[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 12, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21578-21579]
[FR Doc No: 2016-08331]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0764]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Animal Feed Regulatory Program Standards

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an
opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain
information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the
Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information,
including each proposed extension of an existing collection of
information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the
notice. This notice solicits comments on FDA's Animal Feed Regulatory
Program Standards (AFRPS).

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection
of information by June 13, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to http://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions):Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Division of
Dockets Management, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2013-N-0764 for ``Animal Feed Regulatory Program Standards.''
Received comments will be placed in the docket and, except for those
submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Division of Dockets Management between 9
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION''. The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on http://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Division of Dockets Management. If you do not
wish your name and contact information to be made publicly available,
you can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body
of your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/dockets/default.htm.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal
Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information,
before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with
this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection
of information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Animal Feed Regulatory Program Standards--(OMB 0910-0760)--Extension

I. Background

    In the United States, Federal and State Government Agencies ensure
the safety of animal feed. FDA is responsible for ensuring that all
food and feed moving in interstate commerce, except those

under the U.S. Department of Agriculture jurisdiction, are safe,
wholesome, and labeled properly. States are responsible for conducting
inspections and regulatory activities that help ensure food and feed
produced, processed, and distributed within their jurisdictions are
safe and in compliance with State laws and regulations. States
primarily perform inspections under their own regulatory authority.
Some States conduct inspections of feed facilities under contract with
FDA. Because jurisdictions may overlap, FDA and States collaborate and
share resources to protect animal feed.
    The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act passed on January 4, 2011,
calls for enhanced partnerships and provides a legal mandate for
developing an Integrated Food Safety System (IFSS). FDA is committed to
implementing an IFSS thereby optimizing coordination of food and feed
safety efforts with Federal, State, local, tribal, and territorial
regulatory and public health agencies. Model standards provide a
consistent, underlying foundation that is critical for uniformity
across State and Federal Agencies to ensure credibility of food and
feed programs within the IFSS.

II. Significance of Feed Program Standards

    The AFRPS provide a uniform and consistent approach to feed
regulation in the United States. Implementation of the draft feed
program standards is voluntary. States implementing the standards will
identify and maintain program improvements that will strengthen the
safety and integrity of the U.S. animal feed supply.
    The feed standards are the framework that each State should use to
design, manage, and improve its feed program. The standards include the
following: (1) Regulatory foundation; (2) training; (3) inspection
program; (4) auditing; (5) feed-related illness or death and emergency
response; (6) enforcement program; (7) outreach activities; (8) budget
and planning; (9) assessment and improvement; (10) laboratory services;
and (11) sampling program.
    Each standard has a purpose statement, requirement summary,
description of program elements, projected outcomes, and a list of
required documentation. When a State program voluntarily agrees to
implement the feed standards, it must fully implement and maintain the
individual program elements and documentation requirements in each
standard in order to fully implement the standard.
    The feed standards package includes forms, worksheets, and
templates to help the State program assess and meet the program
elements in the standard. State programs are not obligated to use the
forms, worksheets, and templates provided with the feed standards.
Other manual or automated forms, worksheets, and templates may be used
as long as the pertinent data elements are present. Records and other
documents specified in the feed standards must be maintained in good
order by the State program and must be available to verify the
implementation of each standard. The feed standards are not intended to
address the performance appraisal processes that a State agency may use
to evaluate individual employee performance.
    In the first year of implementation, the State program uses the
self-assessment worksheets to determine if the requirements for each
standard are fully met, partially met, or not met. The self-assessments
are used to develop an improvement plan for fully implementing the
requirements of the 11 standards. Second and third-year assessments
will provide progress evaluation.
    Although FDA plans to provide financial support to State programs
that implement the feed standards, funding opportunities are contingent
upon the availability of funds. Funding opportunities may be only
available to State feed regulatory programs that currently have an FDA
feed inspection contract. State programs receiving financial support to
implement the feed standards will be audited by FDA.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may submit requests for a
single copy of the current feed standards from<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Please note that due to editorial revisions and public comments, the
final standards may differ from the copy you receive.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                   Table 1--Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of                       Average burden
                         Type of respondent                             Number of       records per      Total annual         per          Total hours
                                                                      recordkeepers     recordkeeper       records       recordkeeping
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Employee.....................................................              40                1               40            3,000          120,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    The burden has been calculated to 3,000 hours per respondent. This
burden was determined by capturing the average amount of time for each
respondent to assess the current state of the program and work toward
implementation of each of the 11 standards contained in AFRPS. FDA
recognizes that full use and implementation of the feed standards by
State feed programs will occur over many years and the number of years
to fully implement the feed standards will vary among States.

    Dated: April 6, 2016.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-08331 Filed 4-11-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 182 (Friday, September 19, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 56418]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22335]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-73099; File No. SR-EDGX-2014-19]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule
Change To Establish a New Market Data Product Called the BATS One Feed

September 15, 2014.
    On July 14, 2014, EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``EDGX'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
establish a new market data product called the BATS One Feed. The
proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register
on August 1, 2014.\3\ No comments on the proposal have been
received.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 72691 (July 28,
2014), 79 FR 44892.
    \4\ But see Letter from Sal Arnuk and Joe Saluzzi, Themis
Trading LLC, to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Commission, dated
August 21, 2014 (SR-BATS-2014-028); Letter from Ira D. Hammerman,
General Counsel, SIFMA, to Kevin M. O'Neill, Deputy Secretary,
Commission, dated August 22, 2014 (SR-BATS-2014-028) (letters
commenting on a companion BATS filing that proposes to offer the
same feed).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \5\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding, or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
Commission is extending this 45-day time period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer
period within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that
it has sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change and the
comments received on a similar companion proposal. Accordingly, the
Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\6\ designates
October 30, 2014, as the date by which the Commission shall either
approve or disapprove or institute proceedings to determine whether to
disapprove the proposed rule change (File No. SR-EDGX-2014-19).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(57).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-22335 Filed 9-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 213 (Monday, November 4, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65874-65875]
[FR Doc No: 2013-26211]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2011-0228]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone, Brandon Road Lock and Dam to Lake Michigan Including
Des Plaines River, Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, Chicago River, and
Calumet-Saganashkee Channel, Chicago, IL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce a segment of the Safety Zone;
Brandon Road Lock and Dam to Lake Michigan including Des Plaines River,
Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, Chicago River, Calumet-Saganashkee
Channel on all waters of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal from Mile
Marker 296.1 to Mile Marker 296.7 at specified times on each day from
November 4 through November 8, and again on November 13, 2013. This
action is necessary to protect the waterway, waterway users, and
vessels from the hazards associated with the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers dispersal barriers performance testing, as well as the
Illinois Department of Natural Resources netting and electro-fishing
operations.
    During any of the enforcement periods listed below, entry into,
transiting, mooring, laying-up or anchoring within the enforced area of
this safety zone by any person or vessel is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan, or his designated
representative.

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 165.930 will be enforced from 9 a.m.
to 12 noon and from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. on each day from November 4
through November 8, 2013, and from 7 a.m. until 11 a.m. and from 1 p.m.
until 5 p.m. on November 13, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this notice,
call or email MST1 Joseph McCollum, Prevention Department, Coast Guard
Sector Lake Michigan, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email address
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce a segment of
the Safety Zone; Brandon Road Lock and Dam to Lake Michigan including
Des Plaines River, Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, Chicago River,
Calumet-Saganashkee Channel, Chicago, IL,

listed in 33 CFR 165.930. Specifically, the Coast Guard will enforce
this safety zone between Mile Marker 296.1 to Mile Marker 296.7 on all
waters of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal. Enforcement will occur
from 9 a.m. to 12 noon and from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. on each day from
November 4 through November 8, 2013, and from 7 a.m. until 11 a.m. and
from 1 p.m. until 5 p.m. on November 13, 2013.
    This enforcement action is necessary because the Captain of the
Port, Lake Michigan has determined that the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers dispersal barriers performance testing and the Department of
Natural Resources netting and electro-fishing operation poses risks to
life and property. Because of these risks, it is necessary to control
vessel movement during the operations to prevent injury and property
loss.
    In accordance with the general regulations in Sec.  165.23 of this
part, entry into, transiting, mooring, laying up or anchoring within
the enforced area of this safety zone by any person or vessel is
prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan,
or his or her designated representative.
    Vessels that wish to transit through the safety zone may request
permission from the Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan. Requests must
be made in advance and approved by the Captain of the Port before
transits will be authorized. Approvals will be granted on a case by
case basis. The Captain of the Port may be contacted via U.S. Coast
Guard Sector Lake Michigan on VHF channel 16.
    This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 165.930 and 5
U.S.C. 552(a). In addition to this notice in the Federal Register, the
Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan, will also provide notice through
other means, which may include, but are not limited to, Broadcast
Notice to Mariners, Local Notice to Mariners, local news media,
distribution in leaflet form, and on-scene oral notice. Additionally,
the Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan, may notify representatives from
the maritime industry through telephonic and email notifications.

    Dated: October 23, 2013.
M.W. Sibley,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan.
[FR Doc. 2013-26211 Filed 11-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 170 (Tuesday, September 5, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41891-41893]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18710]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0330]
RIN 1625-AA09

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Gulf Intracoastal Waterway,
Sarasota, FL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is modifying the operating schedule of four
bridges across the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GICW); Stickney Point
Drawbridge, mile 68.6, Siesta Drive Drawbridge, mile 71.6, Cortez
Drawbridge, mile, 87.4, and Anna Maria Drawbridge, mile 89.2, in
Sarasota, FL. The request was made to the Coast Guard to change the
operation of four drawbridges due to an increase in vehicle traffic
throughout these areas at all times of the year. This rulemaking would
change the bridges' operating schedules from a three times an hour
opening schedule to a twice an hour opening schedule throughout the
year.

DATES: This rule is effective October 5, 2017.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2016-0330. In the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this rule,
call or email, Ms. Jennifer Zercher with the Seventh Coast Guard
District Bridge Office; 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
GICW Gulf Intracoastal Waterway
OMB Office of Management and Budget
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    On February 13, 2017, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) entitled Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Gulf Intracoastal
Waterway, Sarasota, FL in the Federal Register (82 FR 10444). We
received 125 comments on this rule. 118 comments were in favor of this
regulation change and 7 were against this change.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
499.
    Stickney Point Bridge across the GICW, mile 68.6, at South
Sarasota, Florida is a bascule bridge. This drawbridge has a vertical
clearance of 18 feet in the closed position and a horizontal clearance
of 90 feet between fenders. Presently, in accordance with 33 CFR 117.5,
the Stickney Point Bridge is required to open on demand.
    Siesta Drive Bridge across the GICW, mile 71.6, at Sarasota,
Florida is a bascule bridge. This drawbridge has a vertical clearance
of 25 feet in the closed position and a horizontal clearance of 90 feet
between fenders. Presently, in accordance with 33 CFR 117.287(c), the
Siesta Drive Bridge is required to open on signal, except that from 6
a.m. to 7 p.m., the draw need only open on the hour, twenty minutes
past the hour and forty minutes past the hour. On weekends and Federal
holidays, from 11 a.m. to 6 p.m., the draw need open only on the hour,
twenty minutes past the hour and forty minutes past the hour.
    Cortez (SR 684) Bridge across the GICW, mile 87.4, at Bradenton
Beach, Florida is a bascule bridge. This drawbridge has a vertical
clearance of 22 feet in the closed position and a horizontal clearance
of 90 feet between fenders. Presently, in accordance with 33 CFR
117.287 (d)(1), the Cortez (SR 684) Bridge is required to open on
signal, except that from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m., the draw need only open on
the hour, 20 minutes after the hour, and 40 minutes after the hour.
From January 15 to May 15, from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m., the draw need only
open on the hour and half hour.
    Anna Maria (SR 64) (Manatee Avenue West) Bridge, mile 89.2, at
Bradenton Beach, Florida is a bascule bridge. This drawbridge has a
vertical clearance of 24 feet in the closed position and a horizontal
clearance of 90 feet between fenders. Presently, in accordance with 33
CFR 117.287(d)(2), the Anna Maria (SR 64) (Manatee Avenue West) Bridge
is required to open on signal, except that from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m., the
draw need only open on the hour, 20 minutes after the hour, and 40
minutes after the hour. From January 15 to May 15, from 6 a.m. to 7
p.m., the draw need only open on the hour and half hour.
    The Metropolitan Planning Office for Sarasota and Manatee Counties,
along with the concurrence of the local mayors, have requested that the
Coast Guard consider changing the bridge operating regulations for four
bridges in this area to accommodate a year-round increase of vehicular
traffic. In the past, increased traffic was only associated with the
tourist season. For this reason, the Coast Guard is modifying the four
bridge schedules to provide for both the reasonable needs of navigation
and those of land transportation. The bridge owner, Florida Department
of Transportation, concurs with these recommendations.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes and the Final Rule

    There were seven comments opposing the final rule. Six comments
were against modifying the existing schedule and one comment suggested
that even with this modified schedule the bridge will still open too
often. Not allowing these bridges to open at least twice an hour would
place an undue burden on the marine community. Two of the comments
suggested the City/County/State should look into putting in higher
level bridges and do a traffic management study, as the problem is
traffic control, not the bridge openings.

These comments were directed to the bridge owner. Four comments stated
that having vessels waiting for a half-hour for the bridge to open
could be a safety concern. As the timing between bridge openings has
been adjusted to accommodate traveling at a no wake speed between the
bridges, vessels should not have to wait for longer than 5 to 10
minutes for an opening. Of these four comments sighting safety
concerns, one commenter has posted the same concern twice. No
adjustments have been made to this regulation based on the comments.

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 protesters.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the ability that
vessels can still transit the bridges during the scheduled openings.
Vessels that can transit the bridge in the closed position may continue
to do so. Public vessels of the United States and tugs with tows may
request an opening at any time.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rule. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C.
605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
bridge may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section V.A
above, this final 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
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
    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 calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government

    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
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guides the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made a
determination that this action is one of a category of actions which do
not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule simply promulgates the operating regulations or
procedures for drawbridges. This action is categorically excluded from
further review, under figure 2-1, paragraph (32)(e), of the
Instruction.
    A preliminary Record of Environmental Consideration and a
Memorandum for the Record are not required for this rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the For Further
Information Contact; section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117

    Bridges.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 117 as follows:

PART 117--DRAWBRIDGE OPERATION REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 117 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05-1; and Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Amend Sec.  117.287 by revising paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as
follows:

Sec.  117.287  Gulf Intracoastal Waterway.

* * * * *
    (c)(1) The Stickney Point Bridge, mile 68.6, at South Sarasota,
Florida shall open on signal, except that from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. daily,
the draw need only open on the hour and half hour.
    (2) The draw of the Siesta Drive Bridge, mile 71.6, at Sarasota,
Florida shall open on signal, except that from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. daily,
the draw need only open on the hour and half hour.
    (d)(1) The draw of the Cortez (SR 684) Bridge, mile 87.4, at
Bradenton Beach, Florida shall open on signal, except that from 6 a.m.
to 7 p.m. daily, the draw need only open on the quarter hour and three
quarter hour.
    (2) The draw of the Anna Maria (SR 64) (Manatee Avenue West)
Bridge, mile 89.2, at Bradenton Beach, Florida shall open on signal,
except that from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. daily, the draw need only open on the
quarter hour and three quarter hour.
* * * * *

    Dated: August 22, 2017.
Peter J. Brown,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2017-18710 Filed 9-1-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 122 (Monday, June 25, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37779-37781]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14797]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2012-0013; Directorate Identifier 2010-SW-043-AD;
Amendment 39-17090; AD 2012-12-10]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Agusta S.p.A. Helicopters

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for Agusta
S.p.A. (Agusta) Model AB139 and AW139 helicopters with a certain
generator control unit (GCU), to require replacing each affected GCU
with an airworthy GCU. This AD was prompted by laboratory tests which
revealed a potential fault in the overvoltage protection on a certain
part-numbered GCU. The actions are intended to prevent failure of the
overvoltage protection of the GCU, degraded performance of the
electrical power generation and distribution systems, a fire, and
subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

DATES: This AD is effective July 30, 2012.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in this AD as of July 30,
2012.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Agusta Westland, Customer Support & Services, Via Per Tornavento 15,
21019 Somma Lombardo (VA) Italy, ATTN: Giovanni Cecchelli; telephone
39-0331-711133; fax 39 0331 711180; or at http://www.agustawestland.com/technical-bullettins. You may review a copy of
the referenced service information at the FAA, Office of the Regional
Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth,
Texas 76137.
    Examining the AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket on the
Internet

at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Operations
Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, any incorporated-by-reference
service information, the economic evaluation, any comments received,
and other information. The street address for the Docket Operations
Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is U.S. Department of Transportation,
Docket Operations Office, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-
140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Wiley, Aerospace Engineer, FAA,
Regulations and Policy Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, 2601 Meacham
Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax (817)
222-5961; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    On January 20, 2012, at 77 FR 2926, the Federal Register published
our Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed to amend 14
CFR part 39 to include an AD that would apply to Agusta Model AB139 and
AW139 helicopters, with a GCU, part-number (P/N) 1152550-3, installed.
That NPRM proposed to require, within 6 months, removing the No. 1 and
No. 2 GCU, P/N 1152550-3, modifying the electrical connectors A13P1 and
A14P1 by installing wiring to the power distribution panel, and
installing a No. 1 and No. 2 GCU with P/N 1152550-4 or 1152550-5. Both
GCUs must have identical P/Ns on the same helicopter. The proposed
requirements were intended to prevent failure of the overvoltage
protection of the GCU, degraded performance of the electrical power
generation and distribution systems, a fire, and subsequent loss of
control of the helicopter.
    The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical
Agent for the Member States of the European Union, has issued EASA AD
No. 2009-0042, dated February 25, 2009 (AD 2009-0042), to correct an
unsafe condition for the Agusta Model AB139 and AW139 helicopters, all
serial numbers (S[sol]Ns) except S[sol]Ns 31002, 31003, 31004, and
31007. EASA advises that laboratory tests performed on a new GCU model
under development have shown a potential fault in the overvoltage
protection of currently installed GCUs, P/N 1152550-3. EASA also
advises that this condition, if not corrected, could adversely affect
the helicopter's electrical power generation and distribution system
functionalities.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD, but we did not receive any comments on the NPRM.

FAA's Determination

    These helicopters have been approved by the aviation authority of
Italy and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to
our bilateral agreement with Italy, the EASA, its technical
representative, has notified us of the unsafe condition described in
the EASA AD. We are issuing this AD because we evaluated all
information provided by the EASA and determined that an unsafe
condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other helicopters
of these same type designs. We have determined that air safety and the
public interest require adopting the AD requirements as proposed,
except for a typographical correction in the Related Service
Information paragraph of the NPRM, which referred to the EASA AD as
``2009-0048'' instead of ``2009-0042.'' This change is consistent with
the intent of the proposals in the NPRM and will not increase the
economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.

Differences Between This AD and the EASA AD

    The EASA AD does not apply to certain serial-numbered Model AB139
and AW139 helicopters, whereas this AD applies to all serial-numbered
Model AB139 and AW139 helicopters.

Related Service Information

    Agusta S.p.A. issued Mandatory Bollettino Tecnico No. 139-133, Rev.
A, dated March 17, 2009 (BT), for Model AB139 and AW139 helicopters,
S[sol]Ns 31005 up to S[sol]N 31143, except for S[sol]Ns 31007, 31037,
31038, 31094; S[sol]N 31112; S[sol]Ns 31146 up to S[sol]N 31148;
S[sol]N 31155; S[sol]Ns 31201 up to S[sol]N 31218; and S[sol]Ns 41001
up to S[sol]N 41022, except S[sol]N 41007; with a GCU, P/N 1152550-3.
This BT specifies, within 6 months from receipt of the BT, removing
GCU, P/N 1152550-3, modifying electrical connector A13P1 and A14P1, and
replacing each GCU with an airworthy GCU, P/N 1152550-4 or 1152550-5,
to improve electrical power generation and distribution system
functionalities. EASA classified this BT as mandatory and issued AD
2009-0042 to ensure the continued airworthiness of these helicopters.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 72 helicopters of U.S.
Registry.
    We estimate that operators may incur the following costs in order
to comply with this AD. We estimate that it will take about 4 work-
hours to perform the required actions of this AD per helicopter at an
average labor rate of $85 per work-hour, and required parts will cost
about $42,384 per helicopter. Based on these figures, we estimate the
cost to be $42,724 per helicopter and the total cost impact of the AD
for U.S. operators to be $3,076,128.
    According to the Agusta service information some of the costs of
this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact
on affected individuals. We do not control warranty coverage by Agusta.
Accordingly, we have included all costs in our cost estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on helicopters identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866;
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska to the extent
that it justifies making a regulatory distinction; and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities

under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared an economic evaluation of the estimated costs to comply
with this AD and placed it in the AD docket.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2012-12-10 Agusta S.p.A. Helicopters: Amendment 39-17090; Docket No.
FAA-2012-0013; Directorate Identifier 2010-SW-043-AD.

(a) Applicability

    This AD applies to Agusta S.p.A. (Agusta) Model AB139 and AW139
helicopters, with a generator control unit (GCU), part-number (P/N)
1152550-3 installed; certificated in any category.

(b) Unsafe Condition

    This AD defines the unsafe condition as a potential fault in the
overvoltage protection in GCUs currently installed on Model AB139
and AW139 helicopters. This condition could result in failure of the
overvoltage protection of the GCU, degraded performance of the
electrical power generation and distribution systems, or fire, and
subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

(c) Effective Date

    This AD becomes effective July 30, 2012.

(d) Compliance

    You are responsible for performing each action required by this
AD within the specified compliance time unless it has already been
accomplished prior to that time.

(e) Required Actions

    (1) Remove the No. 1 and No. 2 GCU, P[sol]N 1152550-3. Do not
install GCU, P[sol]N 1152550-3, on any helicopter.
    (2) Modify the electrical connector A13P1 (GCU No. 1) and A14P1
(GCU No. 2) by installing the wiring to the power distribution panel
(PDP) for your serial-numbered helicopter as depicted in Figure 1 of
Agusta Bollettino Tecnico No. 139-133, Rev. A, dated March 17, 2009.
    (3) Using either GCU P[sol]N 1152550-4 or GCU P[sol]N 1152550-5,
install a No. 1 and No. 2 GCU that has the same part number. Having
different part-numbered GCUs on the same helicopter is not approved.

(f) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Safety Management Group, FAA, may approve AMOCs
for this AD. Send your proposal to: Mark Wiley, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Regulations and Policy Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 76137; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) For operations conducted under a 14 CFR part 119 operating
certificate or under 14 CFR part 91, subpart K, we suggest that you
notify your principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector,
the manager of the local flight standards district office or
certificate holding district office, before operating any aircraft
complying with this AD through an AMOC.

(g) Additional Information

    The subject of this AD is addressed in European Aviation Safety
Agency (EASA) AD No. 2009-0042, dated February 25, 2009.

(h) Subject

    Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) Code: 2430, DC
generating system.

(i) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the following service
information under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use the following service information to do the
actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (3) The following service information was approved for IBR on
July 10, 2012.
    (i) Agusta Bollettino Tecnico No. 139-133, Rev. A, dated March
17, 2009.
    (4) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Agusta Westland, Customer Support & Services, Via Per Tornavento 15,
21019 Somma Lombardo (VA) Italy, Attn: Giovanni Cecchelli; telephone
39-0331-711133; fax 39 0331 711180; or at http://www.agustawestland.com/technical-bullettins.
    (5) You may review a copy of the referenced service information
at the FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137 or at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go
to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 8, 2012.
Kim Smith,
Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-14797 Filed 6-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 101 (Thursday, May 25, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33855-33857]
[FR Doc No: 2023-11024]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Parts 61, 91, 107, and 135

[Docket No.: FAA-2023-1256]

UAS Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight Operations

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: As the FAA reviews the recommendations of the UAS Beyond
Visual Line-of-Sight (BVLOS) Operations Aviation Rulemaking Committee
(ARC), the FAA is considering the expansion of BVLOS operations in
certain operating environments with the appropriate safety mitigations
to ensure no adverse safety impact. The FAA is seeking comment to
gather additional technical input on key concepts and potential
approaches that the FAA is contemplating for use in future exemptions.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number and must be received on or before June 14, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2023-1256
using any of the following methods:

     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W12-140,
West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
http://www.dot.gov/privacy.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Ngo,<PHONE_NUMBER>, Office of
Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue
SW, Washington, DC 20591.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    In March 2022, the UAS Beyond Visual Line-of-Sight (BVLOS)
Operations Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) issued its final report,
which included a comprehensive set of recommendations for
implementation to support expanded unmanned aircraft systems (UAS)
operations, such as linear infrastructure and package delivery. The FAA
recognizes BVLOS operations provide significant safety, societal, and
economic advantages and benefits. Several petitioners have proposed
various methods to safely operate UAS BVLOS under petitions for
exemptions. Along those lines, the FAA has received several petitions
for exemptions to conduct several types of BVLOS operations, which the
FAA is looking to leverage in enabling the next phase of BVLOS
operations. The FAA will be separately publishing summaries in the
Federal Register for the individual petitions on the affected projects
and seeking comments on each of those petitions for exemption. In this
document, the FAA seeks public comments that address how advances in
technology, standards, and operational strategies to safely demonstrate
UAS BVLOS operations can be applied without adversely affecting safety.
    Specific questions are included in this request for comments
immediately following the discussion of the relevant issues. The FAA
asks that commenters provide as much information as possible on any
questions of interest to the commenter. Whenever possible, please
provide citations and copies of any relevant studies or reports on
which you rely, including cost data as well as any additional data
which supports your comment. It is also helpful to explain the basis
and reasoning underlying your comment. Each commenting party should
include the identifying number of the specific question(s) to which it
is responding.

A. Detect and Avoid Systems Performance Standards

    The FAA recognizes that several industry standards have been
published that may be useful in defining the performance of Detect and
Avoid (DAA) systems, a major component of BVLOS operations. However,
any single standard may not be fully appropriate for the uses intended
by applicants operating at and below 400 feet above ground level (AGL).
Therefore, the FAA is reviewing these standards, as well as ways for
operators to demonstrate that their DAA system meets specific
requirements in a combination of published standards. These include:
    1. ASTM F3442/F3442M-23, Standard Specification for Detect and
Avoid System Performance Requirements, dated February 28, 2023.
    2. RTCA DO-381, Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS)
for Ground Based Surveillance Systems (GBSS) for Traffic Surveillance,
dated March 26, 2020.
    3. RTCA DO-365C, Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS)
for Detect and Avoid (DAA) Systems, dated September 15, 2022.
    4. RTCA DO-396, Minimum Operational Performance Standards for
Airborne Collision Avoidance System sXu (ACAS sXu), dated December 15,
2022.
     A1. In which circumstances or operating environments
should the FAA allow this combination approach?
     A2. Conversely, are there circumstances or operating
environments where no combination of current standards would provide an
acceptable level of safety?

B. Declarations of Compliance for Detect and Avoid

    As the FAA is contemplating operations beyond visual line of sight,
the FAA is considering allowing operators to declare that they are
utilizing DAA systems that meet the DAA standard(s) referenced above.
     B1. In which circumstances or operating environments
should the FAA allow this declaration approach? What supporting
documentation or data should the FAA require prior to authorization to
operating under an exemption?
     B2. Conversely, are there circumstances or operating
environments in which the FAA should require operators to submit
details of their DAA system for approval and validation prior to
operation?

C. Well-Clear Boundary

    ASTM F3442/F3442M-23, Standard Specification for Detect and Avoid
System Performance Requirements, referenced previously, suggests
maintaining a horizontal distance of 2,000 feet and a vertical distance
of 250 feet between a small UAS and crewed aircraft, described as a
``hockey-puck-shaped'' area of airspace surrounding the small UAS.
     C1. In which circumstances or operating environments would
this standard be appropriate?
     C2. If not this standard, what well-clear boundary should
the FAA consider for operations under an exemption, and under what
circumstances or operating environments?

D. DAA Systems That Include Third-Party Services/Associated Elements
(AE)

    There are numerous technologies and architectures that may be
suitable when implementing DAA solutions. Some systems may have sensors
and DAA logic that are fully contained onboard the aircraft with
information relayed to the pilot control station. A remote pilot may be
involved in executing avoidance maneuvers, or may monitor the
aircraft's automated response. Other systems may rely on ground-based
sensors that are connected to, but distinct from, the UA and its
control station. Yet other DAA systems may use a combination of those
approaches.

    Under 14 CFR 1.1, a UAS is defined as the UA and its associated
elements necessary to support the safe flight of the UA. However, in
various petitions for exemptions, the FAA has understood some DAA
system components are intended to be reused by multiple operators.
These components are generally not directly controlled by either the
UAS manufacturer or the operator; rather, they are controlled by a
third-party service provider. Third-party services may directly support
the DAA solution by, for example, detecting crewed aircraft in a
defined geographic region, or by relaying such information through a
managed command and control (C2) link on behalf of multiple operators.
    Therefore, the FAA is considering new ways to evaluate and
recognize these components as distinct elements. Additionally, section
377 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (Pub. L. 115-254) directs
the Administrator to ``determine if certain UTM [Unmanned Aircraft
Systems Traffic Management] services may operate safely in the national
airspace system before completion of the implementation plan required
by Section 376.''
     D1. The FAA is considering separating the UTM service
provider approval from the exemption for relief from parts 91 and 61.
In order to operate, the UTM service provider would need to receive its
approval, and the applicant's exemption would be contingent on use of
an approved service. Other operators seeking to use that same service
would present their specific use case with the approved UTM service.
Should the FAA separate the approval of the UTM service provider from
the exemption? Why or why not?
     D2. Conversely, the FAA is also considering including the
approval of the UTM service within the exemption, similar to how the
FAA has implemented 49 U.S.C. 44807 to date. Should the FAA consolidate
these approvals? Why or why not?

E. Use of UTM Services for Strategic Deconfliction

    At present, the FAA has not determined an acceptable level of risk
for collision between two UA. However, FAA is concerned that with
increasing numbers of BVLOS UAS operations, two UA could collide,
resulting in falling debris that could cause property damage, injuries,
or fatalities to non-participants on the ground.
     E1. One proposal the FAA is considering would be to
require all BVLOS operations in controlled airspace or within the
lateral limits of a Mode C Veil under an exemption to use a strategic
deconfliction and conformance monitoring capability (both terms as
described in FAA's UTM Concept of Operations v2.0). This could be
fulfilled if the operator provisions their own capability that meets
the requirements of a published standard; or by using a UTM service.
Should the FAA impose this requirement? Why or why not?
     E2. Alternatively, the FAA is considering requiring all
BVLOS operations under an exemption, including in Class G airspace, to
use a strategic deconfliction and conformance monitoring capability.
Should the FAA impose this requirement? Why or why not?
     E3. The FAA is aware of one published standard that could
be used to meet a requirement to have a strategic deconfliction and
conformance monitoring capability. It is referenced as ASTM F3548-21,
Standard Specification for UAS Traffic Management (UTM) UAS Service
Supplier (USS) Interoperability, dated March 8, 2022. What alternative
means exist, preferably using published standards, that the FAA should
consider? What evidence exists for the safety benefit and operational
efficiency of any alternative means?

F. Detect and Avoid Between Unmanned Aircraft

    FAA views strategic deconfliction and conformance monitoring as two
layers of a new, conceptual conflict management strategy for UAS. The
FAA is also considering requiring a third layer, in the form of detect-
and-avoid between UA, leveraging some form of vehicle-to-vehicle
communications method.
     F1. One proposal would be to use the ACAS sXu standard
(RTCA DO-396). What communications method should be used in conjunction
with this approach? Should the FAA impose this requirement, including
use of a specific communications method? Why or why not?
     F2. What evidence exists that the requirement in the above
question would sufficiently manage the risk of collision between UA?
Should such a requirement be in addition to, or in lieu of, any
requirement to use strategic deconfliction and conformance monitoring?
     F3. If the FAA imposes a requirement for UA-to-UA DAA,
should it also prescribe technical requirements to ensure
interoperability of the solution across all BVLOS UAS? Why or why not?

G. Beyond Visual Line of Sight Shielded Operations

    The BVLOS ARC report proposed labeling certain type of BVLOS
operations as shielded operations. These operations would occur in a
shielded area defined by the ARC as ``a volume of airspace that
includes 100' above the vertical extent of an obstacle or critical
infrastructure and is within 100 feet of the lateral extent of the same
obstacle or critical infrastructure as defined in 42 U.S.C. 5195(c).''
Furthermore, the ARC recommended that shielded operations be given
right-of-way privileges based on the unique nature of those operations
and the limited likelihood of crewed aircraft operations in the
specified areas.
    The FAA is considering a similar framework based on safety analysis
and some ability to detect and avoid crewed aircraft operations.
     G1. In which circumstances or operating environments
should the FAA authorize shielded operations? The 42 U.S.C. 5195(c)
definition of critical infrastructure has a broad applicability. Should
the FAA further limit or expand the applicability?
     G2. Conversely, are there circumstances or operating
environments in which the FAA should not authorize shielded operations?
     G3. The ARC report describes the appropriate offset as
100' above, and 100' lateral. Is this the appropriate standard? Why or
why not? If not, what other standard should be used, and what evidence
exists for the appropriateness and safety of an alternative standard?
     G4. What type of notification (e.g., email/phone call, web
portal, mobile phone application using UTM services, etc.) should
operators conducting BVLOS shielded operations provide to the local
aviation communities?

    Issued in Washington, DC.
David H. Boulter,
Acting Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety.
[FR Doc. 2023-11024 Filed 5-23-23; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 88 (Monday, May 10, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 24956]
[FR Doc No: 2021-09939]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, May 13, 2021.

PLACE: The meeting will be held via remote means and/or at the
Commission's headquarters, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.

STATUS: This meeting will be closed to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners,
the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend
the closed meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the
matters also may be present.
    In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting
changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date,
and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's website
at https://www.sec.gov.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (6), (7), (8), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR
200.402(a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(9)(ii) and (a)(10),
permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the closed meeting.
    The subject matter of the closed meeting will consist of the
following topics:

Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;
Resolution of litigation claims; and
Other matters relating to examinations and enforcement proceedings.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting agenda items that may consist of
adjudicatory, examination, litigation, or regulatory matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: For further information; please
contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary at (202)
551-5400.

    Dated: May 6, 2021.
Vanessa A. Countryman,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-09939 Filed 5-6-21; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 185 (Friday, September 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65634-65636]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23149]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0246; FRL-9952-98-OAR]

Proposed Information Collection Request; Comment Request;
Information Requirements for New Marine Compression Ignition Engines at
or Above 30 Liters per Cylinder

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to submit an
information collection request (ICR), ``Information Requirements for
New Marine Compression Ignition Engines at or Above 30 Liters per
Cylinder'' (EPA ICR No. 2345.04, OMB Control No. 2060-0641) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and

approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.). Before doing so, EPA is soliciting public comments on
specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described
below. This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently
approved through November 30, 2016. 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 November 22, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing the Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2013-0246, online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method),
by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket Center,
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: Nydia Yanira Reyes-Morales,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Mail
Code 6405A, Washington, DC 20460; 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 ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center 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 Paperwork Reduction Act,
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. EPA
will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate.
The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and
approval. At that time, 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: For this ICR, EPA is seeking a revision to an existing
package with a three year extension. Title II of the Clean Air Act, (42
U.S.C. 7521 et seq.; CAA), charges the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) with issuing certificates of conformity for those engines that
comply with applicable emission standards. Such a certificate must be
issued before engines may be legally introduced into commerce. Under
this ICR, EPA collects information necessary to (1) issue certificates
of compliance with emission statements, and (2) verify compliance with
various programs and regulatory provisions pertaining to marine
compression-ignition engines with a specific engine displacement at or
above 30 liters per cylinder, also referred to as Category 3 engines.
To apply for a certificate of conformity, manufacturers are required to
submit descriptions of their planned production engines, including
detailed descriptions of emission control systems and test data. This
information is organized by ``engine family'' groups expected to have
similar emission characteristics. There are recordkeeping requirements
of up to eight years. The Act also mandates EPA to verify that
manufacturers have successfully translated their certified prototypes
into mass produced engines, and that these engines comply with emission
standards throughout their useful lives.
    Under the Production Line Testing Program (``PLT Program''),
manufacturers of Category 3 engines are required to test each engine at
the sea trial of the vessel in which the engine is installed or within
the first 300 hours of operation, whichever comes first. This self-
audit program allows manufacturers to monitor compliance and minimize
the cost of correcting errors through early detection. In addition,
owners and operators of marine vessels with Category 3 engines must
record certain information and send minimal annual notifications to EPA
to show that engine maintenance and adjustments have not caused engines
to be noncompliant. From time to time, EPA may test in-use engines to
verify compliance with emission standards throughout the marine
engine's useful life and may ask for information about the engine
family to be tested.
    The information requested is collected by the Diesel Engine
Compliance Center (DECC), Compliance Division (CD), Office of
Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Air and Radiation, EPA.
Besides DECC and CD, this information could be used by the Office of
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance and the Department of Justice for
enforcement purposes.
    Proprietary information is kept confidential in accordance with the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), EPA regulations at 40 CFR parts 2
and 1042.915, and class determinations issued by EPA's Office of
General Counsel. Non-confidential business information may be disclosed
as requested under FOIA. That information may be used by trade
associations, environmental groups, and the public. Most of the
information is collected in electronic format and stored in CD's
databases.
    Form Numbers: 5900-90 (Annual Production Report); 5900-297 (PLT
CumSum Report); 5900-298 (PLT Non-CumSum Report); 5900-124 (Application
for Certification).
    Respondents/Affected Entities: Respondents are manufacturers of
marine compression-ignition engines above 30 liters per cylinder and
the owners or operators of the vessels in which those engines are
installed, within the following North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) codes: 333618 (Other Engine Equipment Manufacturing),
336611 (Manufacturers of Marine Vessels); 811310 (Engine Repair and
Maintenance); 483 (Water transportation, freight and passenger).
    Respondent's Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain a
benefit. Manufacturers must respond to this collection if they wish to
sell and/or operate their Category 3 engines in the U.S., as prescribed
by Section 206(a) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7521) and 40 CFR part 1042.
Certification reporting is mandatory (Section 206(a) of CAA (42 U.S.C.
7521) and 40 CFR part 1042, subpart C). PLT reporting is mandatory
(Section 206(b)(1) of CAA and 40 CFR part 1042, subpart D).

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 201 (total, including engine
manufacturers, owners and operators).
    Frequency of Response: Quarterly, Annually, On Occasion, depending
on the type of response.
    Total Estimated Burden: 24,813 hours per year. Burden is defined at
5 CFR 1320.03(b).
    Total Estimated Cost: $1,931,765 (per year), includes an estimated
$734,588 annualized capital or maintenance and operational costs.
    Changes in Estimates: To date, there are no changes in the total
estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by
OMB. However, EPA is evaluating information that may lead to a change
in the estimates. After EPA has evaluated this information, burden
estimates may slightly decrease due to the fact that EPA has received
fewer applications for certification of Category 3 engine families than
previously estimated. Cost estimates may increase due to inflation and
labor rate changes.

    Dated: September 19, 2016.
Byron J. Bunker,
Director, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air
Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2016-23149 Filed 9-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Panel Members for the Meeting of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory Panel

          Methods for Efficacy Testing of Bed Bug Pesticide Products
                              March 6  -  7, 2012
EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-1017                                                                  OPP Docket Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>

FIFRA SAP Chair

Kenneth Portier, Ph.D.
Program Director, Statistics and Evaluation Center
American Cancer Society
National Home Office
Atlanta, GA

Session Chair

Martha Sandy, Ph.D.
Senior Toxicologist and Chief
Cancer Toxicology and Epidemiology Section
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
California Environmental Protection Agency
Oakland, CA

Designated Federal Official

Joseph E. Bailey
US Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Science Coordination & Policy
FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel
 EPA East Building, (7201M) 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460 Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel Members

Janice Chambers, Ph.D., DABT, ATS
William L. Giles Distinguished Professor
Director, Center for Environmental Health Sciences
College of Veterinary Medicine
Mississippi State University
Mississippi State, MS

Stephen Klaine, Ph.D.
Professor, Department of Biological Sciences
Director, Institute of Environmental Toxicology
Clemson University
Pendleton, SC
FQPA Science Review Board Members

Mark F. Feldlaufer, Ph.D.
Research Entomologist
Invasive Insect Biocontrol & Behavior Laboratory
USDA/Agricultural Research Service
Beltsville, MD

Jody L. Gangloff-Kaufmann, Ph.D.
Senior Extension Associate, IPM Specialist
New York State IPM Program
Faculty Fellow, Atkinson Center for a Sustainable Future
Cornell University
Babylon, NY

Edward E. Gbur, Jr., Ph.D.
Director, Agricultural Statistics Laboratory
Dale Bumpers College of Agricultural, Food and Life Sciences
University of Arkansas
Fayetteville, AR

Matthew Kramer, Ph.D.
Statistician
USDA/Agricultural Research Service
Beltsville, MD

Michael Trevor Siva-Jothy, Ph.D.
Professor of Entomology MSC 3BE
Department of Animal and Plant Science
University of Sheffield
Sheffield, UK

Alvaro Romero, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Urban Entomology
Department of Entomology, Plant Pathology, and Weed Science
New Mexico State University
Las Cruces, NM

Rajeev Vaidyanathan, Ph.D
Associate Director, Vector Biology and Zoonotic Diseases
SRI International
Center for Advanced Drug Research
Harrisonburg, VA


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 21 (Thursday, January 31, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 706-707]
[FR Doc No: 2019-00529]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

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

    Docket Numbers: ER10-1585-014; ER10-1594-014; ER10-1597-007; ER10-
1617-014; ER10-1624-007; ER10-1628-014; ER10-1632-016; ER12-60-016;
ER16-1148-005; ER16-733-005.
    Applicants: Alabama Electric Marketing, LLC, California Electric
Marketing, LLC, Kiowa Power Partners, LLC, LQA, LLC, New Mexico
Electric Marketing, LLC, Tenaska Energ[iacute]a de Mexico, S. de R. L.
de C.V., Tenaska Gateway Partners, Ltd., Tenaska Power Management, LLC,
Tenaska Power Services Co., Texas Electric Marketing, LLC.
    Description: Updated Market Power Analysis of the Tenaska SPP MBR
Sellers.
    Filed Date: 12/27/18.
    Accession Number: 20181227-5143.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/25/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2757-007; ER11-3051-003.
    Applicants: Arlington Valley, LLC, Macho Springs Power I, LLC.
    Description: Notice of Change in Status of Arlington Valley, LLC,
et al.
    Filed Date: 12/27/18.
    Accession Number: 20181227-5136.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2794-026; ER12-1825-024; ER14-2672-011.
    Applicants: EDF Trading North America, LLC, EDF Energy Services,
LLC, EDF Industrial Power Services (CA), LLC.
    Description: Updated Market Power Analysis for the SPP Region of
the EDF Sellers.
    Filed Date: 12/27/18.
    Accession Number: 20181227-5171.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/25/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER10-3063-002.
    Applicants: Green Country Energy, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Update for the SPP Region of
Green Country Energy, LLC.
    Filed Date: 12/27/18.
    Accession Number: 20181227-5172.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/25/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER15-2131-005; ER15-2130-005; ER15-2129-005; ER12-
2037-012; ER12-2314-008.
    Applicants: Spinning Spur Wind LLC, Spearville 3, LLC, Slate Creek
Wind Project, LLC, Roosevelt Wind Project, LLC, Milo Wind Project, LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Update for the SPP Region of
the EDFR SPP Sellers.
    Filed Date: 12/26/18.
    Accession Number: 20181226-5182.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/25/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-2360-006.
    Applicants: Great Western Wind Energy, LLC.
    Description: Market-Based Triennial Review Filing: 2018 Triennial
Market Power Update for the SPP Region--Great Western Wind to be
effective 2/25/2019.
    Filed Date: 12/26/18.
    Accession Number: 20181226-5171.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/25/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-2258-003.
    Applicants: Rock Falls Wind Farm LLC.
    Description: Triennial Market Power Update for the Southwest Region
of Tucson Electric Power Company, et al.
    Filed Date: 12/26/18.
    Accession Number: 20181226-5172.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 2/25/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-463-001.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Progress, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: DEC-DEP State ADIT Errata Filing to
be effective 1/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 12/27/18.
    Accession Number: 20181227-5026.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-688-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amended and Restated
Agreement for Interconnection Service Harbor Cogeneration to be
effective 12/21/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/26/18.
    Accession Number: 20181226-5173.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/16/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-689-000.
    Applicants: The Connecticut Light and Power Company.
    Description: Initial rate filing: Clear River Energy LLC Related
Facilities Agreement to be effective 2/26/2019.
    Filed Date: 12/27/18.
    Accession Number: 20181227-5087.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-690-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 3505 ENGIE Energy Marketing
NA and Sunflower Meter Agent Agr to be effective 12/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/27/18.
    Accession Number: 20181227-5095.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-691-000.
    Applicants: Southwestern Public Service Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Wholesale Fuel Protocols
Update to be effective 3/1/2019.
    Filed Date: 12/27/18.
    Accession Number: 20181227-5098.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-692-000.
    Applicants: NSTAR Electric Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: First Supplement to Stony
Brook--Ludlow Agreement to be effective 12/31/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/27/18.
    Accession Number: 20181227-5135.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-693-000.
    Applicants: NSTAR Electric Company.
    Description: Initial rate filing: Clear River Energy LLC Related
Facilities Agreement to be effective 2/26/2019.
    Filed Date: 12/27/18.
    Accession Number: 20181227-5175.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-694-000.
    Applicants: Duke Energy Progress, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: DEP-FPWC RS No. 184
Amendment to be effective 11/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 12/27/18.
    Accession Number: 20181227-5179.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-695-000.
    Applicants: Gulf Power Company.
    Description: Initial rate filing: Gulf Power FPU PPA Filing to be
effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 12/27/18.
    Accession Number: 20181227-5182.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/19.

    Docket Numbers: ER19-696-000.
    Applicants: Gulf Power Company.
    Description: Initial rate filing: Gulf Power SCS-Flint PPA Filing
to be effective 12/31/9998.
    Filed Date: 12/27/18.
    Accession Number: 20181227-5184.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/17/19.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following public
utility holding company filings:

    Docket Numbers: PH19-4-000.
    Applicants: Pattern Energy Group Inc.
    Description: Pattern Energy Group Inc. submits FERC 65-B Waiver
Notification.
    Filed Date: 12/26/18.
    Accession Number: 20181226-5179.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/16/19.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: December 27, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-00529 Filed 1-30-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 8, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 154)]
[Notices]
[Page 46345]
[DOCID:fr08au08-107]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activity Seeking OMB Approval

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA invites public comments about our intention to request
the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) revision of a current
information collection. The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day
comment period soliciting comments on the following collection of
information was published on May 14, 2008, vol. 73, no. 94, page 27887.
Pursuant to Public Law 104-50, the FAA has implemented an acquisition
management system that addresses the unique needs of the agency. This
document established the policies and internal procedures for the FAA's
acquisition system.

DATES: Please submit comments by September 8, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carla Mauney at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

    Title: FAA Acquisition Management System (FAAAMS).
    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0595.
    Forms(s) 93 Forms available online: http://fast.faa/gov/docs/forms/
form.html.
    Affected Public: An estimated 15,298 Respondents.
    Frequency: This information is collected on occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: Approximately 7.6 hours per
response.
    Estimated Annual Burden Hours: An estimated 2,002,569 hours
annually.
    Abstract: Pursuant to Public Law 104-50, the FAA has implemented an
acquisition management system that addresses the unique needs of the
agency. This document established the policies and internal procedures
for the FAA's acquisition system.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on
the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be
addressed to Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer, Department of Transportation/
FAA, and sent via electronic mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Department, including whether the information will have practical
utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimates of the burden of
the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 30, 2008.
Carla Mauney,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises Business
Services Division, AES-200.
[FR Doc. E8-18099 Filed 8-7-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M