, on individual and one
non-profit organization, on the proposed rule. The comments and BIS's
responses are summarized below.
Comment
    One commenter welcomed the strong and unambiguous statement in
Sec.  742.7(d) that the United States considers international norms
regarding human rights and the practices of other countries that
control exports to promote human right when developing U.S. crime
control export controls. That commenter noted that awareness of the
centrality of human rights in export control policy helps international
efforts to reform export control policy and serves as an example to
other countries.
Response
    This final rule retains the proposed rule language in Sec.
742.7(d). The centrality of human rights in connection with crime
control license requirements has been noted in the EAR for many years.
Comment
    One commenter welcomed the use of the word ``including'' in Sec.
742.11, which sets license requirements and policy for specially
designed implements of torture.
Response
    Addition of the word ``including'' to Sec.  742.11 and its related
Export Control Classification Number 0A983 is, as this commenter noted,
intended to clarify the point that the operative factor in determining
whether an item is subject to ECCN 0A983 and Sec.  742.11 is whether
that item is a specially designed implement of torture. The listed
items are examples of such instruments.
Comment
    One commenter welcomed the addition of the term ``shock sleeves''
to

the illustrative list of items ECCN 0A983 (Specially Designed
Implements of Torture) but noted that shock belts are not included in
the 0A983 illustrative list and that ``stun cuffs'' are included in the
illustrative list for ECCN 0A982 (Law Enforcement Restraint Devices).
This commenter stated that shock belts, shock sleeves and stun cuffs
pose the same concerns about potential use in repressing human rights
and suggested that all three should be covered by ECCN 0A983 under the
collective term ``body worn electronic restraint/electric shock
devices.''
Response
    In deciding whether to classify an item as a specially designed
implement of torture or as a law enforcement restraint device, BIS
considers whether the item has legitimate law enforcement uses. In some
instances, law enforcement authorities must restrain violent persons
and some level of force will be needed to do so. Many items have
potential to be used in abusing human rights; however not all of those
items are specially designed implements of torture. Because legitimate
law enforcement activities sometimes include the need to restrain
violent persons without resorting to lethal force, BIS believes that
some use of electric shock devices in law enforcement may be necessary.
BIS has reassessed its earlier thinking and concluded that stun cuffs,
shock sleeves and shock belts are, in some situations, necessary to
protect law enforcement officers and the public from violent persons.
At the same time, these commodities have sufficient potential to be
used in the abuse of human rights that they should be subject to crime
control license requirements. Accordingly, all three of those
commodities should be treated as restraint devices rather than as
implements of torture. Accordingly, this final rule adds ``shock
belts,'' ``stun cuffs'' and ``shock sleeves'' to the illustrative list
of restraint devices included in ECCN 0A982 . This final rule does not
add ``shock sleeves'' to the illustrative list of specially designed
implements of torture included in ECCN 0A983 and to the heading of
Sec.  742.11 of the EAR as was proposed in the proposed rule. This
final rule does not add stun cuffs to ECCN 0A985 as was proposed in the
proposed rule. BIS believes that the EAR will be clearer if all law
enforcement restraint devices, regardless of whether they operate by
physical or electrical means, are listed under a single ECCN.
Comment
    One commenter recommended that BIS add Canada to the list of
destinations requiring a license under ECCN 0A982, stating that the
lack of a license requirement for Canada poses a diversion risk.
Another comment stated the same concern regarding ECCN 0A985.
Response
    BIS did not propose any changes to the destinations to which a
license would be required for items described in these ECCNs. In
addition, BIS's longstanding practice is not to require licenses for
export or reexport to Canada for most items. Currently, BIS does not
believe that Canada poses a diversion risk that would justify a
departure from this longstanding practice for these ECCNs.
Comment
    One commenter welcomed the use of the word ``including'' in ECCN
0A978.
Response
    As noted by this commenter, that word makes the list illustrative.
The operative term for classifying something under ECCN 0A978 will be
the term ``law enforcement striking weapons.'' Previously this ECCN
covered only saps.
Comment
    One commenter expressed concern that addition of the term ``law
enforcement'' in ECCNs 0A978 and in 0A982 could lead to abuse. This
commenter offered as an example a situation in which a party might
assert that a set of handcuffs were not subject to ECCN 0A982 because
in a particular transaction, the handcuffs were being exported for a
purpose other than law enforcement.
Response
    The language in these two ECCNs describes the items that are
subject to these ECCNs, not the end use to which the items are put.
Some type of modifier to the term ``restraint devices'' in 0A982 is
needed because BIS does not intend to cover all types of restraint
devices, just those used in law enforcement. Similarly, some type of
modifier is needed to the term striking weapons in ECCN 0A978. In
general, ECCNs describe an item without reference to end-use to which
an item will be put. In a few instances ECCNs are tied to a specific
use by express language referring to the use (See e.g, ECCN 1C298,
which applies to certain graphite ``that is intended for use other than
in a nuclear reactor''). ECCNs 0A978 and 0A982 do not employ similar
language to describe use or intended use. The phrase ``law
enforcement'' is intended as part of the descriptions of the items that
those two ECCNs cover. The phrase does not mean that a particular
export or reexport must be for a law enforcement purpose or to a law
enforcement organization in order for one of those ECCNs to apply. BIS
believes that no change to the wording of these two ECCNs is needed to
make this point, because absence of any statement of use or intended
use, when read consistently with the general pattern of language used
in other ECCNs indicates that neither ECCN 0A978 nor 0A982 is tied to a
particular end use.
Comment
    One commenter welcomed new ECCN 0A981, which applies to equipment
designed for the execution of human beings, but recommended that the
wording of the ECCN be made illustrative to be consisted with ECCN's
0A983 and 0A978. Two commenters noted the absence of the phrase ``and
parts and accessories n.e.s'' in this ECCN. One commenter expressed a
belief that such absence weakened the ECCN ``because execution
technologies have a defined set of parts and accessories and because of
their obvious potential in repressing human rights.'' The other
commenter stated that parts and accessories should be covered by this
ECCN because doing so would strengthen the ECCN by making it difficult
to repair such equipment that exists outside the United States.
Response
    BIS believes that adding the word ``parts'' to ECCN 0A981 is not
necessary at this time, but will consider proposing covering parts to
this ECCN in a future rule. ECCN 0A981 covers equipment designed for
the execution of human beings. BIS is not aware of export trade in
parts for these commodities. Because the proposed rule did not propose
adding parts to any of this ECCN, public comments have not been sought
on this idea. Identifying parts that may be appropriate for an export
license requirement without imposing an export license requirement on
general parts that, although usable in equipment designed for the
execution of human beings, have many other uses as well would require
both research by BIS and public comment. Therefore, BIS will consider
addressing the parts issue for these ECCNs in a future proposed rule.
Comment
    One commenter stated that in ECCN 0E984, the wording ``buckshot
shotgun shells.'' is too restrictive given the

increasing range of less-lethal shotgun shells on the market, their
wide use in crime control and the potential for repressing human
rights. That commenter urged BIS to expand ECCN 0E984 to encompass
technology for the development or production of all shotgun shells.
Response
    In the proposed rule, BIS proposed replacing three different
reasons for control (CC 1, CC 2 and CC 3) for technology for the
development and production of shotguns with a single reason (CC 1). The
reasons for control varied according to the barrel length of the
shotgun. BIS proposed the change because most of the technology for the
development or production of a shotgun would not vary based on barrel
length. No commenters objected to this proposed change. The reference
to ``buckshot shotgun shells'' in ECCN 0E984 was pre-existing language
that BIS did not propose to change. This commenter suggests that BIS go
further than the proposal and make ECCN 0E984 applicable to technology
for the development and production of all shotgun shells. BIS believes
that before expanding the scope of this ECCN, the proposal should be
set forth in a proposed rule with an opportunity for public comment.
Accordingly, BIS is not adopting this commenter's proposal at this
time, but may propose it in a future rule.
Comment
    One commenter expressed concern because ECCN 3A981 aggregates
different types of equipment which serve different functions, namely
analysis technologies, biometric technologies and penal technologies.
This commenter recommended that BIS disaggregate such technologies into
additional ECCN's wherever possible. The commenter stated that such
disaggregating would promote best practices and clarity, and facilitate
reporting and analysis of licensable exports.
Response
    Disaggregating commodities currently covered by ECCN 3A981 might
provide the clarity that this commenter suggests. However, doing so
might also impose costs on or engender confusion among parties
accustomed to the current Commerce Control List structure. BIS believes
that such a restructuring should not be undertaken without notice and
an opportunity for public comment. Accordingly BIS may propose
disaggregating the contents of ECCN 3A981 in a future proposed rule.
Summary of the Changes Made by This Rule
    Revisions to Sec.  742.7--Crime control--This rule revises the
section heading to read ``Crime control and detection'' to reflect the
contents of the section. It also revises paragraph (a) to set forth an
all destination license requirement for a new ECCN 0A981 that would
apply to equipment designed for the execution of human beings. Finally,
this rule revises paragraph (d) to state that in maintaining these
controls, the United States considers international norms and the
practices of other countries that control exports to promote the
observance of human rights; however, the controls are not based on the
decisions of any multilateral export control regime and may differ from
controls imposed by other countries. This rule removes certain language
from paragraph (d) that could have been read as erroneously implying
that the United States is the only country that imposes export controls
on crime control and detection items.
    Revisions to Sec.  742.11--Specially designed implements of torture
* * * --This rule revises the heading to match the revised language
that this rule applies to ECCN 0A983, i.e. ``Specially designed
implements of torture, including thumbscrews, thumbcuffs, fingercuffs,
spiked batons and parts and accessories, n.e.s.'' This rule also
revises paragraph (d) to state that in maintaining these controls, the
United States considers international norms and the practices of other
countries that control exports to promote the observance of human
rights; however, the controls are not based on the decisions of any
multilateral export control regime and may differ from controls imposed
by other countries. This rule removes certain language from paragraph
(d) that could have been read as erroneously implying that the United
States is the only country that imposes export controls on specially
designed implements of torture. This rule makes no changes to the
policy of denial of applications to export items subject to Sec.
742.11 or to the prohibition (stated in Sec.  740.2(a)(10) of the EAR)
on use of license exceptions to export commodities subject to Sec.
742.11 of the EAR.
    Revisions to ECCN 0A978--Saps--The items covered by this ECCN are
expanded from ``saps'' to ``law enforcement striking weapons.'' Saps,
police batons, side handle batons, tonfas, sjamboks, and whips are
listed as examples of law enforcement striking weapons. BIS believes
that this change will provide consistent license requirements for
several items that have substantially similar crime control functions.
    Creation of ECCN 0A981--Equipment for the Execution of Human
Beings--This rule creates a new ECCN 0A981 that applies to equipment
designed for the execution of human beings. Such equipment will require
a license to all destinations. BIS is adding this ECCN because
equipment designed for the execution of human beings has a clear nexus
to crime control and an obvious potential use in repressing human
rights.
    Revisions to ECCN 0A982--Restraint Devices--Several changes are
being made to this ECCN to (a) make clear that it applies to law
enforcement restraint devices, rather than safety or medical equipment,
(b) update the illustrative list of commodities to which this ECCN
applies, and (c) cross reference other ECCNs that apply to similar
devices. These changes are intended to focus the ECCN on items of crime
control significance and to reduce the possibility of
misinterpretations. The rule adds the phrase ``Law enforcement'' to the
ECCN heading. This rule adds ``multipoint restraint devices including
restraint chairs'' to the illustrative list of restraint devices
because use of these devices has increased in recent years and because
they have potential for use in human rights abuse. This rule adds stun
cuffs, shock sleeves, and shock belts to ECCN 0A982. The proposed rule
would have added shock sleeves to ECCN 0A983 and stun cuffs to ECCN
0A985. As pointed out in the public comments, the proposed rule did not
address shock belts at all. Upon reflection, BIS has concluded that
each of these three devices has a legitimate law enforcement use in
restraining violent persons. Each can be distinguished from the
specially designed implements of torture in ECCN 0A983, which have no
legitimate law enforcement uses and from the shock devices in ECCN
0A985, which can be used to apply non-lethal force to protect law
enforcement personnel and others from violent persons. Placing these
three devices in the law enforcement restraint device ECCN will add
clarity to the EAR. The rule also revises the related controls
paragraph of this ECCN to note two related export license requirements:
finger cuffs are classified under ECCN 0A983--specially designed
implements of torture, and electronic devices that monitor and report a
person's location to enforce restrictions on movement for law
enforcement or penal reasons are controlled under ECCN 3A981.

    Finally, this rule adds a note stating that ECCN 0A982 does not
apply to medical devices that are equipped to restrain patient movement
during medical procedures, devices that confine memory-impaired
patients to appropriate medical facilities, or safety equipment such as
safety belts or child automobile safety seats.
    BIS believes that this revised language clarifies the scope of ECCN
0A982 and is not a substantive change.
    Revisions to ECCN 0A983--Specially Designed Implements of Torture--
This rule makes no changes to the EAR's stated policies of denial of
license applications for the export or reexport of specially designed
implements of torture and prohibition of use of any license exception
to export or reexport specially designed implements of torture.
    The heading of ECCN 0A983 is being revised to add the word
``including'' immediately following the phrase ``specially designed
implements of torture'' to make clear that the items listed are
examples of specially designed implements of torture rather than an
exclusive list of such implements. The heading is also being revised to
add fingercuffs, and spiked batons to the ECCN as additional examples
of specially designed implements of torture. A new note provides that
``torture'' in this ECCN has the same meaning as set forth in 18 U.S.C.
2340(1), which is the definition employed by the United States criminal
statute that implements the United Nations Convention against Torture
and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. BIS
believes that these changes will more clearly distinguish specially
designed implements of torture from crime control and detection items.
    Revisions to ECCN 0A984--Shotguns--This rule removes the phrase
``parts n.e.s.'' and adds the following specific parts for the shotguns
controlled by this ECCN: Barrels of 18 inches (45.72 cm) or longer but
not longer than 24 inches (60.96 cm), receivers, breech mechanisms,
complete trigger mechanisms, and magazines or magazine extension tubes.
The parts are subject to CC column 1 license requirements. BIS believes
that the purposes of the control can be met by retaining the license
requirement on the shotguns themselves and on the critical parts set
forth in this rule. BIS believes that continuing to require licenses
for other parts would pose a burden on legitimate trade in shotgun
repair parts that is not needed to achieve the purpose of these
controls or of the controls related to the Inter-American Convention
Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms,
Ammunition, Explosives and Other Related Materials.
    Revisions to ECCN 0A985--Discharge Type Arms--ECCN 0A985 applies to
discharge type arms and to some electroshock devices that are not
discharge type arms. To provide greater clarity and to include a
representative description of devices currently available, this
proposed rule adds the phrase ``devices to administer electric shock''
to the heading and adds shock shields to the illustrative list of items
classified under this ECCN. This rule also adds references to the
``Related Controls'' paragraph informing readers that electronic
devices that monitor and report a person's location to enforce
restrictions on movement for law enforcement or penal reasons are
controlled under ECCN 3A981 and that law enforcement restraint devices
that administer an electric shock are controlled under ECCN 0A982.
    Revisions to ECCN 0A987--Optical Sighting Devices for Firearms--
This rule replaces the general description in the heading of ECCN 0A987
with a list of items controlled. With this change, the ECCN clearly
states that it applies to specific sighting devices, their associated
optical elements, and adjustment mechanisms.
    Revisions to ECCN 0E984--Technology for shotguns--This rule revises
ECCN 0E984 to apply CC Column 1 as a reason for control of technology
for the development and production of all shotguns and shotgun shells
controlled by ECCN 0A984. Currently, ECCN 0E984 applies reasons for
control that are parallel to the reasons for control in ECCN 0A984,
i.e., CC Column 1, 2, or 3 is applied depending on whether the barrel
length exceeds 24 inches and whether the end-user is a law enforcement
agency. BIS is making the change described in this paragraph because it
believes that the technology for the development and production of
shotguns is substantially the same for all shotguns with barrel length
exceeding 18 inches and does not vary based on the end user of the
shotgun.
    Revisions to ECCN 3A981--Polygraphs and other electronic devices--
This rule adds a cross reference to the restraint devices controlled by
ECCN 0A982. This rule also adds a note expressly stating that the
electronic monitoring restraint devices in ECCN 3A981 are devices that
monitor or report the location of confined persons for law enforcement
or penal reasons. The note excludes devices used to confine memory
impaired patients to appropriate medical facilities. BIS views these
changes as clarifications rather than substantive changes.
    Consistent with the provisions of section 6 of the Export
Administration Act of 1979, as amended (EAA), a foreign policy report
was submitted to Congress on July 12, 2010, notifying Congress of the
imposition of foreign policy-based licensing requirements reflected in
this rule.
    Although the Export Administration Act expired on August 20, 2001,
the President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001, 3 CFR,
2001 Comp., p. 783 (2002), as extended by the Notice of August 13, 2009
(74 FR 41325 (August 14, 2009)), has continued the Export
Administration Regulations in effect under the International Emergency
Economic Powers Act.

Rulemaking Requirements

    1. This rule is significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    2. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is
required to respond to nor be subject to a penalty for failure to
comply with a collection of information, subject to the requirements of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA),
unless that collection of information displays a currently valid Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) Control Number. This rule involves a
collection of information that has been approved by OMB under control
number 0694-0088, which carries a burden hour estimate of 58 minutes to
prepare and submit form BIS-748. Miscellaneous and recordkeeping
activities account for 12 minutes per submission. BIS believes that the
changes proposed will increase the number of submissions subject to
this collection by approximately 1,200 annually. Send comments
regarding these burden estimates or any other aspect of these
collections of information, including suggestions for reducing the
burden, to Jasmeet Seehra, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), by e-
mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by fax to<PHONE_NUMBER>; and to the
Regulatory Policy Division, Bureau of Industry and Security, Department
of Commerce, Room 2705, 14th Street and Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20230.
    3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications
as this term is defined in Executive Order 13132.
    4. The provision of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553)
requiring a delay in effective date, is inapplicable

because this regulation involves a military or foreign affairs function
of the United States (see 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1)). Delay in implementation
could thwart the United States' commitment to promote the observance of
human rights around the world. Any delay in the effective date of this
rule could result in efforts to export restraint devices, equipment for
the execution of human beings or technology for certain shotgun
production to regimes or parties that abuse human rights or that would
use the items to inflict torture before the license requirements become
effective. In addition, immediate implementation of the changes that
focus license requirements for shotgun parts and optical sighting
devices parts impose no new burden on the public and will allow BIS to
focus its licensing and enforcement resources on the critical parts,
such as barrels, receivers, trigger mechanisms and optical elements,
that give these items their essential capabilities for harm rather than
dissipating such resources by evaluating license applications for and
enforcing export controls on such relatively innocuous and easily
fabricated items as springs, screws, washers and mounting brackets. In
addition, the provisions of this rule that provide clarifications or
additional cross references are not substantive changes. Because those
provisions are not substantive changes, the provision of the 5 U.S.C.
553 requiring a delay in effective date is inapplicable. BIS provided a
notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for public comment for
this rule (74 FR 40117, August 11, 2009). Nevertheless, because such
notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for public comment
were not required to be given for this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or by any
other law, the analytical requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) are not applicable.

List of Subjects

15 CFR Part 742

    Exports, Terrorism.

15 CFR Part 774

    Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

0
Accordingly, BIS amends the Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR
Parts 730-774) as follows:

PART 742--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 742 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22
U.S.C. 7210; Sec 1503, Pub. L. 108-11, 117 Stat. 559; E.O. 12058, 43
FR 20947, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 179; E.O. 12851, 58 FR 33181, 3 CFR,
1993 Comp., p. 608; E.O. 12938, 59 FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p.
950; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222,
66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Presidential Determination
2003-23 of May 7, 2003, 68 FR 26459, May 16, 2003; Notice of August
13, 2009, 74 FR 41325 (August 14, 2009); Notice of November 6, 2009,
74 FR 58187 (November 10, 2009).

0
2. In Sec.  742.7, revise the heading, redesignate existing paragraph
(a)(5) as paragraph (a)(6), add a new paragraph (a)(5) and revise
paragraph (d) to read as follows:

Sec.  742.7  Crime control and detection.

    (a) * * *
    (5) Items designed for the execution of human beings as identified
in ECCN 0A981 require a license to all destinations including Canada.
* * * * *
    (d) U.S. controls. In maintaining its controls on crime control and
detection items, the United States considers international norms
regarding human rights and the practices of other countries that
control exports to promote the observance of human rights. However,
these controls are not based on the decisions of any multinational
export control regime and may differ from controls imposed by other
countries.
0
3. In Sec.  742.11, revise the heading and paragraph (d) to read as
follows:

Sec.  742.11  Specially designed implements of torture, including
thumbscrews, thumbcuffs, fingercuffs, spiked batons, and parts and
accessories, n.e.s.

* * * * *
    (d) U.S. controls. In maintaining its controls on specially
designed instruments of torture the United States considers
international norms regarding human rights and the practices of other
countries that control exports to promote the observance of human
rights. However, these controls are not based on the decisions of any
multinational export control regime and may differ from controls
imposed by other countries.

PART 774--[AMENDED]

0
4. The authority citation for part 774 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
10 U.S.C. 7420; 10 U.S.C. 7430(e); 22 U.S.C. 287c, 22 U.S.C. 3201 et
seq., 22 U.S.C. 6004; 30 U.S.C. 185(s), 185(u); 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 42
U.S.C. 6212; 43 U.S.C. 1354; 15 U.S.C. 1824a; 50 U.S.C. app. 5; 22
U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR,
1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p.
783; Notice of August 13, 2009, 74 FR 41325 (August 14, 2009).

0
5. In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 0, revise the heading of
Export Control Classification (ECCN) 0A978 to read as follows:

Supplement No. 1 to Part 774--The Commerce Control List

* * * * *
    0A978 Law enforcement striking weapons, including saps, police
batons, side handle batons, tonfas, sjamboks, and whips.
* * * * *

0
6. In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 0, add a new ECCN 0A981
immediately following ECCN 0A980 and immediately preceding ECCN 0A982
to read as follows:

Supplement No. 1 to Part 774--The Commerce Control List

* * * * *
    0A981 Equipment designed for the execution of human beings (See
list of items controlled).

License Requirements

    Reason for Control: CC.
    Control(s): CC applies to entire entry. A license is required
for ALL destinations regardless of end-use. Accordingly, a column
specific to this control does not appear on the Commerce Country
Chart. (See Sec.  742.7 of the EAR for additional information.)

License Exceptions

    LVS: N/A.
    GBS: N/A.
    CIV: N/A.

List of Items Controlled

    Unit: $ value.
    Related Controls: N/A.
    Related Definitions: N/A.
    Items: a. Gallows and guillotines.
    b. Electric chairs for the purpose of executing human beings.
    c. Air tight vaults designed for the execution of human beings
by the administration of a lethal gas or substance.
    d. Automatic drug injection systems designed for the execution
of human beings by administration of a lethal substance.

0
7. In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 0, ECCN 0A982, revise the
heading, revise the ``Related Controls'' paragraph in the ``List of
Items Controlled'' section and add a note at the end of ECCN 0A982 to
read as follows:

Supplement No. 1 to Part 774--The Commerce Control List

* * * * *
    0A982 Law enforcement restraint devices, including leg irons,
shackles, and handcuffs; straight jackets; stun cuffs; shock belts;
shock sleeves; multipoint restraint devices such as restraint
chairs; and parts and accessories, n.e.s.
* * * * *

List of Items Controlled

    Unit: $ * * *
    Related Controls: Thumbcuffs and fingercuffs are classified
under ECCN 0A983, specially designed implements of torture.
Restraint devices that electronically monitor or report the location
of confined persons for law enforcement or penal reasons are
controlled under ECCN 3A981.
* * * * *

    Note to ECCN 0A982.  This ECCN applies to restraint devices used
in law enforcement activities. It does not apply to medical devices
that are equipped to restrain patient movement during medical
procedures. It does not apply to devices that confine memory
impaired patients to appropriate medical facilities. It does not
apply to safety equipment such as safety belts or child automobile
safety seats.

0
8. In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 0, ECCN 0A983, revise the
heading, and add a note at the end of ECCN 0A983 to read as follows:

Supplement No. 1 to Part 774--The Commerce Control List

* * * * *
    0A983 Specially designed implements of torture, including
thumbscrews, thumbcuffs, fingercuffs, spiked batons, and parts and
accessories, n.e.s.
* * * * *

    Note to ECCN 0A983.  In this ECCN, ``torture'' has the meaning
set forth in Section 2340(1) of Title 18, United States Code.

0
9. In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 0, ECCN 0A984, revise the
heading and the license requirements section of ECCN 0A984 to read as
follows:

Supplement No. 1 to Part 774--The Commerce Control List

* * * * *
    0A984 Shotguns with barrel length 18 inches (45.72 cm) or over;
receivers; barrels of 18 inches (45.72 cm) or longer but not longer
than 24 inches (60.96 cm); complete trigger mechanisms; magazines
and magazine extension tubes; complete breech mechanisms; buckshot
shotgun shells; except equipment used exclusively to treat or
tranquilize animals, and except arms designed solely for signal,
flare, or saluting use.

License Requirements

    Reason for Control: CC, FC, UN.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Control(s)                                              Country chart
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FC applies to entire entry......................  FC Column 1.
CC applies to shotguns with a barrel length       CC Column 1.
 greater than or equal to 18 in. (45.72 cm), but
 less than 24 in. (60.96 cm), shotgun parts
 controlled by this entry, and buckshot shotgun
 shells controlled by this entry, regardless of
 end-user.
CC applies to shotguns with a barrel length       CC Column 2.
 greater than or equal to 24 in. (60.96 cm),
 regardless of end-user.
CC applies to shotguns with a barrel length       CC Column 3.
 greater than or equal to 24 in. (60.96 cm) if
 for sale or resale to police or law enforcement.
UN applies to entire entry......................  Iraq, North Korea, and Rwanda.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

0
10. In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 0, ECCN 0A985, revise the
heading and the ``Related Controls'' paragraph of the ``List of Items
Controlled'' section to read as follows:

Supplement No. 1 to Part 774--The Commerce Control List

* * * * *
    0A985 Discharge type arms and devices to administer electric
shock, for example, stun guns, shock batons, shock shields, electric
cattle prods, immobilization guns and projectiles; except equipment
used exclusively to treat or tranquilize animals, and except arms
designed solely for signal, flare, or saluting use; and parts,
n.e.s.
* * * * *

List of Items Controlled

    Unit: * * *
    Related Controls: Law enforcement restraint devices that
administer an electric shock are controlled under ECCN 0A982.
Electronic devices that monitor and report a person's location to
enforce restrictions on movement for law enforcement or penal
reasons are controlled under ECCN 3A981.
* * * * *

0
11. In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 0, ECCN 0A987, revise the
heading and the ``Items'' paragraph of the ``List of Items Controlled''
section to read as follows:

Supplement No. 1 to Part 774--The Commerce Control List

* * * * *
    0A987 Optical sighting devices for firearms (including shotguns
controlled by 0A984); and parts (See list of items controlled).
* * * * *

List of Items Controlled

    Unit: * * *
    Related Controls: * * *
    Related Definitions: * * *
    Items: a. Telescopic sights.
    b. Holographic sights.
    c. Reflex or ``red dot'' sights.
    d. Reticle sights.
    e. Other sighting devices that contain optical elements.
    f. Laser pointing devices designed for use on firearms.
    g. Lenses, other optical elements and adjustment mechanisms for
articles in paragraphs a, b, c, d or e.

0
12. In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 0, ECCN 0E984, revise the
license requirements section of ECCN 0E984 to read as follows:

Supplement No. 1 to Part 774--The Commerce Control List

* * * * *
    0E984 ``Technology'' for the ``development'' or ``production''
of shotguns controlled by 0A984 and buckshot shotgun shells.

License Requirements

    Reasons for Control: CC, UN

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Control(s)                                              Country chart
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC applies to ``technology'' for shotguns with a  CC Column 1.
 barrel length over 18 in. (45.72 cm), and for
 shotgun shells controlled by ECCN 0A984..
UN applies to entire entry......................  Iraq, North Korea, and Rwanda.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

0
13. In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 3, revise the ``Related
Controls'' paragraph of the ``List of Items Controlled'' section and
add a note to the end of ECCN 3A981 to read as follows:

Supplement No. 1 to Part 774--The Commerce Control List

* * * * *

    3A981 Polygraphs (except biomedical recorders designed for use
in medical facilities for monitoring biological and neurophysical
responses); fingerprint analyzers, cameras and equipment, n.e.s.;
automated fingerprint and identification retrieval systems, n.e.s.;
psychological stress analysis equipment; electronic monitoring
restraint devices; and specially designed parts and accessories,
n.e.s.
* * * * *

List of Items Controlled

    Unit: * * *
    Related Controls: See ECCN 0A982 for other types of restraint
devices.
    Related Definitions: * * *
    Items: * * *

    Note to ECCN 3A981.  In this ECCN, electronic monitoring
restraint devices are devices used to record or report the location
of confined persons for law enforcement or penal reasons. The term
does not include devices that confine memory impaired patents to
appropriate medical facilities.

    Dated: July 12, 2010.
Kevin J. Wolf,
Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 2010-17338 Filed 7-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-33-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 40 (Thursday, February 28, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13747-13748]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04713]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Safety Advisory 2013-01; Passing Stop Signals Protecting Movable
Bridges

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of Safety Advisory.

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

SUMMARY: FRA is issuing Safety Advisory 2013-01 to remind track

owners, railroads, and their employees of the importance of ensuring
that rails are properly aligned and movable spans are secured before
permitting a train to pass a signal that is displaying a stop
indication and protecting a movable bridge. FRA is issuing this notice
in response to a recent train accident involving a derailment in which
there was an unsecured swing span that moved laterally during the
passage of a train. This notice recommends that track owners and
railroads: (1) Evaluate the design and construction of existing movable
bridges to determine if effective span locking is being provided; (2)
review current operating rules and procedures to ensure that these
instructions adequately protect movable bridges during the operation of
trains; and (3) ensure that employees authorized to determine whether
movable bridges are correctly aligned and secured are adequately
trained to perform these duties.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carlo M. Patrick, Staff Director, Rail
and Infrastructure Integrity Division, Office of Railroad Safety, FRA,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, telephone (202) 493-
6399; David R. Killingbeck, Chief Engineer--Structures, Rail and
Infrastructure Integrity Division, Office of Railroad Safety, FRA, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
or Anna Nassif Winkle, Trial Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, FRA,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, telephone (202) 493-
6166.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On November 30, 2012, a Consolidated Rail Corporation mixed freight
train with two locomotives and 82 freight cars, including 51 hazardous
materials tank cars, derailed seven cars while crossing a single-leaf
movable swing bridge. The derailed cars included loaded tank cars of
vinyl chloride and ethanol. One vinyl chloride tank car was breached,
resulting in the release of its contents into a waterway and the
atmosphere, as well as in the subsequent evacuation of approximately
600 nearby residents.
    Due to the typically limited train traffic over the bridge, it was
normally left in an open position when not needed in order to allow
pleasure craft to pass. Upon arriving at the bridge, a train crew would
normally encounter a stop signal and the bridge in the fully-open
position, oriented approximately perpendicular to the track. As such,
once stopped at the signal, the train crew normally would request the
bridge to close using the key pad on the locomotive radio. Through the
use of a programmable logic controller, an automated sequence would
commence closing and seating the bridge and then moving the slide lock
rails into the locked position. Once the slide lock rails were fully
engaged, a signal to proceed would be displayed.
    Following the derailment, the swinging end of the movable span was
found to be laterally displaced approximately three feet. Although
FRA's investigation of this accident is ongoing, and the probable
causes and contributing factors have not yet been established,
preliminary indications are that the movable span was not locked in
place and moved or rotated laterally during the passage of the train.
Unlike most swing bridges that possess end wedges that when driven,
prevent rotation of the span, the subject bridge was a rare, shear-pole
swing span that had neither end wedges nor span locks. The slide rails
that were part of the movable bridge rail joints provided the only
means of securing the span from rotating.
    Recommended Action: In light of the above discussion, FRA
recommends that track owners and railroads:
    1. Evaluate the design of existing movable bridges, especially
swing bridges, to determine if effective span locking, independent of
rail locking, is being provided as recommended in Chapter 15 (Steel
Structures) of the current American Railway Engineering and
Maintenance-of-Way Association Manual for Railway Engineering.
    2. Evaluate operating rules and procedures that permit the
operation of trains past a stop signal protecting a movable bridge to
ensure their adequacy to prevent operation of trains should the bridge
not be properly aligned and secured.
    3. Review the adequacy of all training given to employees
authorized to determine that a movable bridge is properly aligned and
locked to ensure that employees are capable of correctly determining
that the movable bridge is safe for train movements.
    FRA encourages track owners and railroads to take actions that are
consistent with the preceding recommendations and to take other actions
to help ensure the safety of the Nation's railroads, their employees,
and the general public. FRA may modify this Safety Advisory 2013-01,
issue additional safety advisories, or take other appropriate actions
it deems necessary to ensure the highest level of safety on the
Nation's railroads, including pursuing other corrective measures under
its rail safety authority.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 22, 2013.
Jo Strang,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety/Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2013-04713 Filed 2-27-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 184 (Thursday, September 22, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65353-65354]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22681]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0146; FRL-9952-68-OAR]

Release of Draft Policy Assessment for the Review of the Primary
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Nitrogen Dioxide

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reviewing the
primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Nitrogen
Dioxide (NO2). On or about September 23, 2016, the EPA will
make available for public review the document titled Policy Assessment
for the Review of the Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for Nitrogen Dioxide--External Review Draft (draft PA). This draft PA
is intended to facilitate the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee's
(CASAC's) advice and public input as part of the ongoing review of the
primary NAAQS for NO2.

DATES: Comments should be received on or before December 8, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2013-0146, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web,
Cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    The draft PA will be available primarily via the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/s_nox_index.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Jennifer Nichols, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Mail Code C504-06, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number:
919-541-0708; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
http://regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one

complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 2.
    2. Tips for Preparing your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the notice by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
     Follow directions. The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a CFR part or
section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternative and
substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Information About the Document

    Two sections of the Clean Air Act (CAA) govern the establishment
and revision of the NAAQS. Section 108 (42 U.S.C. 7408) directs the
Administrator to identify and list certain air pollutants and then to
issue air quality criteria for those pollutants. The Administrator is
to list those air pollutants that in her ``judgment, cause or
contribute to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to
endanger public health or welfare;'' ``the presence of which in the
ambient air results from numerous or diverse mobile or stationary
sources;'' and ``for which * * * [the Administrator] plans to issue air
quality criteria * * *.'' Air quality criteria are intended to
``accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge useful in
indicating the kind and extent of all identifiable effects on public
health or welfare which may be expected from the presence of [a]
pollutant in the ambient air * * * '' (42 U.S.C. 7408(b)). Under
section 109 (42 U.S.C. 7409), the EPA establishes primary (health-
based) and secondary (welfare-based) NAAQS for pollutants for which air
quality criteria are issued. Section 109(d) requires periodic review
and, if appropriate, revision of existing air quality criteria. The
revised air quality criteria reflect advances in scientific knowledge
on the effects of the pollutant on public health or welfare. The EPA is
also required to periodically review and revise the NAAQS, if
appropriate, based on the revised criteria. Section 109(d)(2) requires
that an independent scientific review committee ``shall complete a
review of the criteria * * * and the national primary and secondary
ambient air quality standards * * * and shall recommend to the
Administrator any new * * * standards and revisions of the existing
criteria and standards as may be appropriate * * *.'' Since the early
1980s, this independent review function has been performed by the
CASAC.
    Presently, the EPA is reviewing the primary NAAQS for
NO2. The first draft Integrated Science Assessment for
Oxides of Nitrogen (Health Criteria) (ISA) was released on November 22,
2013 (78 FR 70040), and the draft Integrated Review Plan for the
Primary NAAQS for Nitrogen Dioxide (IRP) was released on February 6,
2014 (79 FR 7184). Both documents were reviewed by the CASAC at a
public meeting in March 2014, announced in a separate notice (79 FR
8701, February 13, 2014). The final IRP was released in June 2014 (79
FR 36801, June 30, 2014) and is available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/s_nox_2012_pd.html. The second draft ISA was made
available to both the CASAC and the public (80 FR 5110, January 30,
2015), and was reviewed in addition to the Risk and Exposure Assessment
Planning Document (REA Planning Document) (80 FR 27304, May 13, 2015)
at a public meeting in June 2015 (80 FR 22993, April 24, 2015). The
final ISA was then released in January 2016 (81 FR 4910, January 28,
2016) after taking into consideration the CASAC's advice and public
comments.
    The PA, when final, will serve to ``bridge the gap'' between the
scientific information and the judgments required of the Administrator
in determining whether to retain or revise the existing primary NAAQS
for NO2, and, if revision is considered, what revisions may
be appropriate. The draft PA announced today builds upon information
presented in the final ISA and the REA Planning Document. The draft PA
will be available on or about September 16, 2016, through the agency's
Technology Transfer Network (TTN) Web site at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/nox/s_nox_index.html.
    The EPA is soliciting advice and recommendations from the CASAC by
means of a review of this draft document at an upcoming public meeting
of the CASAC, scheduled for November 9-10, 2016. Information about this
public meeting will be published as a separate notice in the Federal
Register. Following the CASAC meeting, the EPA will consider comments
received from the CASAC and the public in preparing revisions to this
document. The EPA will also consider public comments submitted in
response to this notice when revising the document. Comments should be
submitted to the docket, as described above. The document that is the
subject of today's notice does not represent and should not be
construed to represent any final EPA policy, viewpoint or
determination.

    Dated: September 15, 2016.
Stephen Page,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2016-22681 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 15, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 241)]
[Notices]
[Page 75531-75532]
[DOCID:fr15de06-64]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. CP06-335-000 and CP96-810-006]

Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C.; Notice of Availability of
the Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Maritimes Phase IV
Project

December 11, 2006.
    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) on the
natural gas pipeline facilities proposed by Maritimes & Northeast
Pipeline L.L.C (Maritimes) in the above-referenced docket.
    The EA was prepared to satisfy the requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act. The staff concludes that approval of the
proposed project, with appropriate mitigating measures, would not
constitute a major

federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment.
    The EA assesses the potential environmental effects of the
construction and operation of the proposed Maritimes Phase IV Project:

New Construction in Maine

     Approximately, 1.7 miles of 30-inch-diameter pipeline in
Washington County (Baileyville Loop);
     Baileyville Meter Station in Washington County;
     Woodchopping Ridge Compressor Station (18,085 horsepower
[HP]) in Hancock County;
     Brewer Compressor Station (18,085 HP) in Penobscot County;
     Searsmont Compressor Station (18,085 HP) in Waldo County;
     Westbrook Compressor Station (26,666 HP) in Cumberland
County;
     Westbrook Meter Station in Cumberland County; and
     Eliot Compressor Station (8,943 HP) in York County.

Modifications in Maine

     Piping at the existing Richmond Compressor Station in
Sagadahoc County;
     Piping at the existing Baileyville Compressor Station in
Washington County; and
     Piping at the existing Baileyville Meter Station in
Washington County.

Modifications in Massachusetts

     At the existing Dracut Meter Station in Middlesex County.
    The purpose of the proposed Maritimes Phase IV Project is to
provide the necessary infrastructure to transport natural gas from the
Canaport LNG terminal currently under construction in New Brunswick,
Canada to markets in the Northeastern U.S. The EA has been placed in
the public files of the FERC. A limited number of copies of the EA are
available for distribution and public inspection at: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE.,
Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Copies of the EA have been mailed to Federal, State and local
agencies, public interest groups, interested individuals, newspapers,
and parties to this proceeding.
    Any person wishing to comment on the EA may do so. To ensure
consideration prior to a Commission decision on the proposal, it is
important that we receive your comments before the date specified
below. Please carefully follow these instructions to ensure that your
comments are received in time and properly recorded:
     Send an original and two copies of your comments to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE.,
Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426;
     Label one copy of the comments for the attention of the
Gas Branch 2, PJ11.2.
     Reference Docket No. C06-335-000; and
     Mail your comments so that they will be received in
Washington, DC on or before January 10, 2007.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing of any
comments or interventions or protests to this proceeding. See 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
at http://www.ferc.gov under the ``e-Filing'' link and the link to the

User's Guide. Before you can file comments you will need to create a
free account which can be created by clicking on ``Sign-up.''
    Comments will be considered by the Commission but will not serve to
make the commentor a party to the proceeding. Any person seeking to
become a party to the proceeding must file a motion to intervene
pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedures (18 CFR 385.214).\1\ Only intervenors have the right to seek
rehearing of the Commission's decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Interventions may also be filed electronically via the
Internet in lieu of paper. See the previous discussion on filing
comments electronically.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Affected landowners and parties with environmental concerns may be
granted intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they
have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding which would not be
adequately represented by any other parties. You do not need intervenor
status to have your comments considered.
    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at 1-866-208-FERC or on the
FERC Internet Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) using the eLibrary link.

Click on the eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the
docket number excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number
field. Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,

contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries and direct links to
the documents. Go to http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-21418 Filed 12-14-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Farm ID # _______________

Methyl Bromide Critical Use Exemption Enterprise Budget Work Sheets Methyl Bromide Pepper  Double Crop Yield Cartons Per Acre  Pepper Cartons Per Acre  Cucurbits IFAS Average 1,000 600 Farm Information Cost Information IFAS Farm Information Acre Carton Acre Carton Pre Harvest Production Costs:

Fertilizer 575.11 Fumigant 630.63 Crop Protection Materials 1,046.64 Transplants/ Seeds 826.30 Stakes 64.00 Plastic String 27.50 Plastic Mulch/ Irrigation Tubing 337.67 Frost Protection Machinery: Irrigation 350.98 Non irrigation 478.88 Plastic Mulch/ Drip Tape Disposal 140.96 Scounting 27.50 Labor Costs: Tractor Drivers 300.28 Direct Labor 219.28 Miscellaneous 180.00 Interest 219.28 Fixed Costs: Land Cost 350.00 Supervision 1,114.17 Overhead 1,392.71 Total Pre Harvest Production Costs: 8,281.89 $ 5.18 $  $ # DIV/ 0!

Harvesting 2,557.50 $ 1.60 $ # DIV/ 0!

Packing, Selling & Related Overhead 3,683.50 $ 2.30 $ # DIV/ 0! Farming Costs:

dwcgi 15181 1081177513 295334000. xls August 3, 2003 Farm ID # _______________

TOTAL COST: 14,522.89 $ 9.08 $  $ # DIV/ 0!

dwcgi 15181 1081177513 295334000. xls August 3, 2003


[Federal Register: October 28, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 208)]
[Notices]
[Page 66425]
[DOCID:fr28oc10-89]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2000-7165; FMCSA-2004-17984; FMCSA-2006-24783]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Renewals; Vision

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA previously announced its decision to renew the
exemptions from the vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations for 10 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to
exempt individuals from the vision requirement if the exemptions
granted will not compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that
granting these exemptions will provide a level of safety that will be
equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety maintained,
Director, Medical Programs,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FMCSA, without the exemptions for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV)
drivers.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W64-224, Washington,
DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
for a 2-year period if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that
would be achieved absent such exemption.'' The statute also allows the
Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. The comment
period ended on October 18, 2010 (75 FR 57105).

Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

Conclusion

    The Agency has not received any adverse evidence on any of these
drivers that indicates that safety is being compromised. Based upon its
evaluation of the 10 renewal applications, FMCSA renews the Federal
vision exemptions for Robert L. Aurandt, Harry R. Brewer, Joseph H.
Fowler, Kelly R. Konesky, Gregory T. Lingard, Hollis J. Martin, Kevin
C. Palmer, Charles O. Rhodes, Gordon G. Roth, and Daniel A. Sohn.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each renewal
exemption will be valid for 2 years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
The exemption will be revoked if: (1) The person fails to comply with
the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has
resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was
granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent
with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.

    Issued on: October 22, 2010.
Charles A. Horan III,
Office Director, Bus and Truck, Standards and Operation.
[FR Doc. 2010-27292 Filed 10-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


1 TELECON Call To: Gail Froiman, US EPA Office of Environmental Information 202 566 0697 Call From: Jill Lucy Project: US EPA Office of Water, Engineering and Analysis Division 304( m) Detailed Studies Charge Number: 0<IP_ADDRESS> Date: November 13, 2003 Subject: Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds ( PACs) Wastewater Discharges Reported to the Toxic Release Inventory ( TRI)

I contacted Ms. Froiman to investigate whether the Office of Environmental Information had any information concerning the reliability of PACs discharges reported to TRI ( based on discussions with industry, etc.) or any suggestions of approaches to using the TRI data for EAD's analysis.

BACKGROUND To prepare the 2004/ 2005 effluent guidelines plan, EAD is evaluating industrial point source wastewater discharges of toxic or non conventional pollutants. The purpose of the evaluation is to establish a schedule for the annual review and revision of all effluent guidelines ( i. e., a prioritized list of existing effluent guidelines). EAD's evaluation is also being used to identify categories of point sources discharging toxic or non conventional pollutants for which EPA has not published effluent guidelines ( i. e., new categories).

EAD analyzed readily available information to rank industries based on potential hazard. The " readily available" information includes the TRI data and Permit Compliance System ( PCS) data for 2000.

To estimate the potential hazard of the discharges, EAD multiplied the mass discharged by their toxic weighting factors ( TWFs)  these have been used over the years for other effluent guidelines calculations. EAD assigns chemical toxicity based on both aquatic life effects and human health effects and additively combines them into one pollutant specific TWF. EAD then uses the calculated " toxic weighted pound equivalents" in its cost effectiveness analysis for developing new effluent guidelines.

EAD has TWFs for eight of the compounds in the PACs category; however, sites report to TRI 2 Telecon  November 13, 2003 only the sum of the discharges for the PACs category ( not specific compounds). For the screening level analysis, EAD estimated the potential hazard for PACs discharges.

The PACs Category reportable to TRI ( as required by EPCRA Section 313), includes 21 compounds. In addition, benzo( g, h, i) perylene is also a PACs, but reported separately for TRI purposes. From the August 2001 EPCRA Section 313 Guidance for Reporting Toxic Chemicals: Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds Category document:

Most of the 21 listed PACs are products of incomplete combustion; see Table 1 1. Two exceptions, 7,12 dimethylbenz( a) anthracene and 3 methylcholanthrene, are produced in small quantities as research chemicals and are not products of incomplete combustion ( 1). Twelve of the 21 are reported to be found in fossil fuels ( 1). EPCRA Section 313 PAC category chemicals are also found in coal tar and coal distillates.

NOTES ON CALL Ms. Froiman noted that there has been some discussion with industry on the potential for over reporting of PACs discharges. Sites may use estimated production rates ( i. e., manufacture of PACs as products of incomplete combustion) as the release rates. PACs can be created or destroyed during combustion.

For TRI reporting, sites may use monitoring data or engineering calculations/ estimates to determine the amount of PACs discharged to the wastewater. More reporting data/ estimate factors are available for PACs air emissions than for PACs wastewater discharges ( e. g., EPA has developed emission factors for PACs). Ms. Froiman noted that we could use various methods to assist in developing estimates of PACs discharges ( or to determine the validity of TRI data):

1. To estimate wastewater discharges, we could assume the PACs concentration in wastewater releases equals those in air emissions. EPA has air guidance data on seven PACs ( e. g., Locating & Estimating Air Emissions from Sources of Polycyclic Organic Matter, EPA 454/ R 98 014): benz( a) anthracene, benzo( a) phenanthrene ( chrysene), benzo( b) fluoranthene, benzo( k) fluoranthene, benzo( a) pyrene, dibenz( a, h) anthracene, and indeno( 1,2,3 cd) pyrene.

2. PACs are not very soluble in water, and this solubility limit could provide a concentration limit for the amount of PACs discharged in the wastewater. [ However, this would neglect PACs that may be released as in an oil layer, oil/ water emulsion, or associated with suspended solids].

3. Compare the developed emission factors for the seven PACs compounds ( listed above) with the concentration in fuels. If the values are similar, use the concentration in the fuels to estimate wastewater discharges.

Ms. Froiman suggested we could evaluate PACs estimates as reported to TRI by using reporting data for benzo( g, h, i) perylene  since this compound is reported separately to TRI, we may be able 3 Telecon  November 13, 2003 to determine how sites calculated the value and assume the PACs category releases were reported in the same manner.

Some other benchmarking data sources include the Center for Disease Control's human exposure of chemicals. There is a January 2003 report ( publication number NCEH 02 0716) that provides the metabolite of individual PACs ( the data does show a fair number of nondetects).

Other possible wastewater data sources we discussed included determining if other Office of Water projects contained data on PACs. Some possible data sources include mobile diesel data, impact assessment of petrochemicals on water, or drinking water standards.

Some American Petroleum Institute ( API) documents may also be helpful ( e. g., those referenced in the TRI guidance document for PACs).

Ms. Froiman also suggested talking with individuals who have completed TRI reports for industry  they may have more data than needed to be reported ( i. e., specific PACs compound data that was summed to report to TRI for the PACs Category).

Ms. Froiman and I also discussed the Risk Screening Environmental Indicators ( RSEI) program. The program does have some general assumptions that may not translate accurately to the discharges reported to TRI. The model assumes unspecified compounds are a higher toxicity ( e. g., all chromium compounds are assigned the toxicity for chrome 6   this toxicity is higher than other chromium compounds).


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 21 (Wednesday, February 1, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4900-4901]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2122]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0318]
RIN 1625-AA87

Security Zone; Escorted Vessels in Captain of the Port Ohio
Valley Zone

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces a public meeting to receive comments
on a notice of proposed rulemaking entitled ``Security Zone; Escorted
Vessels in Captain of the Port Ohio Valley Zone'' that was published in
the Federal Register on July 27, 2011. As stated in that document, the
Coast Guard proposes to implement fixed and moving security zones
around High Capacity Passenger Vessels (HCPVs) and vessels carrying
Certain Dangerous Cargo (CDC) while they are being escorted in the
navigable waters of the Captain of the Port (COTP), Sector Ohio Valley
Zone. The proposed security zones would control the movement of vessels
within 50-yards of a HCPV or vessel carrying a CDC. These security
zones would mitigate potential terrorist acts and would enhance public
and maritime safety and security.

DATES: A public meeting will be held on Wednesday, February 29, 2012
from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. to provide an opportunity for oral comments.
Written comments and related material may also be submitted to Coast
Guard personnel specified at that meeting. The comment period for the
proposed rule closed on August 26, 2011. A second comment period will
be open for 15 days following the public meeting. All comments and
related material submitted after the meeting must be received by the
Coast Guard on or before Thursday, March 15, 2012.

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held at The Brown Hotel, 335 West
Broadway, Louisville, KY 40202, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    You may submit written comments at the public meeting or during the
comment period following the public meeting. Written comments submitted
after the public meeting must be identified by docket number USCG-2011-
0318 and may be submitted using any one of the following methods:
    (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    (2) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) Mail: Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (4) Hand delivery: Same as mail address above, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
Our online docket for this rulemaking is available on the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov under docket number USCG-2011-0318.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions concerning the
meeting or the proposed rule, please call or email LCDR Derek Schade,
Sector Ohio Valley Response Department, Coast Guard; telephone 502-779-
5413, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing
or submitting material to the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background and Purpose

    We published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal
Register on July 27, 2011, (76 FR 44880), entitled ``Security Zone;
Escorted Vessels in Captain of the Port Ohio Valley Zone''. In it we
stated that we did not plan to hold a public meeting, but that we
welcomed requests explaining why one would be beneficial. 76 FR 44881.
We received several requests from vessel owners and operators to have a
more ``substantive discussion'' in order to address some of their
specific concerns and have concluded that a public meeting would aid
this rulemaking. Therefore, we are publishing this notice.
    In the NPRM, we propose to establish a 50-yard security zone around
High Capacity Passenger Vessels (HCPVs) and vessels carrying Certain
Dangerous Cargo (CDC) while they are being escorted in the Captain of
the Port Ohio Valley zone, as defined in 33 CFR 3.40-65. In the
proposed rule, HCPVs are defined as any commercial vessel carrying 500
or more passengers and CDC means the same as its definition in 33 CFR
part 160. This rule would establish security zones that control the
movement of persons and other vessels from the surface to the bottom of
the water in a 50-yard radius around escorted vessels. Vessels
traveling within 50 yards of these escorted vessels would be required
to slow to the minimum speed necessary to navigate safely. All vessels
or persons would be prohibited from entering within a 25-yard radius
around these escorted vessels without the permission from the COTP
Sector Ohio Valley or his or her designated representative.
    For the purposes of this rule, a designated representative of the
COTP Ohio Valley includes commissioned, warrant, or petty officers of
the U.S. Coast Guard; or Federal, State, and local law enforcement
officers designated by or assisting the COTP Ohio Valley. In the
proposed rule, an escorted vessel is defined as a HCPV or vessel
carrying CDC that is accompanied by one or more Coast Guard assets or
other Federal, State, or local law enforcement assets clearly
identified by lights, vessel markings, or with agency insignia. In all
cases, the COTP would notify the maritime and general public by marine
information broadcast of the periods during which individual security
zones will be enforced.
    You may view the NPRM in our online docket, in addition to
supporting documents prepared by the Coast Guard, including a
preliminary environmental checklist and Categorical Exclusion
Determination (CED), and comments submitted thus far by going to http://www.regulations.gov. Once there, insert ``USCG-2011-0318'' in the
``Keyword'' box and click ``Search.'' You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. We have an agreement with the Department of
Transportation to use the Docket Management Facility.
    We encourage you to participate in this rulemaking by submitting
comments either orally at the meeting or in writing following the
meeting. If you bring written comments to the meeting, you may submit
them to Coast Guard personnel specified at the meeting to receive
written comments. These comments will be submitted to our online public
docket. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have
provided.
    Comments submitted after the meeting must reach the Coast Guard on
or before Thursday, March 15, 2012. If you submit a comment online via
http://www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received by the Coast
Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, hand
delivery, or mail your comment, it will be considered as having been
received by

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

Information on Service for Individuals With Disabilities

    For information on facilities or services for individuals with
disabilities or to request special assistance at the public meeting,
contact LCDR Derek Schade, Sector Ohio Valley Response Department,
Coast Guard at the telephone number or email address indicated under
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice.

Public Meeting

    The Coast Guard will hold a public meeting regarding its Security
Zone; Escorted Vessels in Captain of the Port Ohio Valley Zone proposed
rule on Wednesday, February 29, 2012 from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., at The
Brown Hotel, 335 West Broadway, Louisville, KY 40202, telephone (502)
583-1234. Government-issued, photo ID or other item will not be
required to attend the meeting. Street parking is limited during
business hours. Parking garages and surface lots are available near the
meeting location but charge hourly rates. Public transportation to the
building is available. For additional information regarding public
transportation, contact the Transit Authority of River City at http://www.ridetarc.org/.
    We plan to record this meeting using an audio-digital recorder and
then make that audio recording available through a link in our online
docket. We will also provide a written summary of the meeting and
comments and will place that summary in the docket.

    Dated: January 9, 2012.
L.W. Hewett,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Ohio Valley.
[FR Doc. 2012-2122 Filed 1-31-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P