[Federal Register: March 22, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 55)]
[Notices]
[Page 14514-14517]
[DOCID:fr22mr06-65]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0161; FRL-7768-5]

Poly(hexamethylenebiguanide) hydrochloride; Para Tertiary-
Amylphenol and Salts; 1, 2-Benzisothiazolin-3-one; and
Azadioxabicyclooctane Reregistration Eligibility Decisions; Notice of
Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's Reregistration
Eligibility Decisions (REDs) for the pesticides
poly(hexamethylenebiguanide) hydrochloride hereafter referred to as
PHMB, para tertiary-amylphenol and salts hereafter referred to as 4-t,
1, 2-benzisothiazolin-3-one hereafter referred to as BIT and
azadioxabicyclooctane hereafter referred to as Aza. This notice opens a
public comment period on these documents. The Agency's risk assessments
and other related documents are also available in the Dockets for PHMB,
4-t, BIT and Aza. EPA has reviewed PHMB, 4-t, BIT and Aza through the
public participation process that the Agency uses to involve the public
in developing pesticide reregistration and tolerance reassessment
decisions. Through these programs, EPA is ensuring that all pesticides
meet current health and safety standards.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 22, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number, by one of the following methods: For PHMB, docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0305; for 4-t, docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005 -0181; for BIT, docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0200; for Aza, docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0186.
     http://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Public Information and Records Integrity Branch
(PIRIB) (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20460-
0001.
     Hand delivery. Public Information and Records Integrity Branch
(PIRIB) (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental
Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall 2, 1801 S. Bell St.,
Arlington, VA, Attention: Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0305, for
PHMB; Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0181, for 4-t; Docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0200, for BIT; and Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-
0186, for Aza. The docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number
for the docket facility is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
     Instructions. Direct your comments by the specific docket ID
number- as listed above. EPA's policy is that all comments received
will be included in the public docket without change and may be made
available on-line at http://www.regulations.gov/, including any

personal information provided, unless the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through
regulations.gov or e-mail. The regulations.gov website is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be captured
automatically and included as part of the comment that is placed in the
public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an
electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD
ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit
the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/docket.htm/
.

     Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
regulation.gov index. Although, listed in the index, some information
is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
at http://www.regulations.gov/ or in hard copy at the Public

Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB) (7502C), Office of
Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119,
Crystal Mall 2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA. The docket
facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the docket facility
is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For PHMB, contact Jennifer Slotnick,
Antimicrobials Division (7510C), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For 4-t, contact ShaRon Carlisle, Antimicrobials Division (7510C),
Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703) 308-6427; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
     For BIT, contact Rebecca Miller, Antimicrobials Division (7510C),
Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703) 305-0012; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
     For Aza, contact ShaRon Carlisle, Antimicrobials Division (7510C),
Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(703) 308-6427; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

     This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide
users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution,
or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency
has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be
affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the

information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI). In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at

your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background

A. What Action is the Agency Taking?

     Under section 4 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), EPA is reevaluating existing pesticides to
ensure that they meet current scientific and regulatory standards. EPA
has completed a Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for the
pesticides PHMB, 4-t, BIT and Aza under section 4(g)(2)(A) of FIFRA.
     PHMB is used as a fungicide, algicide, and sanitizer in swimming
pools; preservative for cut flowers; materials preservative;
bacteriostat in industrial processes and water systems; and hard
surface disinfectant (food and non-food contact surfaces). End-use
products are formulated as soluble concentrates, as solids, as ready-
to-use solutions, and in water-soluble packaging.
     4-t is used in disinfectants, hard non-porous surface sanitizers
and air deodorizing products used in agricultural premises, in food
handling establishments, commercial, institutional and industrial
premises, residential, public access premises and in medical settings.
These products primarily are used on hard, non-porous surfaces (walls,
floors, tables, fixtures) textiles (clothing, diapers, mattresses and
bedding), carpets, medical instruments and agricultural equipment.
     BIT is an antimicrobial that is used as an industrial preservative
for the protection of water-based adhesives, caulks, sealants, grouts,
spackling, ready-mixed cements, ready-mixed wallboard compounds,
aqueous compositions such as emulsion paints, aqueous slurries, home
cleaning and car care products, laundry detergents, fabric softeners,
stain removers, inks, photographic processing solutions, paints and
stains, titanium dioxide slurries, oil in water emulsions, latices,
metalworking fluids, casein/rosin dispersions, textile spin-finish
solutions, pesticide formulations, tape joint compound, leather
processing solutions, preservation of fresh animal hides and skins, and
for offshore and terrestrial gas/oil drilling muds and packer fluids
preservation. BIT is also used as an inert ingredient in a variety of
products as a materials preservative. Exposures and risks from the use
of products containing BIT as both the active and inert ingredients are
assessed in this RED. End-use products are formulated as either a
soluble, ready-to-use, or flowable concentrates (all of which are
considered to be liquids). Aza consists of an equilibrium mixture of
three chemicals (I: 5-hydroxymethoxymethyl-1-aza-3,7-
dioxabicyclo(3,3,0)octane; II: 5-hydroxymethyl-1-aza-3,7-
dioxabicyclo(3,3,0)octane; III: 5-hydroxypoly(methylene-oxy)methyl-1-
aza-3,7-dioxabicyclo(3,3,0)octane). These chemicals cannot be divided
into components for individual testing and the three of them will be
referred to as azadioxabicyclooctane in the Reregistration Eligibilty
Decision. This mixture is registered as a preservative for
antimicrobial control in the following use sites: Oil recovery drilling
muds and flooding fluids; industrial adhesives and coatings (natural
based and synthetic); latex and polymer emulsions; metalworking cutting
fluids; latex paints; paper coatings; caulks and sealants; inks;
pigment dispersion and pigment slurry; and textile fiber finishes that
are not intended as clothing. Azadioxabicyclooctane has been cleared by
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use as an antibacterial
preservative in paper and paperboard products that are limited to dry
food contact only in 21 CFR 176.180 as well as a component in paper
adhesives in 21 CFR 175.105.
     EPA has determined that the data base to support reregistration is
substantially complete and that products containing PHMB, 4-t, BIT and
Aza are eligible for reregistration provided the risks are mitigated
either in the manner described in the RED or by another means that
achieves equivalent risk reduction. Upon submission of any required
product specific data under section 4(g)(2)(B) and any necessary
changes to the registration and labeling (either to address concerns
identified in the RED or as a result of product specific data), EPA
will make a final reregistration decision under section 4(g)(2)(C) for
products containing PHMB, 4-t, BIT and Aza.
     Although, the RED decisions were made in FY 04 (PHMB) and FY05 (4-
t, BIT and Aza), certain components of the documents, which did not
affect the final regulatory decisions, were undergoing final editing at
that time. None of these additions or changes alter the conclusions
documented in the PHMB, 4-t, BIT and Aza REDs now available for
comment.
     EPA is applying the principles of public participation to all
pesticides undergoing reregistration and tolerance reassessment. The
Agency's Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration; Public
Participation Process, published in the Federal Register on May 14,
2004, (69 FR 26819)(FRL-7357-9) explains that in conducting these
programs, EPA is tailoring its public participation process to be
commensurate with the level of risk, extent of use, complexity of
issues, and degree of public concern associated with each pesticide.
Due to its uses, risks, and other factors, PHMB, 4-t, BIT and Aza were
reviewed through the modified 4-Phase process. Through this process,
EPA worked extensively with stakeholders and the public to reach the
regulatory decisions for PHMB, 4-t, BIT and Aza.
     The reregistration program is being conducted under
Congressionally mandated time frames, and EPA recognizes the need both
to make timely decisions and to involve the public. The Agency is
issuing the PHMB, 4-t, BIT and Aza REDs for public comment. This
comment period is intended to provide an additional opportunity for
public input and a mechanism for initiating any necessary amendments to
the RED. All comments should be submitted using the methods in
ADDRESSES, and must be received by EPA on or before the closing date.
These comments will become part of the Agency Dockets for PHMB, 4-t,
BIT and Aza. Comments received after the close of the comment period
will be marked ''late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.
     The Agency will carefully consider all comments received by the
closing date and will provide a Response to Comments Memorandum in the
Docket and regulations.gov. If any comment significantly affects the
document, EPA also will publish an amendment to the RED in the Federal
Register. In the absence of substantive comments requiring changes, the
PHMB, 4-t, BIT and Aza REDs will be implemented as they are now
presented.

B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

     Section 4(g)(2) of FIFRA as amended directs that, after submission
of all data concerning a pesticide active ingredient, ``the
Administrator shall determine whether pesticides containing such active
ingredient are eligible for reregistration,'' before calling in product
specific data on individual end-use products and either reregistering
products or taking other ``appropriate regulatory action.''

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, pesticides and pests.

    Dated: March 9, 2006.
Frank Sanders,
Director, Antimicrobials Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 06-2711 Filed 3-21-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 107 (Friday, June 3, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35763-35766]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11967]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0204; FRL-9946-70-OAR]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request;
Information Collection Effort for Oil and Gas Facilities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to
submit an information collection request (ICR), ``Information
Collection Effort for Oil and Gas Facilities'' (EPA ICR No. 2548.01,
OMB Control No. 2060-NEW) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Before doing so, the EPA is soliciting
public comments on specific aspects of the proposed information
collection as described below. This is a request for approval of a new
collection of information. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before August 2, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2016-0204, online using http://www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), or by mail to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Brenda Shine, Sector Policies and
Programs Division, Refining and Chemicals Group (E143-01), Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this notice. The docket can be viewed online at
http://www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center (EPA/
DC, EPA WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-
1742. The telephone number for the public reading room is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, the EPA is soliciting
comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate 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; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through 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. The
EPA will consider the comments received and may amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval. At that time, the EPA will issue another Federal
Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the
opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.
    Abstract: Collectively, oil and gas facilities are the largest
industrial emitters of methane in the U.S. In January 2015, as part of
the Obama Administration's commitment to addressing climate change, the
EPA outlined a number of steps it plans to take to address methane and
smog-forming volatile organic compound

(VOC) emissions from the oil and gas industry. Concurrently with this
action, the EPA has promulgated new source performance standards (NSPS)
for the oil and gas industry to achieve both methane reductions and
additional reductions in VOCs (40 CFR part 60, subpart OOOOa). The EPA
has also committed to require standards of performance for existing oil
and gas sources. Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended,
provides a cooperative federalism approach to establishing standards of
performance for existing sources. Under this approach, the EPA
establishes guidelines that identify the emission performance states
must require their sources to achieve, and states then submit plans for
EPA review and approval, which establish standards of performance that
achieve that emissions performance.
    While a great deal of information is available on the oil and gas
industry and has to date provided a strong technical foundation to
support the Agency's recent actions, the EPA is now seeking more
specific information that would be of critical use in addressing CAA
section 111(d). Taking into account the large number of sources that a
national regulation development effort would need to consider, and the
potential for taking a different approach to addressing co-located
existing sources than was taken with new and modified sources, the EPA
requires information that will enable the development of effective
standards for this entire industry under CAA section 111(d). For new
sources, the CAA requires that standards apply to each new affected
facility upon startup. Conversely, without information allowing for
development of a pathway for phasing in standards, existing source
standards will likely apply to all regulated units at approximately the
same time. Currently there are hundreds of thousands of pieces of
equipment across the country in all kinds of different situations and
configurations. To determine how to efficiently and effectively address
emissions from this volume of sources in a timely, but administrable
manner, we need more comprehensive information that will improve our
understanding of what emission controls are being used (and perhaps
shared) in the field, how those are configured, the difficulty of
replacing or upgrading controls, how much time will be needed to
retrofit, what the likely costs of retrofitting are, whether
electricity or generating capacity is available, and how often sites
are staffed or visited. Such information will, for example, allow us to
ascertain if there are effective ways for affected facilities at well
sites, or other co-located facilities, to share emission controls, how
to balance the level of emission reductions with administering a
program of this size, and potential phase in opportunities. Additional
information will also support the Agency's effort to explore proposing
standards for new and modified units not currently covered by NSPS
OOOOa. Specifically, before proposing standards the EPA must assure
that it has adequate information to determine ``the best system of
emission reduction which (taking into account the cost of achieving
such reduction and any nonair quality health and environmental impact
and energy requirement) the Administrator determines has been
adequately demonstrated,'' (BSER) as well as the ``degree of emission
limitation achievable through the application of'' such system.
Currently, the EPA collects information on the greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions from oil and gas facilities under 40 CFR part 98, subpart W,
of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP). However, the GHGRP
does not collect information on design, performance, and costs of
emission controls. Such information is necessary to evaluate the scope,
design, and potential impact of future standards of performance for
existing oil and gas facility sources. There are also differences in
the definition of ``facility'' in the GHGRP for oil and gas production
facilities as compared to the way we have defined facility under our
regulations. As previously stated, ``the EPA's definition of `facility'
for purposes of 40 CFR part 98 in no way impacts the `facility'
definition for similar sources under existing CAA programs.'' 80 FR
64262, 64271. Additionally, certain states have moved forward with
their own rules and have developed information needed for their own
purposes, but this information is not sufficient for a national
rulemaking. Thus, it is necessary to collect specific information from
oil and gas production facilities both for existing sources and sources
not covered by the standards of performance for new and modified
sources to understand the number of affected facilities and to estimate
the facility-level impacts of potentially implementing existing source
standards of various designs.
    There will be two parts to the information collection. Part 1,
referred to as the operator survey, is specifically designed to obtain
information from onshore oil and gas production facilities to better
understand the number and types of equipment at production facilities.
Part 1 seeks to collect facility-level information (e.g., facility
name, location, contact information, and number of wells, tanks, and
compressors) using the definition of facility commonly employed when
permitting new and existing sources (i.e., all buildings, equipment,
structures, and other stationary equipment that are located on one or
more contiguous or adjacent properties and that are under common
ownership or control). Part 1 will be sent to all known operators of
oil and gas production wells and will allow the Agency to obtain the
information necessary to identify and categorize all potentially
affected oil and gas production facilities. The operators will complete
the Part 1 survey, including providing equipment counts for all
production facilities that they operate with the exception of
facilities selected to complete Part 2. Part 1 is not expected to
contain any CBI. This operator survey may be submitted either
electronically or through hard copy responses. The submission requires
the owner or operator to certify that the information being provided is
accurate and complete.
    Part 2, referred to as the detailed facility survey, will be sent
to selected oil and gas facilities across the different industry
segments. Specifically, these industry segments include onshore
production, gathering and boosting, processing, compression/
transmission, pipeline, natural gas storage, and liquefied natural gas
(LNG) storage and import/export facilities. This ICR will not collect
information from offshore production facilities or from local natural
gas distribution facilities. Due to the large number of potentially
affected facilities, Part 2 uses a statistical sampling method
considering each industry segment (and groupings of facilities in the
production segment) to be separate sampling populations. Thus, a
statistically significant number of facilities within each industry
segment (or ``population'') will be required to complete the Part 2
detailed facility survey.
    Developing an appropriate sampling size for the onshore production
industry is complicated by the number of factors that could impact the
types of processes or equipment present at the site and the magnitude
of emissions from these sources. Therefore, the Agency considered
further stratification of the production industry segment into separate
populations based on differences in the type of well (oil or natural
gas, vertical or horizontal

drilling, or further distinctions based on gas-to-oil ratio), the type
of formation, and the production basin. At this time, the Agency has
limited information on means to characterize individual facilities or
wells by formation type or well drilling type (vertical versus
horizontal wells). However, the Agency does have estimates of the
number of wells in a given basin and has estimates of the gas-to-oil
ratio (GOR), from which we designate well type for nearly all wells.
Therefore, the Agency considered two options for establishing different
populations within the production segment: Option 1, which is based on
the well type using GOR ranges, and Option 2, which is based on
regional groupings of basins.
    Option 1, which considers populations based on well types, defines
the following five populations based on GOR:

1. Heavy Oil (GOR <= 300 standard cubic feet per barrel, scf/bbl)
2. Light Oil (300 < GOR <= 100,000 scf/bbl)
3. Wet Gas (100,000 < GOR <= 1,000,000 scf/bbl)
4. Dry Gas (GOR > 1,000,000 scf/bbl)
5. Coal Bed Methane

    Most of these well type categories have historical significance,
such as the GOR of 300 scf/bbl included in the applicability of the Oil
and Gas NSPS requirements for well completions (40 CFR part 60, subpart
OOOOa) and the GOR of 100,000 scf/bbl delineation between oil and gas
wells used in the U.S. Emissions Inventory for GHG Sources and Sinks.
The delineation between ``wet'' and ``dry'' gas wells was developed for
this ICR to gain information on ``wet'' gas wells because these gas
wells have been found to have higher VOC content and, as such, are of
particular interest in this information collection effort.
    Option 2, which considers regional groupings of basins, defines the
following five populations based on basins (geological provinces)
defined by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists:

1. East: Basins 100 to 190
2. South: Basins 200 to 290 and Basin 400
3. Midwest: Basins 300 to 395
4. West Texas: Basins 405 to 440
5. West: Basins 445 to 895

    Option 1 (populations based on well type) will ensure that a
statistically significant number of each well type is sampled. This is
important because there are fewer wet gas wells and coal bed methane
gas wells than heavy oil, light oil, or dry gas wells. However, because
of the differences in the number of wells within each population,
analyses using the data must use these classifications (or weighting
factors) to develop nationwide assessments. The regional populations
are more similar to each other in terms of the number of wells in each
region, but weighting factors would still be required to perform
nationwide assessments separate from these defined regions.
    Based on a desire to have no more than a 10-percent error (i.e., +/
-10 percent) in the estimate of an average value at a 95-percent
confidence interval and 90-percent power to differentiate an effect
size of 0.2, the target number of samples required for large
populations was determined to be 385 (additional detail regarding the
determination of the target sample size using the statistical sampling
approach is provided in Part B of the Supporting Statement for this
ICR, which is included in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0204 at http://www.regulations.gov). Consequently, because the number of production
facilities in each population is relatively large compared to the
target sample size, the overall costs of the two survey options for
production facilities are nearly identical. We are specifically
requesting comment on these two options for developing population
categories within the production industry. We recognize that other
alternatives may be viable, such as defining the entire production
industry as one population and developing sampling requirements based
on the accuracy and precision needed to characterize any subcategory of
the production population that represents, for example, 20 percent of
the total production wells. In this example, 1,925 (5 x 385) samples
from the production population would be required. All respondents would
have equal weight, so analyses could be conducted without having to
consider weighting factors, but analyses for categories of wells with
less than 20 percent of the population would have less accuracy and
precision. As there are many potential factors to consider for the
production population, we also request comment on other potential
methods to define populations of production wells in order to
adequately characterize the various potentially important differences
in production facilities.
    Part 2 will collect detailed unit-specific information on emission
sources at the facility and any emission control devices or management
practices used to reduce emissions. Most of the information requested
under Part 2 is expected to be available from company records and would
not require additional measurements to be performed. However, selected
data elements must be completed based on actual component equipment
counts (specifically, pneumatic device counts and equipment leak
component counts) or measurement data (specifically, separator/storage
vessel flash analyses). If this information is not directly available
for a facility, the respondent will be required to collect and report
this information (count equipment components and/or sample and analyze
tank feed streams) as part of this information collection. Part 2 is
expected to include information that oil and gas facilities consider to
be confidential and the survey must be completed and submitted
electronically via the EPA's Electronic Greenhouse Gas Reporting Tool
(e-GGRT).
    The data collected throughout this process will be used to
determine the number of potentially affected emission sources and the
types and prevalence of emission controls or emission reduction
measures used for these sources at existing oil and gas facilities,
among other purposes. This information may also be used to fill data
gaps, to evaluate the emission and cost impacts of various regulatory
options, and to establish appropriate standards of performance for oil
and gas facilities.
    If OMB approves this ICR, respondents will be required to respond
under the authority of section 114 of the CAA. The EPA anticipates
issuing the CAA section 114 letters by October 30, 2016. These letters
would require the owner/operator of an oil and gas facility to complete
the Part 1 survey within 30 days of receipt of the survey, and would
require facilities to complete the Part 2 survey with 120 days of
receipt.
    The Agency has reviewed the draft surveys applying the
confidentiality determination methods established for data reporting
under the GHGRP as a model, as well as the policy notice entitled
``Disclosure of Emission Data Claimed as Confidential Under Sections
110 and 114(c) of the Clean Air Act (56 FR 7042, February 21, 1991.)
The EPA has developed proposed determinations of the data elements in
the surveys that may be considered CBI. These proposed determinations
are included in the information being supplied for public review and
comment in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0204 at http://www.regulations.gov. Confidentiality designations will be made
according to the provisions set forth in title 40, Code of Regulations
part 2, subpart B--Confidentiality of Business Information. Any
information subsequently determined to constitute a trade secret will
be protected under 18 U.S.C. 1905.

    Form Numbers: Production Operator Survey (Part 1); Detailed
Facility Survey (Part 2).
    Respondents/affected entities: Respondents affected by this action
are owners/operators of oil and natural gas facilities. Part 1 of this
ICR is specifically requesting information for facilities in the
onshore petroleum and natural gas production industry segment. Part 2
of this ICR is specifically requesting information for facilities in
the following industry segments: Onshore petroleum and natural gas
production, onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting,
onshore natural gas processing, onshore natural gas transmission
compression, onshore natural gas transmission pipelines, underground
natural gas storage, LNG storage and LNG import and export equipment.
The ICR is not requesting information for the offshore petroleum and
natural gas production industry segment or from the natural gas (local)
distribution industry segment.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: The information collection in
Parts 1 and 2 is being conducted by the EPA's Office of Air and
Radiation pursuant to section 114 of the CAA, to assist the
Administrator of the EPA in developing emissions standards for oil and
natural gas facilities pursuant to the CAA.
    Estimated number of respondents: The estimated number of
respondents for Part 1 is 22,500 operators representing approximately
698,800 facilities (total). The estimated number of respondents for
Part 2 is 3,385.
    Frequency of response: This is a one-time survey.
    Total estimated burden: The estimated industry burden is 116,438
hours for Part 1 and 111,485 hours for Part 2. Therefore, the
cumulative industry burden for all parts of this ICR is estimated to be
227,923 hours. The estimated cumulative Agency burden to administer
this ICR (all parts) is 17,947 hours. Burden is defined at 5 CFR
1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: The estimated costs for the oil and natural
gas industry is $16,476,182 for Part 1 and $23,673,312 for Part 2. The
resulting total industry costs for all parts of this ICR is estimated
to be $40,149,494, which includes $11,302,500 in operating and
maintenance (O&M) costs to cover mailing hard copies of Part 1
responses and contracting services for storage vessel feed material
flashing analyses as part of Part 2 responses. The estimated cumulative
Agency costs to administer this ICR (all parts) is $960,793, which
includes $144,618 in O&M costs to send certified CAA section 114
letters to all respondents selected for Part 1 and Part 2 surveys with
electronic return receipt.
    Changes in Estimates: This is a new ICR, so this section does not
apply.

    Dated: May 12, 2016.
Peter Tsirigotis,
Director, Sector Policies and Programs Division, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2016-11967 Filed 6-2-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: November 18, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 221)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 59475]
[DOCID:fr18no09-1]

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0405; Airspace Docket No. 09-ASW-12]

Amendment of Class D and Class E Airspace; New Orleans NAS, LA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action corrects the geographic coordinates of a final
rule that was published in the Federal Register October 16, 2009,
amending Class D and Class E airspace at New Orleans NAS, Alvin
Callender Field, LA.

DATES: Effective December 17, 2009. The Director of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR
Part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone (817) 321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On October 16, 2009, the FAA published in the Federal Register a
final rule amending Class D and Class E airspace at New Orleans NAS,
Alvin Callender Field, LA (74 FR 53161, Docket No. FAA-2009-0405).
Subsequent to publication, an error was discovered in the geographic
coordinates for the airport's Class D and Class E airspace area. This
action corrects that error. Class D and E airspace designations are
published in paragraph 5000 and 6002, respectively, of FAA Order
7400.9T signed August 27, 2009, and effective September 15, 2009, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1. The Class D and Class
E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the
geographic coordinates for the Class D and Class E airspace areas at
New Orleans NAS, Alvin Callender Field, LA, as published in the Federal
Register October 16, 2009 (74 FR 53161), (FR Doc. E9-24626; page 53162,
column 2), are corrected as follows:

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

* * * * *

ASW LA D New Orleans NAS, Alvin Callender Field, LA [Corrected]

    By removing ``(Lat. 29[deg]49'31'' N., long. 90[deg]02'06'' W.)
and substituting (Lat. 29[deg]49'38''N., long. 90[deg]01'36'' W.)
* * * * *

ASW LA E2 New Orleans NAS, Alvin Callender Field, LA [Corrected]

    By removing ``(Lat. 29[deg]49'31'' N., long. 90[deg]02'06'' W.)
and substituting (Lat. 29[deg]49'38'' N., long. 90[deg]01'36'' W.)
* * * * *

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on October 30, 2009.
Anthony D. Roetzel,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. E9-27515 Filed 11-17-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:I have completely quit smoking cigarettes since starting e-cigs 2 years ago.  my health, breathing and oxygen levels are up to 97%.  The stroke I had 3 years ago was a wakeup call to do something different. regulating e-cigs usually means more taxes which I can't afford.  there is no second hand smoke like with cigarettes and whoever is calling for regulation is just afraid of losing control over us ex smokers.

I ask that the comment period remain open for 180 days


PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBMISSION Please read the instructions before completing this form. For additional forms or assistance in completing this form, contact your agency's Paperwork Clearance Officer. Send two copies of this form, the collection instrument to be reviewed, the Supporting Statement and any additional documentation to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW Washington, DC 20503.

1. Agency/ Subagency originating request USEPA/ Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance 2. OMB control number b. G None a. 2060 0096 __ __ __ __

3. Type of information collection ( check one) a. G New collection b. G Revision of a currently approved collection c. X Extension of a currently approved collection d. G Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired e. G Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired f. G Existing collection in use without an OMB control number 4. Type of review requested ( check one) a. X Regular b. G Emergency  Approval requested by: / / c. G Delegated 5. Small entities Will this information collection have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? G Yes X No For b f, note item A2 of Supporting Statement Instructions 6. Requested expiration date a. X Three years from approval date b. G Other Specify: / /___

7. Title Source Compliance and State Action Reporting ( Renewal)

8. Agency form number( s) ( If applicable) ICR 0107.08 9. Keywords: AFS, MDR, Minimum Data Requirement, Air Facility System, Subparts, PPDEs, Stack Test Pollutants, HPV, High Priority Violator, CAA, Clean Air Act, Discovery Date, Violation Type Code 10. Abstract Source Compliance and State Action Reporting is an activity whereby State, District, Local, and Commonwealth governments ( hereafter referred to as " States/ locals" or " State and local agencies") make air compliance information available to the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA or the Agency) on a cyclic basis via input to the Air Facility System ( AFS) of the Aerometric Information Retrieval System ( AIRS). The information provided to EPA includes compliance activities and determinations, and enforcement activities. EPA uses this information to assess progress toward meeting emission requirements developed under the authority of the Clean Air Act ( CAA or the Act) to protect and maintain the atmospheric environment and the public health. The EPA and many of the State and local agencies access the data in AFS to assist them in the management of their air pollution control programs. This renewal information collection request ( ICR) affects oversight of approximately 41,500 stationary sources from 93 State and local agencies and the Federal EPA, and is expected to require 144,089 labor hours per year and cost approximately $ 5.5 million annually. State and local agency burdens and costs alone are estimated as 110,809 hours and approximately $ 3.7 million annually. On average, this burden amounts to approximately one third of a full time equivalent employee for each small State and local agency, three fourths of a full time equivalent employee for each medium sized State and Local Agency and one and one third of full time equivalent employees for each large sized State and Local Agency for national reporting of compliance and enforcement related data under all of the applicable Clean Air Act programs. In order to lessen the burden of these new data requirements, the implementation of this ICR will be effective on October 1, 2005.

11. Affected public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Individuals or households d. Farms b. Business or other for profit e. X Federal Government c. Not for profit institutions f. P State, Local or Tribal Government 12. Obligation to respond ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. X Voluntary b. G Required to obtain or retain benefits c. P Mandatory 13. Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden a. Number of respondents 93 b. Total annual responses 558 1. Percentage of these responses collected electronically 100_ % c. Total hours requested 110,809 d. Current OMB inventory 85,496 e. Difference 25,313 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program Change 28,074 2. Adjustment  2,761 14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden ( in thousands of dollars) a. Total annualized capital/ startup costs $ 0 b. Total annual costs ( O& M) $ 0 c. Total annualized cost requested $ 0 d. Current OMB inventory $ 0 e. Difference $ 0 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program change $ 0 2. Adjustment $ 0 15. Purpose of information collection ( Mark Primary With " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Application for benefits e. x Program planning or management b. x Program evaluation f. Research c. x General purpose statistics g. P Regulatory or compliance d. X_ Audit 16. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting ( check all that apply) a. Q Recordkeeping b. Q Third party disclosure c. X Reporting 1. Q On occasion 2. Q Weekly 3. Q Monthly 4. Q Quarterly 5. Q Semi annually 6. Q Annually 7. Q Biannually 8. X Other ( describe) 6x per year 17. Statistical methods Does this information collection employ statistical methods?

Q Yes X No 18. Agency contact ( person who can best answer questions regarding the content of this submission) Name: Betsy Metcalf Phone: ( 202) 564 5962 OMB 83 I 10/ 95 19. Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions On behalf of this Federal agency, I certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with' 5 CFR 1320.9.

NOTE: The text of 5 CFR 1320.9, and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3), appear at the end of the instructions. The certification is to be made with reference to those regulatory provisions as set forth in the instructions.

The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:

( a) It is necessary for the proper performance of agency functions;

( b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

( c) It reduces burden on small entities;

( d) It uses plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology that is understandable to respondents;

( e) Its implementation will be consistent and compatible with current reporting and recordkeeping practices;

( f) It indicates the retention periods for recordkeeping requirements;

( g) It informs respondents of the information called for under 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3):

( i) Why the information is being collected; ( ii) Use of information; ( iii) Burden estimate; ( iv) Nature of response ( voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory); ( v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and ( vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;

( h) It was developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected ( see note in Item 19 of the instructions);

( i) It uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology; and ( j) It makes appropriate use of information technology.

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement. Signature of Program Official David Hindin, Director Enforcement, Targeting & Data Division Office of Compliance Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Date Signature of Senior Official or designee Oscar Morales, Director Collection Strategies Division Office of Environmental Information Date OMB 83 I 10/ 95 Certification Requirement for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions 5 CFR 1320.9 reads " As part of the agency submission to OMB of a proposed collection of information, the agency ( through the head of the agency, the Senior Official or their designee) shall certify ( and provide a record supporting such certification) that the proposed collection of information

"( a) is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including that the information to be collected will have practical utility;

"( b) is not unnecessarily duplicative of information otherwise reasonably accessible to the agency;

"( c) reduces to the extent practicable and appropriate the burden on persons who shall provide information to or for the agency, including with respect to small entities, as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act 5 U. S. C. § 601( 6)), the use of such techniques as:

"( 1) establishing differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to those who are to respond; "( 2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements; or collection of information , or any part thereof; "( 3) an exemption from coverage of the collection of information, or any part thereof;

"( d) is written using plain, coherent, and unambiguous terminology and is understandable to those who are to respond;

"( e) is to be implemented in ways consistent and compatible, to the maximum extent practicable, with the existing reporting and recordkeeping practices of those who are to respond;

"( f) indicates for each recordkeeping requirement the length of time persons are required to maintain the records specified;

"( g) informs potential respondents of the information called for under § 1320.8( b)( 3); [ see below]

"( h) has been developed by an office that has planned and allocated resources for the efficient and effective management and use of the information to be collected, including the processing of the information in a manner which shall enhance, where appropriate, the utility of the information to agencies and the public;

"( i) uses effective and efficient statistical survey methodology appropriate to the purpose for which the information is to be collected; and "( j) to the maximum extent practicable, uses appropriate information technology to reduce burden and improve data quality, agency efficiency and responsiveness to the public."

NOTE: 5 CFR 1320.8( b)( 3) requires that each collection of information:

"( 3) informs and provides reasonable notice to the potential persons to whom the collection of information is addressed of:

"( i) the reasons the information is planned to be and/ or has been used to further the proper performance of the functions of the agency; "( ii) the way such information is planned to be and/ or has been used to further the proper performance of the functions of the agency; "( iii) an estimate, to the extent practicable, of the average burden of the collection ( together with a request that the public direct to the agency any comments concerning the accuracy of this burden estimate and any suggestions for reducing this burden); "( iv) whether responses to the collection of information are voluntary, required to obtain or retain a benefit ( citing authority), or mandatory ( citing authority); "( v) the nature and extent of confidentiality to be provided, if any ( citing authority); and "( vi) the fact that any agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number." OMB 83 I ( Instructions) 10/ 95


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 14 (Wednesday, January 22, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 3679]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00981]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-10003-88-Region 6]

Notice of Availability of Final Designation of Certain Stormwater
Discharges in the State of New Mexico Under the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System of the Clean Water Act

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Regional Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency Region 6 (EPA) is providing notice of the availability of EPA's
final determination that storm water discharges from the Los Alamos
Urban Cluster (as defined by the 2010 Decennial Census) and Los Alamos
National Laboratory (LANL) property are contributing to violations of
New Mexico water quality standards (WQS) and require National Pollutant
Elimination System (NPDES) permit coverage under the Clean Water Act
(CWA). This action is in response to a June 30, 2014 petition filed
with EPA by Amigos Bravos entitled ``A Petition by Amigos Bravos for a
Determination that Storm Water Discharges in Los Alamos County
Contribute to Water Quality Standards Violations and Require a Clean
Water Act Permit.''

DATES: EPA's Designation Decision and Record of Decision in Response to
Petition by Amigo Bravos for a Determination that Stormwater Discharges
in Los Alamos County Contribute to Water Quality Standards Violations
and Require a Clean Water Act Permit (``EPA's Decision Document'') was
signed on December 16, 2019.

ADDRESSES: For further information contact Ms. Evelyn Rosborough via
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or may be mailed to Ms. Evelyn
Rosborough, Environmental Protection Agency, Water Division (6WQ-NP),
1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, TX 75270.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA is providing notice of availability of
its final determination that stormwater discharges from MS4s located in
the portion of Los Alamos County within the Los Alamos Urban Cluster
(as defined by the 2010 Decennial Census) and on Los Alamos National
Laboratory (LANL) property within Los Alamos County and Santa Fe County
are contributing to violations of New Mexico water quality standards
(WQS) and require NPDES permit coverage. EPA's final designation
determination is made pursuant to the authority of CWA Sec.
402(p)(2)(E) and 40 CFR 122.26(a)(9)(i)(D) and 122.26(f)(2). CWA Sec.
402(p)(2)(E) and 40 CFR 122.26 (a)(9)(i)(D) allow EPA to designate for
NPDES permit coverage stormwater discharges that EPA determines are
contributing to violations of WQS, but are not otherwise required to be
permitted under EPA's stormwater regulations.
    Details of EPA's final designation determination are available in
EPA's Decision Document. EPA's Decision Document and ancillary
materials may be viewed on the EPA Region 6 web page at https://www.epa.gov/npdes/epas-residual-designation-authority.

    Issued on: Dated: December 16, 2019.
Ken McQueen,
Regional Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2020-00981 Filed 1-21-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 159 (Thursday, August 18, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50868-50870]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17794]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2022-0209]

National Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee; September
2022 Meeting

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice of federal advisory committee meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The National Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee
(Committee) will conduct a series of meetings over three days in Dania
Beach, FL to discuss issues relating to personnel in the United States
Merchant Marine including the training, qualifications, certification,
documentation, and fitness of mariners.

DATES:
    Meetings: The National Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee
is scheduled to meet on Wednesday, September 7, 2022, from 9:00 a.m.
until 4:30 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT), Thursday, September 8,
2022, from 9:00 a.m. until 4:30 p.m. (EDT), and Friday, September 9,
2022, from 9:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. (EDT). Committee meetings on
Wednesday, September 7, and Thursday, September 8, will include periods
during which the Committee will break into subcommittees. These
meetings may adjourn early if the Committee has completed its business.
    Comments and supporting documentation: To ensure your comments are
received by Committee members before the meeting, submit your written
comments no later than August 24, 2022.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the STAR Center, 2 West Dixie
Highway, Dania Beach, FL 33004, additional information about the
facility can be found at: www.star-center.com.
    Pre-registration Information: Pre-registration is required for in-
person access to the meeting. If you are not a member of the Committee
and do not represent the Coast Guard, you must request in-person
attendance by contacting the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice.
    Attendees at the meeting will be required to follow COVID-19 safety
guidelines promulgated by the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), which may include the need to wear masks and the
completion of STAR Center's pre-arrival questionnaire for visitors,
which can be accessed at

(www.star-center.com). You may be asked to show this form when entering
the facility. Masks will be provided for attendees upon request. CDC
guidance on COVID protocols can be found here: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/communication/guidance.html.
    The National Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee is
committed to ensuring all participants have equal access regardless of
disability status. If you require reasonable accommodation due to a
disability to fully participate, please email Mrs. Megan Johns Henry at
[email protected] or call at<PHONE_NUMBER> as soon as possible.
    Instructions: You are free to submit comments at any time,
including orally at the meetings as time permits, but if you want
Committee members to review your comment before the meeting, please
submit your comments no later than August 24, 2022. We are particularly
interested in comments on the issues in the ``Agenda'' section below.
We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, email the individual in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for
alternate instructions. You must include the docket number USCG-2022-
0209. Comments received will be posted without alteration at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For
more about privacy and submissions in response to this document, see
DHS's eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11,
2020). If you encounter technical difficulties with comment submission,
contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this notice.
    Docket Search: Documents mentioned in this notice as being
available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online
docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following
that website's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online
docket and sign-up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments
are posted.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs. Megan Johns Henry, Alternate
Designated Federal Officer of the National Merchant Marine Personnel
Advisory Committee, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of these meetings is in compliance
with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. appendix). The
National Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee is authorized by
section 601 of the Frank LoBiondo Act of 2018, and is codified in 46
U.S.C. 15103. The Committee operates under the provisions of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. appendix), and 46 U.S.C.
15109. The National Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee
provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Homeland
Security through the Commandant of the United States Guard on matters
relating to personnel in the United States Merchant Marine including
the training, qualifications, certification, documentation, and fitness
of mariners.

Agenda

    The National Merchant Marine Personnel Advisory Committee will meet
on Wednesday, September 7, 2022, Thursday, September 8, 2022, and
Friday, September 9, 2022 to review, discuss, deliberate and formulate
recommendations, as appropriate on the following topics:

Day 1

    The agenda for the September 7, 2022 meeting is as follows:
    (1) The full Committee will meet briefly to discuss the
subcommittees' business/task statements, which are listed under
paragraph (9) under Day 3 below.
    (2) During the morning session of the meeting, the full Committee
will meet to discuss Workforce Issues and the Mariner Shortage.
    (3) During the afternoon session of the meeting, subcommittees will
then separately address and work on the following task statements,
which are available for viewing at https://homeport.uscg.mil/missions/federal-advisory-committees/national-merchant-marine-personnel-advisory-committee- (nmerpac);
    (a) Task Statement 21-4, STCW Convention and STCW Code Review;
    (b) Task Statement 21-5, Review of Merchant Mariner Rating and
Officer Endorsement Job Task Analyses, including amendment Task
Statement 21-5A, JTA to Mass Mapping; and
    (c) Task Statement 21-9, Sexual Harassment and Sexual Assault-
Prevention and Culture Change in the Merchant Marine.
    (4) Report of subcommittees. At end of the day, the Chair or Co-
Chairs of the subcommittees will report to the full Committee on what
was accomplished. The full Committee will not take action on this date
and the Chair or Co-Chairs of the subcommittees will present a full
report to the Committee on Day 3 of the meeting.
    (5) Adjournment of meeting.

Day 2

    The agenda for the September 8, 2022 meeting is as follows:
    (1) The full Committee will meet briefly to discuss the
subcommittees' business/task statements, which are listed under
paragraph (9) under Day 3 below.
    (2) During the morning session of the meeting, subcommittees will
then separately address and work on the following task statements,
which are available for viewing at https://homeport.uscg.mil/missions/federal-advisory-committees/national-merchant-marine-personnel-advisory-committee- (nmerpac);
    (a) Task Statement 21-4, STCW Convention and STCW Code Review;
    (b) Task Statement 21-5, Review of Merchant Mariner Rating and
Officer Endorsement Job Task Analyses, including amendment Task
Statement 21-5A, JTA to Mass Mapping; and
    (c) Task Statement 21-9, Sexual Harassment and Sexual Assault.
Prevention and Culture Change in the Merchant Marine.
    (3) During the afternoon session of the meeting, subcommittees will
then separately address and work on the following task statements,
which are available for viewing at https://homeport.uscg.mil/missions/federal-advisory-committees/national-merchant-marine-personnel-advisory-committee- (nmerpac);
    (a) Task Statement 21-4, STCW Convention and STCW Code Review;
    (b) Task Statement 21-2, Communications Between External
Stakeholders and the Mariner Credentialing Program; and
    (c) Task Statement 21-9, Sexual Harassment and Sexual Assault,
Prevention and Culture Change in the Merchant Marine.
    (4) Report of subcommittees. At end of the day, the Chair or Co-
Chairs of the subcommittees will report to the full Committee on what
was accomplished. The full Committee will not take action on this date
and the Chair or Co-Chairs of the subcommittees will present a full
report to the Committee on Day 3 of the meeting.
    (5) Adjournment of meeting.

Day 3

    The agenda for the September 9, 2022 meeting is as follows:
    (1) Introduction.
    (2) Designated Federal Officer remarks.
    (3) Roll call of Committee members and determination of a quorum.

    (4) Adoption of the agenda.
    (5) Acceptance of Minutes from Committee Meeting Two (May 3, 2022).
    (6) Remarks from U.S. Coast Guard Leadership.
    (7) Introduction of new task.
    (8) Introduction of task addendum.
    (9) U.S. Coast Guard presentations.
    (10) Reports from the subcommittee Chair or Co-Chairs. The
Committee will review the information presented on the following Task
Statements and deliberate on any recommendations presented by the
subcommittees, recommendations may be approved and completed tasks may
be closed. Official action on these topics may be taken:
    (a) Task Statement 21-1, Review of IMO Model Courses Being
Validated by the IMO HTW Subcommittee
    (b) Task Statement 21-2, Communication Between External
Stakeholders and the Mariner Credentialing Program, including amendment
Task Statement 21-2A, Reviewing Assessments in NVICS for STCW;
    (c) Task Statement 21-3, Military Education, Training, and
Assessment for STCW and National Mariner Endorsements;
    (d) Task Statement 21-04, STCW Convention and STCW Code Review;
    (e) Task Statement 21-5, Review of Merchant Mariner Rating and
Officer Endorsement Job Task Analyses, including amendment Task
Statement 21-5A, JTA to Mass Mapping;
    (f) Task Statement 21-6, Sea Service for Merchant Mariner
Credential Endorsements;
    (g) Task Statement 21-8, Remote Operators of Maritime Autonomous
Surface Ships;
    (h) Task Statement 21-9, Sexual Harassment and Sexual Assault-
Prevention and Culture Change in the Merchant Marine;
    (i) Task Statement 22-1, Propulsion Power Limits; and
    (j) Task Statement 22-2, Alternative Methods for Meeting STCW
Training Requirements at the Operational Level.
    (11) Public comment period.
    (12) Closing remarks.
    (13) Adjournment of meeting.
    A copy of all meeting documentation will be available at https://homeport.uscg.mil/missions/federal-advisory-committees/national-merchant-marine-personnel-advisory-committee-(nmerpac) by August 24,
2022. Alternatively, you may contact the individual noted in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above.
    Public comments or questions will be taken throughout the meetings
as the Committee discusses the issues, and prior to deliberations and
voting. There will also be a public comment period at the end of the
meeting on September 9, 2022 at approximately 2:30 p.m. (EDT). Public
comments will be limited to 3 minutes per speaker. Please note that the
public comments period will end following the last call for comments.
    Please contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to register as a speaker.

    Dated: August 15, 2022.
Jeffrey G. Lantz,
Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2022-17794 Filed 8-17-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 24, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11120-11122]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03536]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2021-0034]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Duluth-Superior Harbor, Duluth, MN and Superior, WI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
certain waters of Duluth-Superior Harbor encompassed by a box from
Connor's Point Marina in Superior, WI to Rice's Point in Duluth, MN and
extending 100 yards from four (4) barges placed across the waterway.
This action is necessary to protect the safety of life on these
navigable waters of Duluth-Superior Harbor near the Blatnik Bridge for
an extreme sports event. This rulemaking would prohibit persons,
vehicles, and vessels from entering, transiting, or anchoring in the
safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Duluth or a
designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective February 24, 2021 through March 5, 2021.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2021-0034 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 about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email LT Abbie Lyons, Chief, Incident
Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; 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

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 the temporary rule takes place after
the closure of the Sault Saint Marie Locks on a frozen waterway with no
anticipated vessel traffic. Further, delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable because immediate action is needed to
respond to the potential safety hazards associated with the events
taking place during Red Bull's filming of the snowmachine stunts across
the waterway.
    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. For the same reasons discussed in
the preceeding paragraph, waiting for a 30-day notice period to run
would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest.

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 Duluth
(COTP) has determined that this rule is necessary to protect the safety
of people, vessels, vehicles, and the navigable waters within the
safety zone immediately before, during, and after the scheduled event.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    The COTP establishing a safety zone from 9 a.m. through 4 p.m.
daily from February 25, 2021 through March 5, 2021. The safety zone
covers all navigable waters from Connor's Point Marina, along the
Blatnik Bridge (Interstate 535 Bridge) to Rice's Point Landing,
extending 100 yards on either side of the barges along the waterway.
The duration of the zone is intended to protect the safety of persons,
vehicles, vessels, and these navigable waters immediately before,
during, and after the scheduled event. No vessel, vehicle, or person
would 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 NPRM has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, the NPRM 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 on the size,
location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. There is no
expected vessel traffic on Lake Superior due to the closure of the
Sault Saint Marie Locks and buildup of ice. Moreover, the Coast Guard
would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM marine channel 16
about the zone, and under certain conditions, the rule would allow
vessels to transit to seek permission to enter the zone from the COTP
or a designated representative.

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
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    There is no expected vessel traffic on Lake Superior due to the
closure of the Sault Saint Marie Locks and buildup of ice, so there
this proposed rule would 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 proposed rule
involves a safety zone lasting four hours over six consecutive days
that would prohibit entry within 100 yards of the barges alongside
Blatnik Bridge (Interstate 535 Bridge). Normally such actions are
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of
Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. We
seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a
significant environmental impact from this proposed rule.

G. Protest Activities

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

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 is
proposing to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority: 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.T09-0034 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T09-0034  Safety Zone; Duluth-Superior Harbor, Duluth, MN and
Superior, WI.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of
Duluth-Superior Harbor, from surface to bottom, encompassed by a box
from Connor's Point Marina in Superior, WI to Rice's

Point in Duluth, MN extending 100 yards from the four (4) barges placed
across the waterway.
    (b) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within
this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port (COTP) Duluth or a designated on-scene representative.
    (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the COTP Duluth or a designated on-scene
representative.
    (3) The ``on-scene representative'' of the COTP Duluth is any Coast
Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been designated by
the COTP Duluth to act on his behalf.
    (4) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP Duluth or the
COTP Duluth's representative by contacting Station Duluth at 218-529-
3100. 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.
    (c) Enforcement periods. This section will be enforced from 9 a.m.
through 4 p.m. daily from February 25, 2021 through March 5, 2021.

    Dated: February 17, 2021.
Frances M. Smith,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Duluth.
[FR Doc. 2021-03536 Filed 2-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 186 (Tuesday, September 25, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 59027]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23541]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Form N-Q, OMB Control No. 3235-0578, SEC File No. 270-519.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the
collection of information summarized below. The Commission plans to
submit this existing collection of information to the Office of
Management and Budget for extension and approval.
    Form N-Q (17 CFR 249.332 and 274.130) is a combined reporting form
that is used for reports of registered management investment companies
(``funds''), other than small business investment companies registered
on Form N-5, under Section 30(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940
(15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq.) (``Investment Company Act'') and Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et
seq.). Pursuant to Rule 30b1-5 under the Investment Company Act, funds
are required to file with the Commission quarterly reports on Form N-Q
not more than 60 days after the close of the first and third quarters
of each fiscal year containing their complete portfolio holdings.
    Form N-Q contains collection of information requirements. The
respondents to this information collection are management investment
companies subject to Rule 30b1-5 under the Investment Company Act. We
estimate that there are 10,453 portfolios required to file reports on
Form N-Q. Based on conversations with industry representatives, we
estimate that it takes approximately 21 hours per portfolio to prepare
Form N-Q. Accordingly, we estimate that the total annual burden
estimated associated with Form N-Q is 219,513 hours (21 hours per
portfolio x 10,453 portfolios) per year. The estimates of average
burden hours are made solely for the purposes of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and are not derived from
a comprehensive or even representative survey or study of the cost of
Commission rules and forms. The collection of information under Form N-
Q is mandatory. The information provided by the form is not kept
confidential. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays
a currently valid control number.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information will
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of
the burden of the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Thomas Bayer, Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312; or send an
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: September 19, 2012.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-23541 Filed 9-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P