[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 219 (Wednesday, November 15, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78466-78467]
[FR Doc No: 2023-25168]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Hazardous Materials: Notice of Applications for New Special
Permits

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: List of applications for special permits.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures governing the application
for, and the processing of, special permits from the Department of
Transportation's Hazardous Material Regulations, notice is hereby given
that the Office of Hazardous Materials Safety has received the
application described herein.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 15, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Record Center, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety

Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC
20590.
    Comments should refer to the application number and be submitted in
triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of comments is desired, include
a self-addressed stamped postcard showing the special permit number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald Burger, Chief, Office of
Hazardous Materials Safety General Approvals and Permits Branch,
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department
of Transportation, East Building, PHH-13, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
Southeast, Washington, DC 20590-0001,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Each mode of transportation for which a
particular special permit is requested is indicated by a number in the
``Nature of Application'' portion of the table below as follows: 1--
Motor vehicle, 2--Rail freight, 3--Cargo vessel, 4--Cargo aircraft
only, 5--Passenger-carrying aircraft.
    Copies of the applications are available for inspection in the
Records Center, East Building, PHH-13, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
Southeast, Washington, DC.
    This notice of receipt of applications for special permit is
published in accordance with part 107 of the Federal hazardous
materials transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5117(b); 49 CFR 1.53(b)).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 3, 2023.
Donald P. Burger,
Chief, General Approvals and Permits Branch.

                          Special Permits Data
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Nature of the
   Application       Applicant      Regulation(s)      special permits
     number                            affected            thereof
------------------------------------------------------------------------
21656-N.........  Rawhide Leasing  173.302a(b)....  To authorize the
                   Company LLC.                      requalification of
                                                     3A, 3AA, 3AX, 3AAx
                                                     and 3T cylinders by
                                                     proof pressure
                                                     testing in
                                                     accordance with CGA
                                                     Pamphlet C-1 in
                                                     lieu of hydrostatic
                                                     or direct expansion
                                                     testing. (modes 1,
                                                     3).
21658-N.........  Veolia ES        173.21(b),       To authorize the one-
                   Technical        173.51,          time, one-way
                   Solutions LLC.   173.54(a),       transportation in
                                    173.56(b).       commerce of
                                                     unapproved
                                                     explosives for the
                                                     purpose of
                                                     disposal. (mode 1).
21659-N.........  Siller           172.400,         To authorize the
                   Helicopters,     172.101,         transportation in
                   Inc.             172.200,         commerce of certain
                                    172.204(c)(3),   hazardous materials
                                    172.204(c)(3),   by 14 CFR Part 133
                                    172.300,         cargo-only aircraft
                                    173.27(b)(2),    (rotorcraft
                                    175.30(a)(1).    external load
                                                     operations)
                                                     transporting
                                                     hazardous materials
                                                     attached to or
                                                     suspended from the
                                                     aircraft, and Part
                                                     135, as applicable,
                                                     in remote areas of
                                                     the US only,
                                                     without being
                                                     subject to certain
                                                     hazard
                                                     communication
                                                     requirements,
                                                     quantity
                                                     limitations and
                                                     certain loading and
                                                     stowage
                                                     requirements. (mode
                                                     4).
21661-N.........  Thermavant       173.301(f),      To authorize the
                   Technologies,    173.302a(a)(1)   transportation in
                   LLC.             ,                commerce of certain
                                    173.304a(a)(2).  non-DOT
                                                     specification
                                                     containers
                                                     containing
                                                     anhydrous ammonia
                                                     for use in
                                                     specialty cooling
                                                     applications in the
                                                     DoD and Aerospace
                                                     industry. (mode 1).
21662-N.........  Tank Traders     180.215........  To authorize the
                   Missouri.                         transportation in
                                                     commerce of propane
                                                     cylinders where the
                                                     visual inspection
                                                     record is created
                                                     in an alternative
                                                     manner.
21663-N.........  Orbion Space     173.301(f)(1),   To authorize the
                   Technology,      173.302a.        transportation in
                   Inc..                             commerce of non-DOT
                                                     specification
                                                     cylinders intended
                                                     for use in
                                                     spacecraft. (mode
                                                     1).
21664-N.........  Champion         173.158(f)(3)..  To authorize the
                   Container                         transportation in
                   Corporation.                      commerce of nitric
                                                     acid in combination
                                                     packaging where the
                                                     inner packagings
                                                     are not further
                                                     individually
                                                     overpacked in
                                                     tightly closed
                                                     metal packagings.
                                                     (modes 1, 2, 3).
21665-N.........  Weilert          178.935(c)(1)..  To authorize the
                   Enterprises,                      manufacture, mark,
                   Inc.                              sale, and use of UN
                                                     50D large
                                                     packagings with a
                                                     volumetric capacity
                                                     exceeding 3000 L.
21666-N.........  CMC Materials,   173.22(a)(2),    To authorize the
                   Inc.             173.24(c)(1)(i   transportation in
                                    ).               commerce of certain
                                                     oxidizing liquids
                                                     in alternative
                                                     packaging. (mode
                                                     1).
21667-N.........  Hanwha Cimarron  173.302(a).....  To authorize the
                   LLC.                              manufacture, mark,
                                                     sale, and use of
                                                     non-DOT
                                                     specification fiber
                                                     reinforced
                                                     composite cylinders
                                                     with non-load
                                                     sharing plastic
                                                     liners in
                                                     compliance with UN/
                                                     ISO11515: 2013,
                                                     Type 4. (modes 1,
                                                     2, 3).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2023-25168 Filed 11-14-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 51 (Friday, March 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14216-14217]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05308]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP17-28-000]

Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review of the 2017 Expansion Project

    On December 30, 2016, Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company (Eastern
Shore) filed an application in Docket No. CP17-28-000 requesting a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity pursuant to Section
7(c) of the Natural Gas Act to construct and operate certain natural
gas pipeline facilities. Eastern Shore's proposal is known as the 2017

Expansion Project (Project), and would involve construction of
approximately 40 miles of pipeline and appurtenant facilities located
in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Delaware to provide 61,162 dekatherms
per day of additional firm transportation service.
    On January 11, 2017, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission or FERC) issued its Notice of Application for the Project.
Among other things, that notice alerted agencies issuing federal
authorizations of the requirement to complete all necessary reviews and
to reach a final decision on a request for a federal authorization
within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Project. This instant notice
identifies the FERC staff's planned schedule for the completion of the
EA for the Project.

Schedule for Environmental Review

    Issuance of EA--May 12, 2017.
    90-day Federal Authorization Decision Deadline--August 10, 2017.
    If a schedule change becomes necessary, additional notice will be
provided so that the relevant agencies are kept informed of the
Project's progress.

Project Description

    The facilities to be constructed and operated under Section 7(c)
include: (1) Six pipeline loop segments totaling 22.7 miles; (2) one
10-inch-diameter 16.9-mile-long mainline extension; (3) upgrades to an
existing Meter and Regulator Station in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania;
(4) installation of an additional 3,750 horsepower compressor unit at
the existing Daleville Compressor Station in Chester County,
Pennsylvania; and (5) the addition of two pressure control stations in
Sussex County, Delaware.

Background

    On August 1, 2016, the Commission issued a Notice of Intent To
Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed 2017 Expansion
Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues (NOI). The NOI
was issued during the pre-filing review of the Project in Docket no.
PF16-7 and was sent to federal, state, and local government
representatives and agencies; elected officials; Native American
tribes; potentially affected landowners; and other interested
individuals and groups in the Project area. In response to the Notice
of Intent, the Commission received comments from the Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection, West Sadsbury Township, the
Chester Water Authority, the Maryland Historical Trust, the Delaware
Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control--Division of
Fish and Wildlife, the Franklin Township Historical Commission, and the
National Park Service. The primary concerns raised were regarding
wetland and waterbody impacts; potential damage to water mains; impacts
on the White Clay Creek National Wild and Scenic River; potential
impacts on bog turtles and their habitat; and potential impacts on
historic, scenic, or cultural resources. Five private landowners filed
comments expressing questions or concerns regarding the right-of-way
acquisition process, overall public safety and pipeline reliability,
restoration efforts, and the procedures to be used should future
roadway widening occur where the pipeline is installed under the
highway.
    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Department of
Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service are cooperating
agencies in the preparation of the EA.

Additional Information

    In order to receive notification of the issuance of the EA and to
keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets,
the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription. This can
reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by
automatically providing you with notification of these filings,
document summaries, and direct links to the documents. Go to
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp. Additional information
about the Project is available from the Commission's Office of External
Affairs at (866) 208-FERC or on the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov). Using
the ``eLibrary'' link, select ``General Search'' from the eLibrary
menu, enter the selected date range and ``Docket Number'' excluding the
last three digits (i.e., CP17-28), and follow the instructions. For
assistance with access to eLibrary, the helpline can be reached at
(866) 208-3676, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>, or at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
The eLibrary link on the FERC Web site also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rule makings.

    Dated: March 10, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-05308 Filed 3-16-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 113 (Monday, June 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34229-34230]
[FR Doc No: 2011-14570]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-R03-SFUND-2011-0508; FRL-9317-3]

Notice of Proposed Prospective Purchaser Agreement Amendment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; Request for Public Comment.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a proposed prospective purchaser
agreement amendment (``PPA Amendment'') associated with the Fischer &
Porter Superfund Site in Warminster Township, Bucks County,
Pennsylvania was executed by the Environmental Protection Agency
(``EPA'') and the Department of Justice and is now subject to public
comment, after which the United States may modify or withdraw its
consent if comments received disclose facts or considerations which
indicate that the PPA Amendment is inappropriate, improper, or
inadequate. The PPA Amendment would resolve certain potential EPA
claims under Sections 106 and 107 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9606 and 9607,
against Blue Marlin Associates (``Purchasers''). In lieu of financial
consideration, in exchange for EPA's covenant not to sue for response
costs incurred at the Site, the settlement would require the Purchasers
to, among other things, conduct a vapor intrusion study on their
existing building located on the parcel adjacent to the property under
consideration in the PPA Amendment, and, if any unacceptable risks from
vapor intrusion were shown to be present, to take appropriate remedial
measures as approved by EPA.
    For thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this
notice, the Agency will receive written comments relating to the PPA
Amendment. The Agency's response to any comments received will be
available for public inspection at the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III Office, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia PA 19103.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before July 13, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
SFUND-2011-0508, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments.
     E-mail: Elizabeth B. Lukens, Senior Assistant Regional
Counsel at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: EPA-R03-SFUND-2011-0508, Elizabeth B. Lukens, Senior
Assistant Regional Counsel (3RC44), U.S. EPA, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029.
     Hand Delivery: Elizabeth B. Lukens, Senior Assistant
Regional Counsel (3RC44), U.S. EPA, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029. Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Business Hours:
Monday through Friday 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Such deliveries are accepted
only during business hours of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID no. EPA-R03-SFUND-
2011-0508. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index for docket ID no. EPA-R03-SFUND-2011-
0508. The PPA Amendment itself displays a separate EPA internal docket
number (``CERC-PPA-2000-0007'') used for other purposes. Although
listed in the index, some information may not be publicly available,
i.e., CBI 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 available only in hard copy form.
    Additionally, the PPA Amendment and additional background
information are available for public inspection at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III Office, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103. A copy of the PPA Amendment may be obtained
from Lydia Guy (3RC00), Regional Hearing Clerk, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III Office, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia,
PA 19103, or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth B. Lukens (3RC44), Senior
Assistant Regional Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103,
    Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is given in accordance with the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of
1980 as Amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of
1986, (``CERCLA''), 42 U.S.C. 9601-9675.

    Dated: June 2, 2011.
Kathryn A. Hodgkiss,
Acting Director, Hazardous Site Cleanup Division, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2011-14570 Filed 6-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 239 (Thursday, December 14, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59148-59151]
[FR Doc No: 2017-26909]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82238; File No. SR-MSRB-2017-08]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Municipal Securities Rulemaking
Board; Order Granting Approval of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend MSRB
Form G-45 To Collect Additional Data About the Transactional Fees
Primarily Assessed by Programs Established To Implement the ABLE Act

December 8, 2017.

I. Introduction

    On October 13, 2017, the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the
``MSRB'' or ``Board'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``SEC'' or ``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 amend MSRB Form G-45
under MSRB Rule G-45, on reporting of information on municipal fund
securities,\3\ to collect additional data about the transactional fees
primarily assessed by programs established to implement the Stephen
Beck, Jr., Achieving a Better Life Experience Act of 2014 (the ``ABLE
Act'' and an ``ABLE program'') (the ``proposed rule change'').\4\ The
proposed rule change

was published for comment in the Federal Register on October 27,
2017.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Form G-45 is an electronic form on which submissions of the
information required by Rule G-45 are made to the MSRB.
    \4\ The ABLE Act was enacted on December 19, 2014 as part of The
Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014 (Pub. L. 113-295).
    \5\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81921 (October 23, 2017)
(the ``Notice of Filing''), 82 FR 49908 (October 27, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission received one comment letter on the proposed rule
change.\6\ On December 1, 2017, the MSRB responded to the comments
received by the Commission.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Letter to Secretary, Commission, from Leslie Norwood,
Managing Director and Associate General Counsel, and Bernard Canepa,
Vice President and Assistant General Counsel, Securities Industry
and Financial Markets Association (``SIFMA''), dated November 17,
2017 (the ``SIFMA Letter'').
    \7\ See Letter to Secretary, Commission, from Pamela K. Ellis,
Associate General Counsel, MSRB, dated December 1, 2017 (the ``MSRB
Response Letter''), available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-msrb-2017-08/msrb201708-2743045-161576.pdf .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of Proposed Rule Change

    In the Notice of Filing, the MSRB stated that the proposed rule
change would amend Form G-45 to collect additional information relating
to fees and expenses to help ensure that the MSRB continues to receive
comprehensive information regarding ABLE programs and 529 college
savings plans.\8\ The MSRB stated that this data would enhance the
MSRB's understanding of the markets for ABLE programs and 529 college
savings plans, including the differences among such programs or
plans.\9\ Further, the MSRB stated that the additional fee and expense
information would assist the MSRB in fulfilling its investor protection
mission.\10\ The MSRB also stated that the information about fees and
expenses would continue to be submitted in a format that is consistent
with the disclosure principles of the College Savings Plan Network
(``CSPN''), an affiliate of the National Association of State
Treasurers, which, the MSRB added, commenters on previous MSRB
rulemaking proposals relating to MSRB Form G-45 have stated is the
industry norm.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Notice of Filing.
    \9\ Id.
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As further described by the MSRB in the Notice of Filing, under the
proposed rule change, an underwriter to an ABLE program or a 529
college savings plan would be required to submit data on Form G-45
about the following additional fees and expenses, as applicable:
     account opening fee;
     investment administration fee;
     change in account owner fee;
     cancellation/withdrawal fee;
     change in investment option/transfer fee;
     rollover fee;
     returned excess aggregate contributions fee;
     rejected ACH or EFT fee;
     overnight delivery fee;
     in-network ATM fee;
     out-of-network ATM fee;
     ATM mini statement fee;
     international POS/ATM transaction fee;
     foreign transaction fee;
     overdraft fee;
     copy of check or statement fee (per request);
     copy of check images mailed with monthly statement fee;
     check fee (i.e., fee for blank checks);
     returned check fee;
     checking account option fee;
     re-issue of disbursement check fee;
     stop payment fee;
     debit card fee;
     debit card replacement fee;
     outgoing wire fee;
     expedited debit card rush delivery fee;
     paper fee; and
     miscellaneous fee (to address any miscellaneous
transactional fee that is not otherwise specified on Form G-45).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, under the proposed rule change, the MSRB stated that
it would collect data about any variance in the annual account
maintenance fee due to the residency of the account owner.\13\ The MSRB
also stated that the proposed rule would apply to underwriters to ABLE
programs as well as to underwriters to 529 college savings plans.\14\
The MSRB, however, stated that it anticipates that most of the data
that would be collected by the proposed rule change would relate to
ABLE programs.\15\ The MSRB also noted that it believes that 529
college savings plans generally do not assess the fees and charges that
are the subject of this proposed rule change.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id.
    \14\ Id.
    \15\ Id.
    \16\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The MSRB requested in the Notice of Filing that the proposed rule
change be approved with an effective date of June 30, 2018.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of Comments Received and MSRB's Responses to Comments

    As noted previously, the Commission received one comment letter on
the proposed rule change, as well as the MSRB Response Letter. The
commenter, SIFMA, stated that it was ``supportive of the MSRB's efforts
to fully understand the ABLE programs and 529 college savings plans
market and fulfill its mission'' but believed that municipal securities
dealers who underwrite ABLE programs and 529 college savings plans
``should only be required to submit the information required by Form G-
45 to the extent it is within their possession, custody, or
control''.\18\ SIFMA also stated that the MSRB should be mindful of the
possibility that additional regulatory requirements such as the
proposed rule change could increase costs to investors in dealer-sold
529 college savings plans and ABLE programs versus direct-sold programs
that are not regulated by the MSRB.\19\ The MSRB stated that it
believes the proposed rule change is consistent with its statutory
mandate and has responded to the comments, as discussed below.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See SIFMA Letter.
    \19\ Id.
    \20\ See MSRB Response Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Submission of Information Within Custody of Dealer

    SIFMA stated that some of the information about fees that
underwriters would be required to submit on MSRB Form G-45, under the
proposed rule change, may be contained in ABLE program or 529 college
savings plan disclosure documents and suggested that those underwriters
could provide hyperlinks to those documents to the MSRB.\21\ The MSRB
responded by stating that even if some of the information required to
be submitted on MSRB Form G-45 were contained in those ABLE program or
529 college savings plan disclosure documents, that the information
would not be published in a uniform electronic format that would allow
for the MSRB's efficient analysis or comparison of such
information.\22\ The MSRB noted that, at this time, there is no
requirement that state issuers prepare those disclosure documents in a
uniform format and, unlike for 529 college savings plans, there are not
even voluntary disclosure principles for state issuers in the
preparation of their disclosure documents that are applicable to ABLE
programs.\23\ As result, the MSRB stated, it is even more likely that
the information in the ABLE program disclosure documents would not be
presented in a uniform format that would allow the MSRB to readily
analyze and compare ABLE programs.\24\ In addition, the MSRB stated
that referencing the ABLE program or 529

college savings plan disclosure documents would not meet the MSRB's
regulatory need because the data provided to the MSRB must be in a
uniform electronic format that can be aggregated and analyzed.\25\ The
MSRB acknowledged that the proposed rule change would result in some
up-front costs to underwriters due to technical changes to
underwriters' reporting systems, but the MSRB stated that those costs
should mostly be one-time only costs and that the cumulative benefits
of receiving data in a uniform electronic format should exceed the
upfront costs over time.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See SIFMA Letter.
    \22\ See MSRB Response Letter.
    \23\ Id.
    \24\ Id.
    \25\ Id.
    \26\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Applicability of Proposed Rule Change to Advisor-Sold and Direct-
Sold ABLE Programs and 529 College Savings Plans

    SIFMA suggested that the duty to submit information about the fees
assessed by ABLE programs and 529 college savings plans on MSRB Form G-
45 would create an undue burden because, in SIFMA's view, the MSRB's
jurisdiction is limited to underwriters to dealer-sold ABLE programs or
529 college savings plans.\27\ The MSRB responded by stating that such
an undue burden on competition would not exist because the MSRB
believes it has jurisdiction over all underwriters of ABLE programs and
529 college savings plans.\28\ The MSRB stated that it has jurisdiction
over underwriters to all 529 college savings plans, regardless of the
marketing channel through which such plans are sold (whether sold with
the advice of a dealer, i.e., ``advisor-sold,'' or without the advice
of a dealer, i.e., ``direct-sold''), and this view has equal
application to similar ABLE programs.\29\ The MSRB also stated that it
has previously discussed the application of Rule G-45 to dealers, and
in doing so has said that the activities of an entity may cause that
entity to be within the definition of dealer and/or underwriter set
forth in the Act or rules thereunder and thus subject to MSRB Rule G-
45.\30\ The MSRB stated that, for example, the activities of a program
manager to an ABLE program or 529 college savings plan, or its
affiliates or contractors, could include direct contact with investors
through the development and distribution of ABLE program or 529 college
savings plan advertising sales literature, or maintaining ABLE program
or 529 college savings plan websites, including processing enrollment
funds.\31\ The MSRB stated that those activities could, depending on
the facts and circumstances, cause one or more of those entities to be
underwriters under Rule G-45.\32\ The MSRB also noted that it believed
the Commission has agreed with the MSRB that each entity must make its
own determination about whether its activity would qualify as
``underwriting'' activity as that term is defined in SEC Rule 15c2-
12(f)(8) under the Act.\33\ In addition, the MSRB stated that,
beginning in 2015, the MSRB has received data from underwriters to 529
college savings plans under Rule G-45.\34\ The MSRB stated that it has
every reason to believe that there is widespread compliance by those
underwriters with their reporting obligations under Rule G-45.\35\
Consequently, the MSRB stated, it does not believe that the requirement
to submit fee information, as would be required under the proposed rule
change, on MSRB Form G-45 would unduly burden competition between
underwriters to advisor-sold ABLE programs or 529 college savings plans
versus underwriters to direct-sold ABLE programs or 529 college savings
plans.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See SIFMA Letter.
    \28\ See MSRB Response Letter.
    \29\ Id.
    \30\ Id.
    \31\ Id.
    \32\ Id.
    \33\ Id.
    \34\ Id.
    \35\ Id.
    \36\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Underwriter Reporting Obligation

    SIFMA stated that it believed dealers that underwrite ABLE programs
and 529 college savings plans should only be required to submit
information required by MSRB Form G-45 to the extent that such
information is within their possession, custody and control.\37\ The
MSRB stated that, under the proposed rule change, and consistent with
the MSRB's previous position on this issue, an underwriter to an ABLE
program or 529 college savings plan would not be required to submit
information on MSRB Form G-45 that the underwriter neither possesses
nor has the legal right to obtain.\38\ The MSRB also noted that the
legal right to obtain the information for purposes of the proposed rule
change is not affected by a voluntary relinquishment, by contract or
otherwise, of such right.\39\ Therefore, the MSRB stated, an
underwriter may designate an affiliate or contractor to perform
activities in the underwriter's stead in connection with the
underwriting, but that the underwriter would be properly viewed as
having the legal right to obtain all information.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See SIFMA Letter.
    \38\ See MSRB Response Letter.
    \39\ Id.
    \40\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Discussion and Commission Findings

    The Commission has carefully considered the proposed rule change,
the comment letter received, and the MSRB Response Letter. The
Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to the MSRB.
    In particular, the proposed rule change is consistent with Sections
15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act.\41\ Section 15B(b)(2)(C) of the Act states
that the MSRB's rules shall be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in municipal
securities and municipal financial products, to remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market in municipal
securities and municipal financial products, and, in general, to
protect investors, municipal entities, obligated persons, and the
public interest.\42\ The Commission believes the proposed rule change
is consistent with Section 15B(b)(2)(C) and necessary and appropriate
to help the MSRB receive complete and reliable information about ABLE
programs and 529 college savings plans which it can use to monitor such
programs and plans and detect potential investor harm. The Commission
believes that, for that data set to be complete and reliable, such data
should include the data about the fees and expenses associated with an
investment in an ABLE program or a 529 college savings plan that are
included in the proposed rule change. In addition, the Commission
believes the proposed rule change is necessary for the MSRB to gather
relevant data required to ensure the MSRB's regulatory scheme is
sufficient and/or to determine whether additional rulemaking is
necessary to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(C).
    \42\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-4(b)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposed rule change would
facilitate the MSRB's ability to better analyze the market for ABLE
programs and 529 college savings plans as well as improve the MSRB's
ability to evaluate trends and differences among ABLE programs and 529
college savings plans. Further,

the Commission believes that the MSRB, as well as other financial
regulators charged with enforcing the MSRB's rules, use (or will use)
the information submitted on MSRB Form G-45 to enhance their
understanding of, and ability to monitor, ABLE programs and 529 college
savings plans.
    The Commission believes that the MSRB or other regulators could use
the information submitted on MSRB Form G-45 to, among other things,
determine if the disclosure documents or marketing materials prepared
or reviewed by underwriters are consistent with the data submitted to
the MSRB for regulatory purposes.
    In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission also has
considered the impact of the proposed rule change on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation.\43\ The Commission 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
additional data that the proposed rule change would collect is
understood by the Commission to be readily available and known to the
underwriters of ABLE programs and 529 college savings plans.
Additionally, the Commission understands that these underwriters are
already required to submit certain information to the MSRB on MSRB Form
G-45 on a semi-annual basis. Also, the Commission believes that the
additional information required to be submitted by the proposed rule
change would be submitted on an equal and non-discriminatory basis, and
the requirement would apply equally to all dealers that serve as
underwriters to ABLE programs and/or 529 college savings plans.
Furthermore, the Commission believes that the potential burdens created
by the proposed rule change are to be likely outweighed by the
benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the reasons noted above, the Commission believes that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the Act.

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\44\ that the proposed rule change (SR-MSRB-2017-08) be, and hereby
is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, pursuant to delegated authority.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-26909 Filed 12-13-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 13, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14690-14691]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5979]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0122]

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Hutchinson River, Bronx, NY

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Commander, First Coast Guard District, has issued a
temporary deviation from the regulation governing the operation of the
Amtrak Pelham Bay Railroad Bridge, mile 0.5, across the Hutchinson
River at the Bronx, New York. The deviation is necessary to facilitate
scheduled maintenance at the bridge. This deviation allows the bridge
to remain in the closed position for four days.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 10 p.m. on March 16, 2012
through 4 a.m. on March 26, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2012-0122 and are available online
at www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2012-0122 in the ``Keyword'' and
then clicking ``Search''. They are also available for inspection or
copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30), U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Ms. Judy Leung-Yee, Project Officer, First Coast Guard
District<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. If
you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Amtrak Pelham Bay Railroad Bridge,
across the Hutchinson River, mile 0.5, at the Bronx, New York, has a
vertical clearance in the closed position of 8 feet at mean high water
and 15 feet at mean

low water. The drawbridge operation regulations are listed at 33 CFR
117.793.
    The waterway users are mostly commercial operators.
    The owner of the bridge, National Railroad Passenger Company
(Amtrak), requested a temporary deviation from the regulations to
facilitate scheduled maintenance, to replace fiber optic cables, at the
bridge.
    Under this temporary deviation the Amtrak Pelham Bay Railroad
Bridge may remain in the closed position from 10 p.m. on March 16, 2012
through 4 a.m. on March 19, 2012. In the event of inclement weather the
closure will commence at 10 p.m. on March 23, 2012 through 4 a.m. on
March 26, 2012. Vessels that can pass under the bridge in the closed
position may do so at any time.
    The commercial users were notified. No objections were received.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the bridge must return to its
regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: February 23, 2012.
Gary Kassof,
Bridge Program Manager, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2012-5979 Filed 3-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 219 (Friday, November 13, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70179-70180]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28764]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 49, 51, 52, 60, 70, and 71

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0685; EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505; EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0606; EPA-
HQ-OAR-2015-0216; FRL-9937-01-OAR]

Source Determination for Certain Emission Units in the Oil and
Natural Gas Sector; Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for
New and Modified Sources; Review of New Sources and Modifications in
Indian Country: Federal Implementation Plan for Managing Air Emissions
From True Minor Sources Engaged in Oil and Natural Gas Production in
Indian Country

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: On September 18, 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) proposed three rules titled, ``Source Determination for Certain
Emission Units in the Oil and Natural Gas Sector,'' ``Oil and Natural
Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New and Modified Sources,'' and
``Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian Country: Federal
Implementation Plan for Managing Air Emissions from True Minor Sources
Engaged in Oil and Natural Gas Production in Indian Country.'' The EPA
is extending the comment period on the three proposed rules that was
scheduled to close on November 17, 2015. The EPA has received several
letters from trade and business organizations, states and tribes
requesting additional time to review and comment on the three proposed
rule revisions.

DATES: The public comment period for the three proposed rules published
in the Federal Register on September 18, 2015 (80 FR 56579, 80 FR
56593, and 80 FR 56553), is being extended. Written comments must be
received on or before December 4, 2015.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established separate dockets for each of the
three proposed rulemakings (available at http://www.regulations.gov).
For the proposed rulemaking titled, ``Source Determination for Certain
Emission Units in the Oil and Natural Gas Sector,'' the Docket ID No.
is EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0685. For the proposed rulemaking titled, ``Oil and
Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New and Modified Sources,''
the Docket ID No. is EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505. For the proposed rulemaking
titled, ``Review of

New Sources and Modifications in Indian Country: Federal Implementation
Plan for Managing Air Emissions from True Minor Sources Engaged in Oil
and Natural Gas Production in Indian Country,'' the Docket ID No. is
EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0606. Information on all of these actions is posted at
http://www.epa.gov/airquality/oilandgas/actions.html. Submit your
comments, identified by the appropriate Docket ID, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or withdrawn. The EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. If you need to
include CBI as part of your comment, please visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html for instructions. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make.
    For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit
http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information on this
action, contact Cheryl Vetter, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Environmental Protection Agency (C504-03), Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number
(919) 541-5509; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: After considering the requests to extend the
public comment period received from various trade and business
organizations, states and tribes, the EPA has decided to extend the
public comment period until December 4, 2015. This extension will
ensure that the public has additional time to review the three proposed
rules.

    Dated: November 3, 2015.
Stephen D. Page,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
[FR Doc. 2015-28764 Filed 11-12-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 19 (Wednesday, January 29, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4807-4808]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01694]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[FMCSA Docket No. FMCSA-2013-0191]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes
Mellitus

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 39 individuals from its
rule prohibiting persons with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM)
from operating commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in interstate commerce.
The exemptions will enable these individuals to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.

DATES: The exemptions are effective January 29, 2014. The exemptions
expire on January 29, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elaine M. Papp, Chief, Medical
Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Room
W64-224, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access

    You may see all the comments online through the Federal Document
Management System (FDMS) at: http://www.regulations.gov.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov and/or Room W12-140 on the
ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of DOT's dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, or other
entity). You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the Federal
Docket Management System (FDMS) published in the Federal Register on
January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316).

Background

    On November 13, 2013, FMCSA published a notice of receipt of
Federal diabetes exemption applications from 39 individuals and
requested comments from the public (78 FR 68139). The public comment
period closed on December 13, 2013, and no comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of the 39 applicants and
determined that granting the exemptions to these individuals would
achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that
would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR
391.41(b)(3).

Diabetes Mellitus and Driving Experience of the Applicants

    The Agency established the current requirement for diabetes in 1970
because several risk studies indicated that drivers with diabetes had a
higher rate of crash involvement than the general population. The
diabetes rule provides that ``A person is physically qualified to drive
a commercial motor vehicle if that person has no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of

diabetes mellitus currently requiring insulin for control'' (49 CFR
391.41(b)(3)).
    FMCSA established its diabetes exemption program, based on the
Agency's July 2000 study entitled ``A Report to Congress on the
Feasibility of a Program to Qualify Individuals with Insulin-Treated
Diabetes Mellitus to Operate in Interstate Commerce as Directed by the
Transportation Act for the 21st Century.'' The report concluded that a
safe and practicable protocol to allow some drivers with ITDM to
operate CMVs is feasible. The September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441), Federal
Register notice in conjunction with the November 8, 2005 (70 FR 67777),
Federal Register notice provides the current protocol for allowing such
drivers to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
    These 39 applicants have had ITDM over a range of 1 to 44 years.
These applicants report no severe hypoglycemic reactions resulting in
loss of consciousness or seizure, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning symptoms, in the past 12 months and no recurrent (2 or
more) severe hypoglycemic episodes in the past 5 years. In each case,
an endocrinologist verified that the driver has demonstrated a
willingness to properly monitor and manage his/her diabetes mellitus,
received education related to diabetes management, and is on a stable
insulin regimen. These drivers report no other disqualifying
conditions, including diabetes-related complications. Each meets the
vision requirement at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
    The qualifications and medical condition of each applicant were
stated and discussed in detail in the November 13, 2013, Federal
Register notice and they will not be repeated in this notice.

Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) if the exemption
is likely to achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety than
would be achieved without the exemption. The exemption allows the
applicants to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.
    To evaluate the effect of these exemptions on safety, FMCSA
considered medical reports about the applicants' ITDM and vision, and
reviewed the treating endocrinologists' medical opinion related to the
ability of the driver to safely operate a CMV while using insulin.
    Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these
applicants from the diabetes requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3) is
likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the
exemption.

Conditions and Requirements

    The terms and conditions of the exemption will be provided to the
applicants in the exemption document and they include the following:
(1) That each individual submit a quarterly monitoring checklist
completed by the treating endocrinologist as well as an annual
checklist with a comprehensive medical evaluation; (2) that each
individual reports within 2 business days of occurrence, all episodes
of severe hypoglycemia, significant complications, or inability to
manage diabetes; also, any involvement in an accident or any other
adverse event in a CMV or personal vehicle, whether or not it is
related to an episode of hypoglycemia; (3) that each individual provide
a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to the medical
examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and (4) that
each individual provide a copy of the annual medical certification to
the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file, or keep
a copy in his/her driver's qualification file if he/she is self-
employed. The driver must also have a copy of the certification when
driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local
enforcement official.

Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the 39 exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts Ryan P. Abrahamsen (NY), Dylan J. Bryan (IL), Robert A. Collins
(NJ), Fred J. Combs (OH), Edward DeFrancesco (CT), Terrance J. Dusharm
(MN), Jonathan W. Eggers (MN), John L. Eversole (WY), Gilbert N. Fugate
(IN), Scott C. Garbial (ME), Charles D. Grant (GA), William F. Hamann
(KY), Dallis L. Hollon (KS), James H. Howard, Jr. (FL), Harry R. Jaycox
(IN), Jerry J. Klosterman (OH), Joseph E. Kolb (NY), Matthew D. Lee
(VA), Craig A. Lemponen (OH), Matthew P. Ludwig (NY), Gerry A. Lutz
(IA), Joel S. Malone (LA), Keith B. Masters (NH), Eli J. Meekhoff (MI),
Arthur S. Miller (TN), Jeffrey A. Olson (IA), Marvin H. Patterson, III
(SC), Brandon C. Rhinehart (MD), Thomas L. Rice (TN), Ismael Romero
(NJ), Timothy J. Sebald (IN), Erick D. Selgren (CO), Donald R. Sine,
Jr. (IN), Dennis E. Taunton (ID), Phillip A. Trent (VA), Robert P.
Trofa, II (PA), Deborah D. Watson (MI), Ronnie C. Webb (MT), and Allan
D. Wesley (WI) from the ITDM requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3),
subject to the conditions listed under ``Conditions and Requirements''
above.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 each exemption will
be valid for two years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption
will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person fails to comply
with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has
resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained before it was
granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not be consistent
with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315. If the
exemption is still effective at the end of the 2-year period, the
person may apply to FMCSA for a renewal under procedures in effect at
that time.

    Issued on: January 10, 2014.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-01694 Filed 1-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 80 (Tuesday, April 26, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24606-24609]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08826]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0193]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of a New Approval of Information Collection: ICAO CO2
Certification Database

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval for a new information collection.
The collection involves the possibility for airplane manufacturers for
which the airplane is subject to the applicability of Annex 16, Volume
III of the Convention on Civil Aviation (hereinafter the ``Chicago
Convention'') to submit electronically CO2 Certification
Database (CO2DB) Datasheet(s) to the FAA. The information to
be collected will be necessary because of FAA's commitment to help (a)
provide publicly available data on the CO2 Metric Value (MV)
which represents a measure of fuel burn performance of airplane types
against CO2 technology/design standards, (b) track and
communicate the improvement in airplane CO2 MVs over time
and (c) provide an incentive to improve the CO2 MV of
airplane types.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by June 27, 2022.

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 the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of
Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to
[email protected], or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>, or mailed to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW, Washington,
DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laszlo Windhoffer at<PHONE_NUMBER>,
or by email at: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Appendix A ``Supporting Statement A''.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-XXXX.
    Title: ICAO CO2 Certification Database
(CO2DB).
    Form Numbers: Not applicable.
    Type of Review: Clearance of a new information collection.
    Background: In March 2017, the International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO) Council adopted the Volume III of Annex 16 of the
Chicago Convention (Environmental Protection) for the implementation of
a new airplane CO2 emissions standard. The Standard will
apply to new airplane type designs from 2020, and to airplane type
designs already in-production as of 2023. Those in-production airplane
which by 2028 do not meet the standard will no longer be able to be
produced unless their designs are sufficiently modified to comply with
the in-production standard.
    To support the implementation of Annex 16 Volume III, ICAO agreed
that, similar to noise and engine emissions, an ICAO CO2
Certification Database (CO2DB) should be developed and
continuously maintained in a publicly accessible manner. The U.S.
Federal Aviation Administration will host the new database on behalf of
ICAO.
    The aim of the CO2DB is to (a) Provide publicly
available data on the CO2 Metric Value (MV) which represents
a measure of fuel burn performance of airplane types against
CO2 technology/design standards, (b) Track and communicate
the improvement in airplane CO2 MVs over time and (c)
Provide an incentive to improve the CO2 MV of airplane
types.
    The collection of data towards the CO2DB is expected to
leverage the Airplane Airworthiness Certification process, which
includes; airplane performance measurement, computation of relevant
metrics (e.g., CO2 MV) and submission of the information to
the Certificating Authority (CA) of the State of Design. As part of the
airworthiness certification process, the data/information is reviewed
by the CA and approved. Given that the submission of information into
the CO2DB is voluntary, it is expected that the applicant
(e.g., airplane manufacturer) will decide to submit a CO2DB
Datasheet to its CA and ultimately to the U.S. FAA. If the applicant
decides to submit information to the CO2DB, the applicant
will prepare a CO2DB Datasheet by using the CO2DB
Datasheet Template that will be publicly available via the
CO2DB web page expected to be hosted on the FAA Office of
Environment and Energy website.
    Once the U.S. FAA collects the CO2DB Datasheets it may
conduct an information check to identify any gross errors or mistakes.
Similar to other ICAO environment databases, the entity submitting the
information (in this case the applicant) will be solely responsible for
the accuracy of the information. If there are any questions about
submissions, the U.S. FAA will communicate with the applicant to
attempt to address any issues.
    CO2DB Datasheets will then be integrated into the
CO2DB and the records of changes will be updated. It is
expected that the database will be available for download in a common
table format (e.g., Microsoft Excel file) as well as a collection of
the submitted CO2DB Datasheets. Additional background and
supporting information will also be available on the CO2DB
website along with a Support Function communication mechanism (e.g.,
email address).
    Respondents: Respondents will be airplane manufacturers (or
``applicants'') subject to the applicability of Annex 16, Volume III of
the Chicago Convention. From the outset, FAA expects about 3 U.S.
airplane applicants to submit CO2DB Datasheets for their
certified airplanes. It should be noted that additional respondents
from outside the United States (i.e., Airplane Manufacturers for which
the Certificating Authority is another ICAO Member State than the
United States) are expected to submit CO2DB Datasheets to
the CO2DB for their certified airplane. These non-US
applicants were assumed to be outside the scope of the burden analysis
contained in Supporting Statement A and were therefore not included as
respondents.
    Frequency: If they decide to submit information to the
CO2DB, the manufacturers will submit data after the
certification of an airplane. It is expected that manufacturers would
submit one CO2DB Datasheet for each airplane model. As
described in Supporting Statement A and based on historical frequency
of airplane certification, each U.S. manufacturer could be expected to
certificate up to two new models every three years. Thus, in
mathematical terms, the FAA would expect to receive an average of

two thirds of one datasheet per year and per respondent.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: It is expected that filling
and submitting a CO2DB Datasheet could take approximately 5
hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: Based on the above, FAA expects that
the annual submission of CO2DB Datasheet by U.S. airplane
manufacturers could take approximately 5 hours for an average of 2
submissions per year across 3 manufacturers.

    Issued in Washington, DC on April 20, 2022.
Julie Marks,
Acting Executive Director, Office of Environment and Energy.

Appendix A: Supporting Statement A for the ICAO CO2 Certification
Database

    1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of
information necessary. Identify any legal or administrative
requirements that necessitate the collection.
    On March 6, 2017 the United States (through its International
Civil Aviation Organization [ICAO] Council Member) voted to adopt
Annex 16, Vol. III of the Chicago Convention. Annex 16, Vol. III
contains the Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) relating to
the implementation of the airplane CO2 standard.
    The ICAO standard applies to (1) Subsonic jet aeroplanes, (2)
All propeller-driven aeroplanes, (3) Derived versions of non-
CO2-certified subsonic jet aeroplanes, (4) Derived
versions of non-CO2 certified propeller-driven aeroplanes
and (5) Individual non-CO2-certified subsonic jet
aeroplanes and propeller-driven aeroplanes. The standard applies to
new airplane type designs submitted for certification after January
1, 2020, and to airplane type designs already in-production as of
2023. After January 1, 2028, airplanes that do not meet the standard
may no longer be produced unless their designs are sufficiently
modified.
    Airplane manufacturers in the U.S. and other ICAO countries are
required to show compliance with the ICAO standard at the time of
airplane certification.
    In February 2016, members of ICAO's Committee on Aviation
Environmental Protection (CAEP) agreed that, similar to noise and
engine emissions, an ICAO CO2 Certification Database
(CO2DB) should be developed and continuously maintained
in a publicly accessible manner. Information submission to the
CO2DB is done by manufacturers and by the certificating
authority of the State of airplane design on a voluntary basis. It
is not a requirement or standard contained in Annex 16 Volume III.
The United States (FAA) agreed to host the database on behalf of
ICAO.
    The aim of the CO2DB is to:
    (a) Provide publicly available data on the CO2 metric
value (MV) for each certificated airplane model; MV represents a
measure of fuel burn performance of airplane types against
CO2 technology/design standards.
    (b) Track and communicate improvements in airplane
CO2 MVs over time.
    (c) Provide an incentive to manufacturers to improve the
CO2 MV of each airplane type.

Attachments:
 Annex 16, Vol. III

    2. Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the information
is to be used. Except for a new collection, indicate the actual use
the agency has made of the information received from the current
collection.
    The data expected to be submitted for the CO2DB is
generated during the airworthiness certification process, which
includes airplane performance measurement, computation of relevant
metrics (e.g., CO2 MV) and submission of the information
to the Certificating Authority (CA) of the State of Design. As part
of the airworthiness certification process, the data and information
are reviewed and approved by each CA.
    Since submission of information to the CO2DB is
voluntary, it is the decision of the certification applicant (e.g.,
manufacturer) to decide whether to submit CO2DB data to
its CA and ultimately to the FAA for inclusion in the database. If
the applicant decides to submit information to the CO2DB,
the applicant prepares a datasheet using the CO2DB
Datasheet Template that will be available on the CO2DB
website. The template is a one-page document that requires
identification of the airplane type design, whether it is a new type
design or in-production, and includes airframe, engine, and
propeller information
    Following the decision by the certification applicant to submit
to the CO2DB, each CA will review the applicant's
CO2DB datasheet to ensure that it conforms to the
database requirements. The CA will then submit the CO2DB
datasheet(s) to the FAA.
    Once the FAA collects the CO2DB datasheets, it may
choose to conduct an information check to identify any gross errors
or mistakes; this process is optional for the FAA as the CA remains
responsible for the accuracy of the information and data contained
in the CO2DB datasheets it submits to the FAA). If there
are any concerns about submissions, the FAA will communicate with
the CA in an attempt to address any issues.
    The FAA will integrate the datasheets into the CO2DB
and update the records of changes. The plan is to have the database
available for download in a common table format (e.g., Microsoft
Excel file), and as a file of the submitted CO2DB
datasheets. Additional background and supporting information will
also be available on the CO2DB website along with a
Support Function communication mechanism with the FAA (e.g., email
address).
    The submission of CO2DB datasheets will take place on
an ad-hoc (not regular or recurring) basis after an airplane is
certificated. One submission is expected for each airplane model
following its initial type certification, and again if an airplane
model is modified and it requires a recertification for
CO2 in accordance with the regulations of the State of
design.

Attachment:
 CO2DB Datasheet template

    3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of
information involves the use of automated, electronic, mechanical,
or other technological collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
    The CO2DB datasheet template is a Microsoft Excel-
based template, which maximizes convenience for certification
applicants (i.e., manufacturers) and the Certificating Authority of
the State of design. The application is in widespread use and allows
ease of data entry. The CO2DB datasheets will be
submitted electronically.
    4. Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically
why any similar information already available cannot be used or
modified for use for the purposes described in Item 2 above.
    The CO2 certification requirement is new in ICAO
Annex 16. The conforming U.S. regulatory requirements are in
process. At present, airplane certification data submitted to and
collected by the FAA does not include airplane level CO2
certification data as defined in Annex 16, Vol. III.
    5. If the collection of information involves small businesses or
other small entities, describe the methods used to minimize burden.
    This collection will not involve small businesses or small
entities.
    Note: As described in section 1, the CO2 certification
requirements apply to airplane manufacturers that are generally not
considered small businesses or small entities. In addition,
Certificating Authorities of the State of design are government
entities, not small businesses or small entities.
    6. Describe the consequence to Federal program or policy
activities if the collection is not conducted or is conducted less
frequently, as well as any technical or legal obstacles to reducing
burden.
    As described in section 1, information submission to the
CO2DB is done by manufacturers and the Certificating
Authority of the State of design on a voluntary basis. There are no
impacts to the airworthiness of an airplane if the CO2
certification data is not reported to the CO2DB. The aim
of the CO2DB is to: (a) Provide publicly available data
on the CO2 MV which represents a measure of fuel burn
performance of airplane types against CO2 technology/
design standards; (b) Track and communicate improvements in airplane
CO2 MVs over time; and (c) Provide an incentive to
improve the CO2 MV of airplane types. The absence of
CO2 certification data in the CO2DB would
limit transparency and comparison across airplanes types and the
industry worldwide.
    7. Explain any special circumstances that would cause an
information collection to be conducted in a manner:
     Requiring respondents to report information to the
agency more often than quarterly;
    None. Data is submitted voluntarily by airplane manufacturers
only when airplanes are required to demonstrate compliance with the
CO2 standard.
     requiring respondents to prepare a written response to
a collection of information in fewer than 30 days after receipt of
it;
    None. Submission is voluntary.
     requiring respondents to submit more than an original
and two copies of any

document; requiring respondents to retain records, other than
health, medical, government contract, grant-in-aid, or tax records,
for more than three years;
    None.
     in connection with a statistical survey, that is not
designed to produce valid and reliable results that can be
generalized to the universe of study;
    None.
     requiring the use of a statistical data classification
that has not been reviewed and approved by OMB;
    None.
     that includes a pledge of confidentiality that is not
supported by authority established in statute or regulation, that is
not supported by disclosure and data security policies that are
consistent with the pledge, or which unnecessarily impedes sharing
of data with other agencies for compatible confidential use; or
    None.
     requiring respondents to submit proprietary trade
secrets, or other confidential information unless the agency can
demonstrate that it has instituted procedures to protect the
information's confidentiality to the extent permitted by law.
    None.
    8. Provide information on the PRA Federal Register Notice that
solicited public comments on the information collection prior to
this submission. Summarize the public comments received in response
to that notice and describe the actions taken by the agency in
response to those comments. Describe the efforts to consult with
persons outside the agency to obtain their views on the availability
of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of instructions and
recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting format (if any), and on the
data elements to be recorded, disclosed, or reported.
    Not applicable.
    9. Explain any decisions to provide payments or gifts to
respondents, other than remuneration of contractors or grantees.
    N/A. The FAA will not be providing any payments or gifts to
respondents.
    10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to
respondents and the basis for assurance in statute, regulation, or
agency policy.
    No assurance given. Entities submitting information understand
that it is a voluntary submission to a publicly available database.
    11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a
sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious
beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private.
    N/A. This collection does not contain any questions of a
sensitive nature.
    12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of
information. The statement should:
     Indicate the number of respondents, frequency of
response, annual hour burden, and an explanation of how the burden
was estimated. Unless directed to do so, agencies should not conduct
special surveys to obtain information on which to base hour burden
estimates. Consultation with a sample (fewer than 10) of potential
respondents is desirable. If the hour burden on respondents is
expected to vary widely because of differences in activity, size, or
complexity, show the range of estimated hour burden, and explain the
reasons for the variance. Generally, estimates should not include
burden hours for customary and usual business practices. * If this
request for approval covers more than one form, provide separate
hour burden estimates for each form and aggregate the hour burdens.
     Provide estimates of annualized cost to respondents for
the hour burdens for collections of information, identifying and
using appropriate wage rate categories. The cost of contracting out
or paying outside parties for information collection activities
should not be included here. Instead, this cost should be included
under item 13.
    Number of respondents (total): The FAA expects up to three U.S.
airplane manufacturers to potentially submit a voluntary
CO2 certification datasheet each year. Based on agency
participation with ICAO in developing the airplane CO2
standards, the agency expects up to 12-20 non-U.S. airplane
manufacturers to submit data annually, with no effect on U.S.
respondents.
    Frequency of submission of CO2 certification datasheet per
respondent:
    [ssquf] Each manufacturer decides whether to submit information
to the CO2DB following certification of an airplane
model, with one datasheet for each airplane model. Based on the
number of airplanes certificated from 1900-2019, each U.S.
manufacturer could be expected to certificate up to two new models
every three years. Thus, in mathematical terms, the FAA would expect
to receive an average of two thirds of one datasheet from each U.S.
manufacturer each year.
    Hour burden per year (total): The FAA estimates that filling and
submitting two (2) CO2 certification datasheets (i.e., 2
responses) would take a total of five (5) hours per year.
    [ssquf] It is estimated that the respondent will take a total of
2.5 hours to prepare and submit a CO2 certification
datasheet. The breakdown of this burden is 1 hour to fill out the
datasheet, 0.5 hour for record keeping associated with the
CO2 certification, and 1 hour to disclose and submit the
datasheet to the FAA.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Summary (annual numbers)                     Reporting        Recordkeeping        Disclosure
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of respondents (U.S. respondents only)..........                  3                  3                  3
Number of responses per respondent.....................                2/3                2/3                2/3
Time per Response......................................                  1               0.50                  1
Total number of responses..............................                  2                  2                  2
Total burden (hours)...................................                  2                  1                  2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    13. Provide an estimate for the total annual cost burden to
respondents or record keepers resulting from the collection of
information.
    Overall, this collection is estimated to result in the
following:
    [ssquf] The total cost to all manufacturers of filling and
submitting two CO2 certification datasheets would be
approximately $298 per year.
    CO2DB submission annualized cost (total): Based on hourly cost
assumptions described in the section below: ``Explanation of
CO2 certification datasheet submission burden'', the
total estimated cost for filling and submitting a CO2
certification datasheet is approximately $149 per individual
datasheet submission.
    Explanation of CO2 certification datasheet submission burden:
The hourly rates for the preparation and submission of a
CO2 certification datasheet are based on a mix of wage
rates that include a 50% burden on General and Operations Managers
(11-1021) with an hourly rate of $59.35 and a 50% burden on a
Management Analysts (13-1110) with an hourly rate of $44.92. The
fully loaded rate of $74.96 was calculated using a multiplier of
1.44 based on the United States average of wage and salaries and
benefits for private industry workers [U.S. BLS 2018].
    Note.--The information submitted on the CO2 certification
datasheet is expected to be part of the certification data that will
be gathered and recorded as part of airplane CO2 certification
requirements. The CO2 data would be reported voluntarily for
inclusion in the CO2DB. With the exception of filling out the
datasheet, there are no additional costs of collecting information
in support of submissions to the CO2DB.
    Note.--The FAA notes that 12 to 20 additional manufacturers are
eligible to submit airplane data into the CO2DB. Since these are
non-U.S. manufacturers that will submit to their own CAs, the FAA
has no means to estimate the cost burden on these entities. This
lack of information and the voluntary nature of the submission have
led to our exclusion of them from this assessment.
    14. Provide estimates of annualized costs to the Federal
government. Also, provide a description of the method used to
estimate cost, which should include quantification of hours,
operational expenses (such as equipment, overhead, printing, and
support staff), and any other expense that would not have been
incurred without this collection of information.
    Estimated annualized cost to the Federal government: The total
estimated costs to the Federal government related to the
CO2 certification datasheets are expected to range

from $3480 to $4600 per year all of which is expected to be
considered as operating (recurring) cost.
    Note.--The range of cost estimates above includes expected
processing of submissions from non-U.S. manufacturers the FAA finds
would be eligible to submit CO2 certification datasheets.
    Explanation of how annualized cost to the Federal government was
estimated:
    [ssquf] Estimates of costs to the Federal government include;
cost of collecting electronically submitted CO2
certification datasheets, reviewing them, adding them to the
database, publishing the database, and supporting the electronic
reporting systems.
    [ssquf] The collection of the CO2 certification
datasheets are assumed to take 1 hour per CO2
certification datasheet submitted.
    [ssquf] The review of CO2 certification datasheets is
estimated to require 4 hours for each CO2 certification
datasheet submitted.
    [ssquf] The electronic publication of the CO2DB is
estimated to require 8 hours per publication. Assuming 4
publications per year, the total burden to publish the
CO2DB is estimated to be 32 hours per year.
    [ssquf] The hourly rate ($42.67) for collecting, reviewing
CO2 certification datasheets and managing and publishing
the CO2DB are based on a mix of wage rates including a
10% burden on GS-15 with hourly rate of $57.09 and 90% burden on a
GS-13 with hourly rate of $41.07 (where $42.67 is calculated as the
weighted sum of; $57.09 multiplied by 0.1 and $41.07 multiplied by
0.9).
    15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments.
    This is a new collection; therefore, it is not a program change.
    16. For collections of information whose results will be
published, outline plans for tabulation and publication. Address any
complex analytical techniques that will be used. Provide the time
schedule for the entire project, including beginning and ending
dates of the collection of information, completion of report,
publication dates, and other actions.
    Upon receipt a new or revised CO2DB datasheet, the
FAA will integrate it into the CO2DB and the record of
changes will be updated. Data integration is a simple transfer of
the limited amount of data contained in the one-page
CO2DB datasheet into a single master table.
    The FAA expects that the database will be available for download
in a common table format as a Microsoft Excel file). The database
will also include the submitted CO2DB datasheets in pdf
format for review.
    Additional background and supporting information related to the
development and implementation of the CO2DB will also be
available on the CO2DB website along with a Support
Function communication mechanism (email address). Similarly to other
publicly available ICAO databases hosted by other national aviation
authorities, this supplemental information on FAA's website will
provide detailed guidance for entities planning to provide a
submission to the CO2DB.
    The CO2DB will be published on an ad-hoc basis based
on the receipt of CO2DB datasheets. For context, similar
ICAO Environmental databases are published a few times per year:
    [ssquf] For the ICAO Engine Emissions databank hosted and
maintained by the European Aviation Safety Agency, the frequency of
publication varied over time with an average of slightly more than
twice a year. There are no specific/regular update patterns
throughout the years (i.e., updates have been published throughout
the year except in August).
    [ssquf] For the ICAO NoisedB hosted and maintained by the French
Civil Aviation Authority, the frequency of publication has been 3 to
4 times per year.
    17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for
OMB approval of the information collection, explain the reasons why
display would be inappropriate.
    FAA is seeking approval not to display an expiration date for
the CO2DB datasheet template. The applicability of the
ICAO standard in Annex 16 Vol. III is permanent. The information
requested on the CO2DB datasheet template is not expected
to change, but manufacturers may need to submit new or updated
CO2DB datasheets for new airplane certifications or
modifications, or they may need to amend existing database
information. FAA requests approval not to display an expiration date
that may confuse an international process.
    18. Explain each exception to the topics of the certification
statement identified in ``Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act
Submissions.''
    There are no exceptions to the certification statement.

[FR Doc. 2022-08826 Filed 4-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P