[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 185 (Monday, September 24, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48245-48249]
[FR Doc No: 2018-20629]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2017-0050; FRL-9984-10--Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; TN: Revisions to New Source Review

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving changes
to the Tennessee State Implementation Plan (SIP) to revise New Source
Review (NSR) regulations. Specifically, EPA is approving the portions
of a SIP revision submitted by the State of Tennessee, through the
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), on May 28,
2009, that modify the definitions of ``baseline actual emissions.''
This action is being taken pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

DATES: This rule is effective October 24, 2018.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2017-0050. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the
index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D. Brad Akers, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Mr. Akers can be reached via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
via electronic mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What action is EPA taking?

    On May 28, 2009, TDEC submitted a SIP revision to EPA for approval
that contains changes to Tennessee's SIP-approved major NSR permitting
regulations at Tennessee Air Pollution Control Regulations (TAPCR)
1200-3-9-.01--``Construction Permits,'' including the adoption of
federal requirements and the modification of certain other provisions.
In this action, EPA is approving the portions of this SIP submission
that make changes to the definitions of ``baseline actual emissions''
in Tennessee's SIP-approved Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) and nonattainment NSR (NNSR) regulations at TAPCR 1200-3-
9-.01(4)--``Prevention of Significant Air Quality Deterioration'' and
1200-3-9-.01(5)(b)--``Nonattainment Areas,'' respectively. Tennessee's
NSR regulations at TAPCR 1200-3-9-.01 were last revised in the SIP on
July 25, 2013 (78 FR 44886).
    On June 20, 2018 (83 FR 28577), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) proposing to approve the portions of Tennessee's SIP
revision described in Section II, below. The details of Tennessee's SIP
revision and the rationale for EPA's actions are further explained in
the NPRM. EPA received no adverse comments on the proposed approval.

II. Analysis of Tennessee's Submittal

    Tennessee's May 28, 2009, submittal revises the SIP-approved
definitions of ``baseline actual emissions'' at TAPCR 1200-3-
9-.01(4)(b)(45)(i)(III) and 1200-3-9-.01(4)(b)(45)(ii)(IV) for PSD, and
1200-3-9-.01(5)(b)(1)(xlvii)(I)III and 1200-3-
9-.01(5)(b)(1)(xlvii)(II)IV for NNSR. The revised definitions read as
follows (strikethrough indicates language removed from the SIP in this
action and underlined text indicates language added):
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24SE18.001

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

    \1\ The ``baseline actual emissions'' for a proposed project are
considered when determining whether a ``significant emissions
increase'' will occur. If a ``significant emissions increase'' is
shown as a result of the project, then the ``net emissions
increase'' is calculated, considering contemporaneous and creditable
increases and decreases from unrelated projects to determine whether
the project will result in a ``significant net emissions increase.''
Thus, the baseline period referenced here is most relevant to the
determination of a ``significant emissions increase.''
    \2\ Although the revision refers to modifications and new
sources, it does not affect new sources or new units because
Tennessee's SIP-approved rules require new sources/units to use the
actual-to-potential test--not the actual-to-projected-actual test--
and the corresponding baseline actual emissions for new sources/
units are set to zero. This is consistent with federal rules. The
revision only applies to projects that involve multiple existing
emissions units.

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

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR24SE18.002

BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
    The changes mean that a project involving multiple emissions units
is no longer subject to major NSR permitting under the revised
definitions if it meets the limiting criteria identified above for the
use of pollutant-specific baseline periods. EPA's major NSR rules do
not contain such limiting criteria. Under the federal major NSR rules,
a state must adopt the federal definitions into its SIP unless the
state's definitions are more stringent than, or at least as stringent
as, the federal definitions. See 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1) and 51.166(b). EPA
finds that Tennessee's changes to its SIP-approved definitions of
``baseline actual emissions'' are more stringent than the federal
definitions given the limiting criteria and are therefore allowable
changes to Tennessee's SIP-approved NSR program pursuant to 40 CFR
51.165(a)(1) and 51.166(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See footnote 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 110(l) of the CAA prohibits EPA from approving a SIP
revision that would interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and RFP (as defined in section 171), or any other
applicable requirement of the CAA. EPA has determined that the changes
to the Tennessee SIP, as described above, would not violate section
110(l) for the following reasons: (1) Tennessee's changes will maintain
the State program at a more stringent level than the federal NSR
requirements; \4\ (2) the State is currently attaining all of the NAAQS
except for the 2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide (SO2) NAAQS in a
portion of Sullivan County; \5\ and (3) any projects that would not
qualify as major modifications under the revised definitions would
still be subject to the preconstruction review and permitting
requirements of Tennessee's SIP-approved minor NSR regulations at TAPCR
1200-3-9-.01(1). For a more complete discussion, see the NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ EPA also believes that the impact, if any, on air quality as
a result of the changes would be small given the nature of the
actual-to-projected-actual test and the limited applicability of the
multiple baseline provision.
    \5\ On May 12, 2017, TDEC submitted a plan to EPA to attain the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in Sullivan County. EPA proposed
approval of the of the Sullivan County attainment demonstration on
June 29, 2018 (83 FR 30609).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the portions
of TAPCR 1200-3-9-.01--``Construction Permits,'' \6\ which specifically
revise the definitions of ``baseline actual emissions'' in Tennessee's
SIP-approved PSD and NNSR regulations as discussed in Section II
above,\7\ state effective April 24, 2013. EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these materials generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).

Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in
the State implementation plan, have been incorporated by reference by
EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110
and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of
EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference in the next
update to the SIP compilation.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The title of this regulation is erroneously listed as
``Definitions'' in the ``Title/subject'' column of 40 CFR
52.2220(c). Therefore, EPA is correcting the ``Title/subject'' entry
in this action.
    \7\ The state effective date of the rule changes to the
definitions of ``baseline actual emissions'' in Tennessee's May 28,
2009, SIP revision is May 10, 2009. However, these changes to
Tennessee's rule are captured and superseded by the version of TAPCR
1200-3-9-.01 that was state effective on April 24, 2013. On July 25,
2013 (78 FR 44889), EPA approved portions of the April 24, 2013
version of TAPCR 1200-3-9-.01 that were included in a May 10, 2013
SIP revision and modified the state effective date at 40 CFR
52.2220(c) accordingly.
    \8\ See 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Final Action

    EPA is approving the changes to the definitions of ``baseline
actual emissions'' in Tennessee's SIP-approved PSD and NNSR regulations
at TAPCR 1200-3-9-.01(4)--``Prevention of Significant Air Quality
Deterioration'' and 1200-3-9-.01(5)(b)--``Nonattainment Areas,''
respectively, because they are consistent with the CAA and federal
regulations.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. This action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by November 23, 2018. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 10, 2018.
Onis ``Trey'' Glenn, III,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart RR--Tennessee

0
2. In Sec.  52.2220, table 1 in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entry ``Section 1200-3-9-.01'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                   Table 1--EPA Approved Tennessee Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             State
          State citation              Title/subject     effective date   EPA approval date       Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Chapter 1200-3-9 Construction and Operating Permits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 1200-3-9-.01.............  Construction              4/24/2013  9/24/2018, [insert   EPA approved
                                    Permits.                             Federal Register     Tennessee's May
                                                                         citation].           10, 2013, SIP
                                                                                revision to
                                                                                Chapter 1200-3-9-
                                                                                .01 on July 25,
                                                                                2013, with the
                                                                                exception of the
                                                                                PM2.5 SILs (at
                                                                                1200-3-9-.01(5)(b)
                                                                                1(xix)) and SMC
                                                                                (at 1200-3-9-
                                                                                .01(4)(d)6(i)(III)
                                                                                ) as promulgated
                                                                                in the October 20,
                                                                                2010, PM2.5
                                                                                Increments-SILs-
                                                                                SMC Rule.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-20629 Filed 9-21-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 222 (Friday, November 16, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 68856]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28048]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Wednesday,
November 14, 2012 at 9:30 a.m.
    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.
    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)(4), (8), (9)(A)(i) and (ii), and 17 CFR
200.402(a)(4), (8), (9)(A)(i) and (ii), permit consideration of the
scheduled matter at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Walter, as duty officer, voted to consider the item
listed for the Closed Meeting in a closed session, and determined that
no earlier notice was possible.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting will be an examination of
a financial institution.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting item.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact: The Office of the
Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: November 13, 2012.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-28048 Filed 11-14-12; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 82 (Monday, April 29, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25079-25081]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10043]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9807-1]

Forum on Environmental Measurements Announcement of Competency
Policy for Assistance Agreements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Announcement of Competency Policy for Assistance Agreements.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency's Forum on Environmental
Measurements (FEM) is implementing an Agency-wide policy requiring
organizations generating or using environmental data under certain
Agency-funded assistance agreements to submit documentation of their
competency prior to award of the agreement, or if that is not
practicable, prior to beginning any work involving the generation or
use of environmental data under the agreement. The Policy was
originally approved on December 12, 2012 by the Science Technology
Policy Council (STPC) and will be effective on May 15, 2013. The Policy
will apply to all competitive and non-competitive assistance agreements
expected to exceed a total maximum value of $200,000 (in federal
funding) and awarded based on solicitations issued after May 14, 2013.
The Policy will be reviewed against frequently asked questions within
two years after its effective data and will either be reissued without
revision, reissued with revisions, or rescinded.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Comments or questions should be sent

to Ms. Lara P. Phelps, US EPA (E243-05), 109 T. W. Alexander Drive,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709; emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For purposes of this Policy, the following
definitions apply:
    Accreditation--As defined in various International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) publications and glossaries, accreditation is a
procedure by which an authoritative body gives formal recognition that
an entity is competent to carry out specific tasks.
    Assistance agreement--As described in the U.S. EPA Grants and
Debarment Glossary (http://www.epa.gov/ogd/recipient/glossary.htm), an
assistance agreement is the legal instrument that the U.S. EPA uses to
transfer money, property, services, or anything of value to a recipient
to accomplish a public purpose. It is either a grant or a cooperative
agreement and will specify certain things including: budget and project
periods; the federal share of eligible project costs; a description of
the work to be accomplished, and any terms and conditions/special
conditions.
    Competence--As defined in ISO 9000, competence is the demonstrated
ability to apply knowledge and skills.
    Certification--As similarly defined in various ISO publications and
glossaries, certification is the recognition provided by an independent
body related to products, processes, systems or persons.
    Environmental data--As defined in the U.S. EPA Quality Policy (CIO
2106.0; 10/20/08), environmental data include any measurements or
information that describe environmental processes, location or
conditions; ecological or health effects and consequences; or the
performance of environmental technology.

Applicability

    This Policy applies to all U.S. EPA programs (e.g., Program
Offices, Regional Offices, and Laboratories) responsible for
evaluating, issuing, and/or managing Agency assistance agreements
involving organizations generating or using environmental data through
environmental sample collection, field measurements and/or laboratory
analyses. It applies to new competitive and non-competitive awards that
at the time of solicitation issuance or award are expected to exceed
$200,000 (in federal funding) in total maximum value (including any
amendments).\1\ This is an additional award requirement to be
implemented by the project officer(s) and overseen by the project
officer(s) or their technical designee(s). This Policy does not replace
any existing requirements (e.g., general information, quality system
requirements documentation) or prohibit an Agency program from placing
additional requirements or stipulations on an organization receiving an
award. Project officers are responsible for implementing the
requirements under this Policy and ensuring that appropriate
solicitation provisions and programmatic terms and conditions, if
necessary, are included in solicitations and assistance agreements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ While this Policy does not apply to existing awards, or
awards under the dollar threshold, offices are encouraged to apply
this Policy to those awards as deemed appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As mentioned above, this Policy applies to:
     Awards made under competitive solicitations issued after
May 14, 2013 that are expected to exceed $200,000 (in federal funding)
in maximum total value and involve the use or generation of
environmental data; and
     Non-competitive assistance agreements awarded after May
14, 2013 that are expected to exceed $200,000 (in federal funding) in
total maximum value and involve the use or generation of environmental
data.

Background/Authority

    The U.S. EPA Science Policy Council (now U.S. EPA Science and
Technology Policy Council) established the Forum on Environmental
Measurements (FEM) as a standing committee of senior U.S. EPA managers
who provide the Agency and the public with a focal point for addressing
measurement, monitoring and laboratory issues with multi-program
impact. Since the inception of the FEM in April 2004, an action item
has existed for the FEM to assure the competency of organizations
funded by the Agency under acquisition and/or assistance agreements to
generate environmental data through measurement activities. The goal is
to assure that, nationwide, organizations performing environmental data
operations have effective quality management systems and technical
competence, and thus have the capability to generate valid
environmental data.
    In 2004, the Agency issued a policy to assure the competency of
U.S. EPA laboratories. In 2011, the Agency issued a second policy to
assure the competency of organizations (e.g., laboratories, field
sampling and measurement) generating environmental data under Agency-
funded acquisitions (i.e., contracts).
    The Policy announced today was developed to ensure the use of
competent organizations for performing activities involving the use or
generation of environmental data under Agency-funded assistance
agreements. As explained below, these organizations will have to
demonstrate competency either prior to award or prior to beginning such
activities. Project officers are responsible for implementing this
requirement.
    A Frequently Asked Question document is available with further
details on implementing this Policy.\2\ This will be revised and
updated as necessary. Questions as to whether activities involve the
use or generation of environmental data and are covered by this Policy
should be referred to the FEM (http://www.epa.gov/fem/lab_comp.htm).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See http://www.epa.gov/fem/lab_comp.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Requirements

    Organizations performing activities involving the use or generation
of environmental data under covered assistance agreements shall provide
the Agency with:
     Quality documentation such as a quality management plan
(QMP), and/or other documentation that demonstrates conformance to U.S.
EPA quality program requirements; \3\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See http://www.epa.gov/quality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Demonstration of competency in the field(s) of expertise.
    Demonstration of competency may include (but not be limited to):
     Current participation in accreditation or certification
programs that are applicable to the environmental data generated under
the Agency-funded assistance;
     Ongoing participation by the organization in proficiency
testing (PT) or round robin programs conducted by external
organizations;
     Ongoing U.S. EPA accepted demonstrations and audits/
assessments of proficiency; and
     Other pertinent documentation that demonstrates competency
(e.g., past performance to similar statement of work [SOW]).

Assistance agreement solicitations and agreements will include
applicable provisions and terms and conditions. Examples will be
contained in the FAQ document.

Implementation

    Competitive awards and solicitations: Program offices that issue
competitive solicitations expected to result in awards exceeding
$200,000 (in federal funding) in total maximum value that

will involve the generation or use of environmental data must include a
provision in the solicitation indicating that applicants for these
awards must demonstrate competency (i) prior to award or (ii) if that
is not practicable or will unduly delay the award prior to beginning
such activities under the award. For awards covered by (i) above where
the Project Officer obtains the competency demonstration prior to award
the Project Officer will include the demonstration in their file. For
awards covered by (ii) above, where the competency demonstration will
be made after award, the Project Officer will include a programmatic
term and condition in the grant requiring the grantee to demonstrate
competency prior to performing any work involving the use or generation
of environmental data. This competency demonstration should be
documented in the project officer's file. Sample clauses will be
provided in the FAQ document.
    Non-competitive awards: Program offices that make non-competitive
awards expected to exceed $200,000 (in federal funding) in total
maximum value that will involve the generation or use of environmental
data should ensure that the applicant demonstrates their competency to
perform such activities prior to award. This will be documented by the
Project Officer in their file. However, if obtaining the competency
demonstration prior to award is impracticable or will cause a
significant delay of the award, project officers must include a
programmatic term and condition in the grant requiring the grantee to
demonstrate competency prior to performing any such activities. This
competency demonstration should be documented in the project officer's
file. Sample clauses will be provided in the FAQ document.
    Awards: If, at time of award, it is uncertain whether the award
will exceed $200,000 (in federal funding) in total maximum value and
involve the generation or use of environmental data, the project
officer will include a term/condition in the award that the recipient
must demonstrate competency prior to performing any such activities (an
example will be put in the FAQ document).

References

 U.S. EPA Grants and Debarment, http://www.epa.gov/ogd.
 U.S. EPA CIO 2106.0 U.S. EPA Quality Policy, October 20,
2008, http://www.epa.gov/irmpoli8/policies/21060.pdf.
 U.S. EPA CIO 2105-P-01-0 EPA Quality Manual for
Environmental Programs, May 5, 2000, http://www.epa.gov/irmpoli8/policies/2105P010.pdf.
 U.S. EPA Agency Policy Directive Assuring the Competency of
Environmental Protection Agency Laboratories, February 23, 2004,
http://www.epa.gov/fem/pdfs/labdirective.pdf.
 U.S. EPA Agency Policy Directive FEM-2011-01 Policy to
Assure Competency of Organizations Generating Environmental
Measurement Data under Agency Funded Acquisitions, March 28, 2011,
http://www.epa.gov/fem/pdfs/fem-lab-competency-policy.pdf.

    Dated: April 19, 2013.
Glenn Paulson,
Science Advisor, Office of the Science Advisor.
[FR Doc. 2013-10043 Filed 4-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 141 (Tuesday, July 23, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44089-44090]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17673]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 770

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0018; FRL-9394-1]
RIN 2070-AJ92

Formaldehyde Emissions Standards for Composite Wood Products;
Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: EPA issued a proposed rule in the Federal Register of June 10,
2013, concerning formaldehyde emissions standards for composite wood
products. This document extends the comment period from August 9, 2013,
to September 9, 2013. After receiving requests for an extension, EPA
believes it is appropriate to extend the comment period in order to
give stakeholders additional time to assess the impacts of the
proposal, review technical documents in the docket, and prepare
comments.

DATES: The EPA is extending the comment date on a proposed rule
published June 10, 2013 at 78 FR 34820. Comments, identified by docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0018, must be received on
or before September 9, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Follow the detailed instructions as provided under ADDRESSES
in the Federal Register document of June 10, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information contact:
Cindy Wheeler, National Program Chemicals Division, Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202) 566-0484; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document extends the public comment
period established in the Federal Register of June 10, 2013 (78 FR
34820) (FRL-9342-3). EPA is hereby extending the comment period, which
was set to end on August 9, 2013, to September 9, 2013.
    To submit comments, or access the docket, please follow the
detailed instructions as provided under ADDRESSES in the June 10, 2013,
Federal Register document. If you have questions, consult the technical
contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 770

    Environmental protection, Formaldehyde, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Toxic substances, Wood.

    Dated: July 17, 2013.
James Jones,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2013-17673 Filed 7-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 228 (Friday, November 27, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 73955-73957]
[FR Doc No: 2015-29876]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2015-3642; Directorate Identifier 2015-CE-028-AD;
Amendment 39-18335; AD 2015-24-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; SOCATA Airplanes

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for SOCATA
Model TB 9, TB 10, TB 20, TB 21, and TB 200 airplanes. This AD results
from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by an
aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe
condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe
condition as corrosion of the horizontal stabilizer. We are issuing
this AD to require actions to address the unsafe condition on these
products.

DATES: This AD is effective January 4, 2016.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of January 4,
2016.

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
3642; or in person at Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact SOCATA NORTH
AMERICA, North Perry Airport, 601 NE 10 Street, Pompano Beach, Florida
33060; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet: http://www.socatanorthamerica.com/default.htm. You may view this referenced
service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust,
Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. It is also available on
the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for Docket No.
FAA-2015-3642.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Albert J. Mercado, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to SOCATA Models TB 9, TB 10,
TB 20, TB 21, and TB 200 airplanes. The NPRM was published in the
Federal Register on August 28, 2015 (80 FR 52215). The NPRM proposed to
correct an unsafe condition for the specified products and was based on
mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an
aviation authority of another country. The MCAI states:

    During accomplishment of SOCATA Service Bulletin (SB) SB10-152-
55 at original issue, some operators reported finding heavy
corrosion of the horizontal stabilizer (HS) spar.
    The results of the technical investigation have identified that
the corrosion was caused by humidity ingress in the HS on aeroplanes
subject to severe environmental conditions.
    This condition, if not detected and corrected, could result in
buckling and permanent HS distortion, possibly resulting in reduced
control of the aeroplane.
    To address this unsafe condition, SOCATA issued SB 10-152-55
Revision 1 to provide instructions for inspection and corrective
action.
    For the reasons described above, this AD requires repetitive
inspections of the affected area of the HS and, depending on
findings, accomplishment of applicable corrective action(s).

The MCAI can be found in the AD docket on the Internet at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-3642-0001.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. The following presents the comment received on the proposal
and the FAA's response to the comment.

Request

    Anthony Pynes commented that that he does not believe the
methodology used and the foundational data available supports the need
for this AD, and thus he believes that this AD is not necessary.
    We do not agree. The FAA, in working with the State of Design
airworthiness authority (EASA), determined that the actions of this AD
on the horizontal stabilizer of the affected airplanes are necessary to
correct an unsafe condition. Included in this is the risk in
establishing such actions at the required compliance times. No changes
to the AD have been made based on this comment.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the
AD as proposed except for minor editorial changes. We have determined
that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (80 FR 52215, August 28, 2015) for correcting the unsafe
condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (80 FR 52215, August 28, 2015).

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

    We reviewed DAHER-SOCATA TB Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB
10-152, Amendment 1, dated April 2015. The service information
describes procedures for inspection for corrosion on the horizontal
stabilizer spar and repair, if necessary. This service information is
reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it
through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
the ADDRESSES section of the AD.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD will affect 195 products of U.S. registry.
We also estimate that it would take about 2 work-hours per product to
comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average
labor rate is $85 per work-hour.
    Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of this AD on U.S.
operators to be $33,150, or $170 per product.
    In addition, we estimate that any necessary follow-on actions would
take about 15 to 38 work-hours and require parts costing $250 to $400
depending on the type of repair, for a cost of $2,325 to $4,280 per
product. The cost may vary depending on the extent of damage found. We
have no way of determining the number of products that may need these
actions.

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 products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that 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 this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, 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.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-
3642; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains the NPRM, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received,
and other information. The street address for the Docket Office
(telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt.

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 AD:

2015-24-03 SOCATA: Amendment 39-18335; Docket No. FAA-2015-3642;
Directorate Identifier 2015-CE-028-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes effective January 4,
2016.

(b) Affected ADs

    None.

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to SOCATA Models TB 9, TB 10, TB 20, TB 21, and
TB 200 airplanes, all manufacturer serial numbers, certificated in
any category.

(d) Subject

    Air Transport Association of America (ATA) Code 55: Stabilizers.

(e) Reason

    This AD was prompted by mandatory continuing airworthiness
information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another
country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as corrosion of the
horizontal stabilizer. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
corrosion of the horizontal stabilizer (HS) spar, which could result
in buckling and permanent HS distortion, possibly resulting in
reduced control.

(f) Actions and Compliance

    Unless already done, do the actions in paragraphs (f)(1) through
(f)(5) of this AD:
    (1) Within 13 months after January 4, 2016 (the effective date
of this AD) and repetitively thereafter at intervals not to exceed
72 months, do a special detailed inspection of the HS spar following
the instructions of DAHER-SOCATA TB Aircraft Mandatory Service
Bulletin SB 10-152, Amendment 1, dated April 2015.
    (2) If no discrepancy is detected during any inspections
required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, protect the HS spar
following the instructions of DAHER-SOCATA TB Aircraft Mandatory
Service Bulletin SB 10-152, Amendment 1, dated April 2015.
    (3) If any discrepancy is detected during any inspection
required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD, before further flight, do
the applicable corrective action(s) following the instructions of
DAHER-SOCATA TB Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 10-152,
Amendment 1, dated April 2015.
    (4) Accomplishment of protection or corrective actions on an
airplane as required by paragraph (f)(2) or (f)(3) of this AD, as
applicable, does not constitute terminating action for the
repetitive inspections as required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD
for that airplane.
    (5) Inspections and corrective actions on an airplane done
before January 4, 2016 (the effective date of this AD) following the
instructions of DAHER-SOCATA TB Aircraft Recommended Service
Bulletin SB 10-152, dated May 2013, are acceptable to comply with
the requirements of this AD for that airplane. After January 4, 2016
(the effective date of this AD), repetitive inspections and
applicable corrective actions, as required by this AD, must be done
as required by paragraph (f)(1) of this AD following the
instructions of DAHER-SOCATA TB Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin
SB 10-152, Amendment 1, dated April 2015.

(g) Other FAA AD Provisions

    The following provisions also apply to this AD:
    (1) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs): The Manager,
Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this
AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send
information to ATTN: Albert Mercado, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small
Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Before using any approved AMOC on any
airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate
principal inspector (PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District Office
(FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
    (2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement in this AD to obtain
corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these
actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered
FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority

(or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(h) Related Information

    Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD No.
2015-0130, dated July 7, 2015; and DAHER-SOCATA TB Aircraft
Recommended Service Bulletin SB 10-152, dated May 2013, for related
information. The MCAI can be found in the AD docket on the Internet
at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA-2015-3642-
0001.

(i) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) DAHER-SOCATA TB Aircraft Mandatory Service Bulletin SB 10-
152, Amendment 1, dated April 2015.
    (ii) Reserved.
    (3) For SOCATA service information identified in this AD,
contact SOCATA NORTH AMERICA, North Perry Airport, 601 NE 10 Street,
Pompano Beach, Florida 33060; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet:
http://www.socatanorthamerica.com/default.htm.
    (4) You may review this referenced service information at the
FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri
64106. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. In addition, you can access this service
information on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov by
searching for and locating Docket No. FAA-2015-3642.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference 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/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on November 17, 2015.
Melvin Johnson,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-29876 Filed 11-25-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 160 (Monday, August 19, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50489-50491]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19987]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Petition for Exemption From the Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Volkswagen Group of America,
Inc.'s (Volkswagen) petition for exemption of the Audi confidential
vehicle line in accordance with 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from the
Theft Prevention Standard. This petition is granted because the agency
has determined that the antitheft device to be placed on the line as
standard equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and
deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking
requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard, 49 CFR part 541, Federal
Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard. Volkswagen requested
confidential treatment for specific information in its petition. The
agency will address Volkswagen's request for confidential treatment by
separate letter.

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2015 model year.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Deborah Mazyck, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, West
Building, W43-443, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Ms. Mazyck's phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Her fax number is (202)
493-2990.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated April 9, 2013,
Volkswagen requested an exemption from the parts-marking requirements
of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541) for the new MY 2015
Audi vehicle line. The petition requested an exemption from parts-
marking requirement pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle
Theft Prevention Standard, based on the installation of an antitheft
device as standard equipment for an entire vehicle line.

    Under 49 CFR part 543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to
grant an exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its
petition, Volkswagen provided a detailed description and diagram of the
identity, design, and location of the components of the antitheft
device for its Audi vehicle line. Volkswagen will install its
transponder-based electronic engine immobilizer antitheft device as
standard equipment on its Audi vehicle line beginning with MY 2015.
Volkswagen stated that its immobilizer device is aimed to actively
incorporate the engine control unit into the evaluation and monitoring
process. Key components of the antitheft device will include a passive
immobilizer, a warning message indicator, a transponder ignition key
(key fob), an engine control unit and an immobilizer control unit.
Volkswagen stated that its Audi vehicle line will also be available
with an optional keyless entry and locking control, and a keyless start
feature. Volkswagen stated that the keyless entry and locking control
uses a transponder key that allows the doors to be locked by touching a
button on the outside door handle of the vehicle door, or to be opened
by touching the outside door handle when the key fob is near the door.
Volkswagen also stated that its antitheft device will include an
audible and visible alarm system as standard equipment. Volkswagen's
submission is considered a complete petition as required by 49 CFR
543.7, in that it meets the general requirements contained in 49 CFR
543.5 and the specific content requirements of 49 CFR 543.6. Volkswagen
stated that the immobilizer is activated automatically after the key is
removed from the ignition lock, or for the keyless system, after the
key fob is removed from the vehicle (i.e., ignition off). Deactivation
of the immobilizer device occurs when the ignition is turned on or the
key transponder is recognized by the immobilizer control unit. The key
transponder sends a fixed code to the immobilizer control unit. If this
is identified as the correct code, a variable code is generated in the
immobilizer control unit and sent to the transponder. A secret
arithmetic process is then started according to a set of specific
equations. The results of the computing process are evaluated in the
control unit and if verified, the vehicle key is acknowledged as
correct. The engine control unit then sends a variable code to the
immobilizer control unit. If all the data matches, start-up of the
vehicle is enabled. Volkswagen stated that a new variable code is
generated every time the immobilizer goes through the secret computing
process. Therefore, Volkswagen believes that the code is
undecipherable.
    Volkswagen also informed the agency that the antitheft device will
also include an audible and visible alarm feature as standard
equipment. When the alarm system is activated, the horn will sound and
the vehicle's exterior lights will flash when unauthorized entry is
attempted by opening the hood, doors or luggage compartment. The
antitheft alarm system is also activated when the vehicle is locked by
pressing the lock button on the remote control vehicle key.
Deactivation of the alarm system is performed by opening the vehicle
with the key fob, using the mechanical key in the driver's door lock
cylinder or opening the vehicle using the keyless entry and locking
control.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 49 CFR 543.6,
Volkswagen provided information on the reliability and durability of
its proposed device. To ensure reliability and durability of the
device, Volkswagen stated that the antitheft device has been tested for
compliance to its corporate requirements, including those for
electrical and electronic assemblies in motor vehicles related to
performance.
    In support of its belief that its antitheft device will be as or
more effective in reducing and deterring vehicle theft than the parts-
marking requirement, Volkswagen referenced the effectiveness of
immobilizer devices installed on other vehicles for which NHTSA has
granted exemptions. Specifically, Volkswagen referenced information
from the Highway Loss Data Institute which showed that BMW vehicles
experienced theft loss reductions resulting in a 73% decrease in
relative claim frequency and a 78% lower average loss payment per claim
for vehicles equipped with an immobilizer. Additionally, Volkswagen
stated that the proposed device is similar to the antitheft device
installed on its Audi A3 vehicle line which was granted an exemption by
the agency on March 13, 2009 (see 74 FR 10984). Using an average of 2
MYs' data (2010 and preliminary 2011), the theft rate for the Audi A3
vehicle line was 1.1785, which is significantly lower than the median.
    Based on the supporting evidence submitted by Volkswagen on the
device, the agency believes that the antitheft device for the Audi
vehicle line will likely be as effective in reducing and deterring
motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking requirements
of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541). The agency
concludes that the device will provide the five types of performance
listed in 49 CFR 543.6(a)(3): promoting activation; attracting
attention to the efforts of an unauthorized person to enter or move a
vehicle by means other than a key; preventing defeat or circumvention
of the device by unauthorized persons; preventing operation of the
vehicle by unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the reliability and
durability of the device.
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7 (b), the agency grants
a petition for exemption from the parts-marking requirements of part
541 either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of part 541. The agency
finds that Volkswagen has provided adequate reasons for its belief that
the antitheft device for the Volkswagen Audi vehicle line is likely to
be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention
Standard (49 CFR part 541). This conclusion is based on the information
Volkswagen provided about its device.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full
Volkswagen's petition for exemption for the Volkswagen Audi vehicle
line from the parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR part 541, beginning
with the 2015 model year vehicles. The agency notes that 49 CFR part
541, Appendix A-1, identifies those lines that are exempted from the
Theft Prevention Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR 543.7(f)
contains publication requirements incident to the disposition of all
part 543 petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of future
product nameplates, the beginning model year for which the petition is
granted and a general description of the antitheft device is necessary
in order to notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle lines
exempted from the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention
Standard.
    If Volkswagen decides not to use the exemption for this line, it
must formally notify the agency. If such a decision is made, the line
must be fully marked according to the requirements under 49 CFR 541.5
and 541.6 (marking of major component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if Volkswagen wishes in the future to modify the
device on which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit

a petition to modify the exemption. Part 543.7(d) states that a part
543 exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted
under this part and equipped with the anti-theft device on which the
line's exemption is based. Further, part 543.9(c)(2) provides for the
submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use of
an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in
that exemption.''
    The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that part
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself.
The agency did not intend in drafting part 543 to require the
submission of a modification petition for every change to the
components or design of an antitheft device. The significance of many
such changes could be de minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the
manufacturer contemplates making any changes, the effects of which
might be characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency
before preparing and submitting a petition to modify.

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR
1.50.

    Dated: July 29, 2013.
Christopher J. Bonanti,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
    [Signature page, Grant of Petition for Exemption, 2015 VW
AudiConfidential]
[FR Doc. 2013-19987 Filed 8-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 21, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28367-28369]
[FR Doc No: 2017-12889]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-80939; File No. SR-BatsBYX-2017-15]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Bats BYX Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change Related to
Fees for Use on Bats BYX Exchange, Inc.

June 15, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on June 9, 2017, Bats BYX Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated the proposed rule change as one establishing or
changing a member due, fee, or other charge imposed by the Exchange
under Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(2)
thereunder,\4\ which renders the proposed rule change effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend the fee schedule applicable
to Members \5\ and non-Members of the Exchange pursuant to BYX Rules
15.1(a) and (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The term ``Member'' is defined as ``any registered broker or
dealer that has been admitted to membership in the Exchange.'' See
Exchange Rule 1.5(n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange's
Web site at www.bats.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such
statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend its fee schedule applicable to its
equities trading platform (``BYX Equities'') to: (i) Modify the rates
associated with fee codes AA, BJ and RA; and (ii) increase the scope of
executions subject to fee code IX. The Exchange notes that Bats EDGA
Exchange, Inc. (``EDGA'') implemented certain pricing changes effective
June 1, 2017, including modification of various fees and rebates to add
and remove liquidity with a displayed or IOC order to a flat fee of
$0.0003 per share to add or remove liquidity with a displayed or IOC
order.\6\ The proposed changes to AA, BJ, and RA are proposed in light
of these changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Press Release, Bats Announces Fee Overhaul of EDGA
Equities Exchange (May 30, 2017), available at http://ir.cboe.com/press-releases/2017/05-30-2017.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fee Code AA
    The Exchange proposes to modify the rate associated with orders
yielding fee code AA, which results from an order routed to EDGA using
ALLB routing strategy,\7\ from a $0.0002 per share rebate to a fee of
$0.0003 per share for securities priced at or above $1.00. The Exchange
does not propose to modify the rate for orders yielding fee code AA for
securities priced below $1.00, which are currently not charged a fee
nor provided a rebate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ALLB is a routing option under which the order checks the
System for available shares and is then sent to the Bats BZX
Exchange, Inc. (``BZX''), EDGA, and Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc.
(``EDGX'' collectively with the Exchange, BZX, and EDGA, the ``BGM
Affiliated Exchanges''). See the Exchange's routing strategies
available at http://cdn.batstrading.com/resources/features/bats_exchange_routing-strategies.pdf. See also Exchange Rule
11.13(b)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fee Code BJ
    The Exchange proposes to modify the rate associated with orders
yielding fee code BJ, which result from an order routed to EDGA using
the Destination Specific (``DIRC''),\8\ TRIM or TRIM2 routing
strategies,\9\ from a rebate of $0.0002 per share to a fee of $0.0003
per share for all securities (i.e., those priced at or above $1.00 and
those priced below $1.00).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See the Exchange's routing strategies available at http://cdn.batstrading.com/resources/features/bats_exchange_routing-strategies.pdf. See also Exchange Rule 11.13(b)(3).
    \9\ The TRIM and TRIM2 routing strategies focus on seeking
execution of orders while minimizing execution costs by routing only
to certain low cost execution venues on the Exchange's System
routing table. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fee Code RA
    The Exchange proposes to decrease the fee associated with orders
yielding fee code RA, which results from an order routed to EDGA which
adds liquidity, from a fee of $0.0005 per share to a fee of $0.0003 per
share for securities priced at or above $1.00. The Exchange does not
propose to modify the rate for orders yielding fee code RA for
securities priced below $1.00, which are currently not charged a fee
nor provided a rebate.
Fee Code IX
    The Exchange proposes to modify the routing strategies applicable
to fee code IX to include the TRIM or TRIM2 routing strategies. Fee
code IX is currently appended to all orders that are routed to the
Investors Exchange, Inc. (``IEX'') using the Destination Specific
routing strategy (also referred to as ``DIRC'').\10\ The Exchange does
not

propose to modify the rate of $0.0010 per share currently charged
orders appended with IX. The Exchange notes that it has not previously
included IEX on the routing tables for TRIM and TRIM2 but began to do
so effective June 1, 2017, and thus, that the proposed change is
necessary to account for executions at IEX through such routing
strategies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See the Exchange's routing strategies available at http://cdn.batstrading.com/resources/features/bats_exchange_routing-strategies.pdf. See also Rule 11.13(b)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation Date
    The Exchange proposes to implement the above changes to its fee
schedule immediately.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The Exchange initially submitted the proposed fee change on
June 1, 2017. (SR-BatsBYX-2017-14). On June 9, 2017, the Exchange
withdrew SR-BatsBYX-2017-14 and submitted this filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes are consistent
with the objectives of Section 6 of the Act,\12\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(4),\13\ in particular, as it is
designed to provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues,
fees and other charges among its Members and other persons using its
facilities. The Exchange also notes that it operates in a highly-
competitive market in which market participants can readily direct
order flow to competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular
venue to be excessive or incentives to be insufficient. The proposed
rule changes reflect a competitive pricing structure designed to
incentivize market participants to direct their order flow to the
Exchange. Furthermore, the Exchange notes that routing through the
Exchange's affiliate, Bats Trading, is voluntary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fee Codes AA, BJ, and RA
    As noted above, EDGA implemented certain pricing changes effective
June 1, 2017, including modification of various fees and rebates to and
remove liquidity with a displayed or IOC order to a flat fee of $0.0003
per share to add or remove liquidity with a displayed or IOC order.\14\
The changes to fee codes AA, BJ, and RA are proposed in light of these
changes and reflect a pass-through of the pricing provided by EDGA. As
the pricing in securities priced at or above $1.00 reflects the same
pricing a Member would receive for participation on EDGA directly and
the pricing in securities priced below $1.00 is based on the current
pricing model applied by the Exchange, the Exchange believes the
proposed fees are reasonable and equitably allocated. The Exchange
further believes the proposed fees are non-discriminatory because they
apply uniformly to all Members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See supra, note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fee Code IX
    The Exchange believes that its proposal to include TRIM and TRIM2
routing strategies for orders routed to IEX that yield fee code IX is
equitable and reasonable because routing through Bats Trading is
voluntary and Members may utilize other avenues to route orders to IEX,
such as connecting to IEX directly. Lastly, the Exchange also believes
that the proposed alternative routing strategies are non-discriminatory
because the availability applies uniformly to all Members.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange does not believe
that any of the proposed changes to the Exchange's routing pricing
burden competition, as they are based on the pricing on other venues.
The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in
which market participants can readily direct order flow to competing
venues if they deem fee structures to be unreasonable or excessive. The
Exchange does not believe the proposed amendments would burden
intramarket competition as they would be available to all Members
uniformly.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received
any unsolicited written comments from Members or other interested
parties.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \15\ and paragraph (f) of Rule 19b-4
thereunder.\16\ At any time within 60 days of the filing of the
proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend
such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is
necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of
investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-BatsBYX-2017-15 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-BatsBYX-2017-15. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File No. SR-BatsBYX-2017-15, and should be
submitted on or before July 12, 2017.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-12889 Filed 6-20-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 101 (Thursday, May 24, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24026-24028]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11110]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2018-0444]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Laguna Madre, South Padre Island, TX

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
certain navigable waters of Laguna Madre, South Padre Island, TX. This
safety zone is necessary to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine
environment from potential hazards associated with firework displays.
Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Corpus Christi or a
designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8:45 p.m. on May 25, 2018, through
9:45 p.m. on September 2, 2018.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2018-0444 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Petty Officer Kevin Kyles, Sector Corpus Christi
Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 361-939-
5125, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port Sector Corpus Christi
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)(3)(B), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) with respect to this rule because it would be impracticable.
This safety zone must be established by May 25, 2018 and we lack
sufficient time to provide a reasonable comment period and then
consider those comments before issuing this rule. The NPRM process
would delay the establishment of the safety zone until after the
scheduled date of the fireworks and compromise public safety.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Delaying the effective date of
this rule would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest
because immediate action is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels,
persons, and marine environment during the fireworks display.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The Captain of the Port Sector Corpus Christi (COTP) has
determined that potential hazards associated with the fireworks display
occurring on May 25, 2018 through September 2, 2018 will be a safety
concern for anyone within a 1000-foot radius of the fireworks display.
This rule is necessary to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine
environment before, during, and after the scheduled firework displays.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 8:45 p.m. on May 25, 2018
through 9:45 p.m. on September 2, 2018. It will be enforced from 8:45
p.m. through 9:45 p.m. each day on May 25, 27; June 1, 7, 8, 14, 15,
21, 22, 28, 29; July 4, 5, 6, 12, 13, 19, 20, 26, 27; August 2, 3, 9,
10, 17,

24, 31; and September 2, 2018. The safety zone will cover all navigable
waters within 1000 feet of the fireworks barge located in the
approximate position 026[deg]06'19'' N, 097[deg]10'55.4'' W, in South
Padre Island, TX. The duration of the zone is intended to protect
personnel, vessels, and the marine environment before, during, and
after the scheduled firework displays.
    Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Corpus Christi (COTP) or a
designated representative. No vessel or person will be permitted to
enter the safety zone without obtaining permission from the COTP or a
designated representative. A designated representative is a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard
assigned to units under the operational control of USCG Sector Corpus
Christi. All persons and vessels permitted to enter this safety zone
must transit at the slowest safe speed and comply with all lawful
directions issued by the COTP or the designated representative. The
COTP or a designated representative will inform the public of the
enforcement times and date for this safety zone through Broadcast
Notices to Mariners (BNMs), Local Notices to Mariners (LNMs), and/or
Marine Safety Information Bulletins (MSIBs), as appropriate.

V. Regulatory Analyses

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

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and time-of-day of the safety zone. Vessel traffic
will be able to safely transit around this safety zone, which will
impact a small designated area of Laguna Madre for about 1 hour during
evenings when vessel traffic is normally low. Moreover, the Coast Guard
will issue a BNMs via VHF-FM marine channel 16 about the zone, and the
rule allows vessels to seek permission to enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

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

C. Collection of Information

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

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the
Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is
one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves
a safety zone lasting one hour that would prohibit entry within 500
feet of the fireworks launch location. It is categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of
DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of
Environmental Consideration

supporting this determination is available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

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

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 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.T08-0444 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0444   Safety Zone; Laguna Madre, South Padre Island, TX.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All navigable
waters of Laguna Madre encompassing a 1000-foot radius around a
fireworks display barge in the approximate position of 026[deg]06'19''
N, 097[deg]10'55.4'' W, in South Padre Island, TX.
    (b) Effective period. This section is effective from 8:45 p.m. to
9:45 p.m. from May 25, 2018, through September 2, 2018.
    (c) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 8:45
p.m. through 9:45 p.m. each day on May 25, 27; June 1, 7, 8, 14, 15,
21, 22, 28, 29; July 4, 5, 6, 12, 13, 19, 20, 26, 27; August 2, 3, 9,
10, 17, 24, 31; and September 2, 2018.
    (d) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.23 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Corpus Christi (COTP) or a
designated representative. A designated representative is a
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer of the U.S. Coast Guard
assigned to units under the operational control of USCG Sector Corpus
Christi.
    (2) Persons or vessels seeking to enter the safety zone must
request permission from the COTP or a designated representative on VHF-
FM channel 16 or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) All persons and vessels permitted to enter this safety zone
must transit at the slowest safe speed and comply with all lawful
directions issued by the COTP or the designated representative.
    (e) Information broadcasts. The COTP or a designated representative
will inform the public of the enforcement times and date for this
safety zone through Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNMs), Local Notices
to Mariners (LNMs), and/or Marine Safety Information Bulletins (MSIBs)
as appropriate.

    Dated: May 18, 2018.
E.J. Gaynor,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Corpus Christi.
[FR Doc. 2018-11110 Filed 5-23-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P