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

1. Agency/ Subagency originating request U. S. EPA/ Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance 2. OMB control number b. G None a. 2060 0035 __ __ __ __

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

7. Title NSPS for Sewage Sludge Treatment Plants ( 40 CFR part 60, subpart O) ( Renewal)

8. Agency form number( s) ( If applicable) 1063.09 9. Keywords Incinerator, municipal sewage treatment plants, combusts wastes, dry basis.

10. Abstract Owners and operators of sewage sludge incinerators are required to monitor, record, and under specified circumstances, report the following: the pressure drop across the control device, oxygen content of the incinerator exhaust gas, temperature profile of the incinerator, sludge feed rate to the incinerator, and the moisture and volatile content of the sludge. Metals testing would be required during the initial performance test. Semiannual reports of excess emissions are also required.

11. Affected public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Individuals or households d. Farms b. X Business or other for profit e. Federal Government c. Not  for profit institutions f. P State, Local or Tribal Government 12. Obligation to respond ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. G Voluntary b. G Required to obtain or retain benefits c. P Mandatory 13. Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden a. Number of respondents 54 b. Total annual responses 113 1. Percentage of these responses collected electronically 10 % c. Total hours requested 6,214 d. Current OMB inventory 9,089 e. Difference ( 2,875) f. Explanation of difference 1. Program Change 2. Adjustment ( 2,875) 14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden ( in thousands of dollars) a. Total annualized capital/ startup costs 100 b. Total annual costs ( O& M) 1,890 c. Total annualized cost requested 1,990 d. Current OMB inventory 5,845 e. Difference ( 3,855) f. Explanation of difference 1. Program change 2. Adjustment ( 3,855)

15. Purpose of information collection ( Mark Primary With " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Application for benefits e. Program planning or management b. Program evaluation f. Research c. General purpose statistics g. P Regulatory or compliance d. __ Audit 16. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting ( check all that apply) a. X Recordkeeping b. Q Third party disclosure c. X Reporting 1. Q On occasion 2. Q Weekly 3. Q Monthly 4. Q Quarterly 5. X Semi annually 6. Q Annually 7. Q Biannually 8. X Other ( describe) Initial 17. Statistical methods Does this information collection employ statistical methods?

Q Yes X No 18. Agency contact ( person who can best answer questions regarding the content of this submission) Name: Learia A. Williams Phone: ( 202) 564 4113 OMB 83 I 10/ 95 19. Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions On behalf of this Federal agency, I certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with' 5 CFR 1320.9.

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

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

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

( b) It avoids unnecessary duplication;

( c) It reduces burden on small entities;

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item below and explain the reason in Item 18 of the Supporting Statement.

Signature of Program Official Michael S. Alushin, Director Compliance Assessment and Media Programs Division Office of Compliance Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Date Signature of Senior Official or designee Oscar Morales, Director Collection Strategies Division Office of Environmental Information Date OMB 83 I 10/ 95 Certification Requirement for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions 5 CFR 1320.9 reads " As part of the agency submission to OMB of a proposed collection of information, the agency ( through the head of the agency, the Senior Official or their designee) shall certify ( and provide a record supporting such certification) that the proposed collection of information

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 235 (Friday, December 10, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 70380]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26790]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2021-0864]

Safety Zone; Sausalito Lighted Boat Parade Fireworks Display;
Richardson Bay, Sausalito, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notification of enforcement of regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone in the navigable
waters of Richardson Bay, off Sausalito, CA, in support of the
Sausalito Lighted Boat Parade Fireworks Display. This safety zone is
necessary to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment
from the dangers associated with pyrotechnics. During the enforcement
period, unauthorized persons or vessels are prohibited from entering
into, transiting through, or remaining in the safety zone, unless
authorized by the designated Patrol Commander (PATCOM) or other
federal, state, or local agencies on scene to assist the Coast Guard in
enforcing the regulated area.

DATES: The regulation in 33 CFR 165.1191, will be enforced for the
location in Table 1 to Sec.  165.1191, Item number 30, from 10 a.m.
until 8:25 p.m. on December 11, 2021, or as announced via Broadcast
Notice to Mariners.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
notification of enforcement, call or email LT Anthony Solares, Sector
San Francisco Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone 415-
399-3585, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the safety zone
established in 33 CFR 165.1191, Table 1, Item number 30, for the
Sausalito Lighted Boat Parade Fireworks on December 11, 2021. The
Captain of the Port has delegated the authority to issue the
notification of enforcement for this regulation to the Prevention
Department Head. The Coast Guard will enforce a 100-foot safety zone
around the fireworks barge during the loading, transit, and setup of
the fireworks barge from the loading location to the display location
and until the commencement of the fireworks display. From 10 a.m. until
5 p.m. on December 11, 2021, the fireworks barge will be loading
pyrotechnics at Pier 50 in San Francisco, CA. The fireworks barge will
remain at the loading location until its transit to the display
location. From 5:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. on December 11, 2021 the loaded
fireworks barge will transit from Pier 50 to the launch site near
Sausalito Point in approximate position 37[deg]51'15.99'' N,
122[deg]28'41.70'' W (NAD 83), where it will remain until the
conclusion of the fireworks display. Starting at 7:15 p.m. on December
11, 2021, 30 minutes prior to the commencement of the 10-minute
fireworks display, the safety zone will encompass the navigable waters,
from surface to bottom, surrounding the fireworks barge near Spinnaker
Point in Sausalito, CA within a radius of 1,000 feet from approximate
position 37[deg]51'15.99'' N, 122[deg]28'41.70'' W (NAD 83) for the
Sausalito Lighted Boat Parade Fireworks Display as set forth in 33 CFR
165.1191, Table 1, Item number 30. The safety zone will be enforced
until 8:25 p.m. on December 11, 2021, or as announced via Broadcast
Notice to Mariners.
    In addition to this notification of enforcement in the Federal
Register, the Coast Guard plans to provide notification of this
enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners.
    Under the provisions of 33 CFR 165.1191, unauthorized persons or
vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or
anchoring in the safety zone during all applicable effective dates and
times, unless authorized to do so by the PATCOM or other Official
Patrol defined as a federal, state, or local law enforcement agency on
scene to assist the Coast Guard in enforcing the regulated area.
Additionally, each person who receives notice of a lawful order or
direction issued by the PATCOM or Official Patrol shall obey the order
or direction. The PATCOM or Official Patrol may, upon request, allow
the transit of commercial vessels through regulated areas when it is
safe to do so.
    If the Captain of the Port determines that the regulated area need
not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice, a
Broadcast Notice to Mariners may be used to grant general permission to
enter the regulated area.

    Dated: December 6, 2021.
Taylor Q. Lam,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, San Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2021-26790 Filed 12-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 2, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31644-31645]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14112]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 33535; 812-15039]

WicShares Trust and Water Island Capital, LLC; Notice of
Application

June 27, 2019.
AGENCY:  Securities and Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'').

ACTION:  Notice.

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

    Notice of an application for an order under section 6(c) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'') for an exemption from
sections 2(a)(32), 5(a)(1), 22(d), and 22(e) of the Act and rule 22c-1
under the Act, under sections 6(c) and 17(b) of the Act for an
exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(2) of the Act, and under
section 12(d)(1)(J) for an exemption from sections 12(d)(1)(A) and
12(d)(1)(B) of the Act. The requested order would permit (a) index-
based series of certain open-end management investment companies
(``Funds'') to issue shares redeemable in large aggregations
(``Creation Units''); (b) secondary market transactions in Fund shares
to occur at negotiated market prices rather than at net asset value
(``NAV''); (c) certain Funds to pay redemption proceeds, under certain
circumstances, more than seven days after the tender of shares for
redemption; (d) certain affiliated persons of a Fund to deposit
securities into, and receive securities from, the Fund in connection
with the purchase and redemption of Creation Units; (e) certain
registered management investment companies and unit investment trusts
outside of the same group of investment companies as the Funds (``Funds
of Funds'') to acquire shares of the Funds; and (f) certain Funds
(``Feeder Funds'') to create and redeem Creation Units in-kind in a
master-feeder structure.

APPLICANTS:  WicShares Trust (the ``Trust''), a Delaware statutory
trust, that intends to register under the Act as a series open-end
management investment company, and Water Island Capital, LLC (the
``Initial Adviser''), a Delaware Limited liability company registered
as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.

FILING DATES:  The application was filed on June 11, 2019.

HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING:  An order granting the requested
relief will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's
Secretary and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally
or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by
5:30 p.m. on July 22, 2019, and should be accompanied by proof of
service on applicants, in the form of an affidavit, or for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Pursuant to rule 0-5 under the Act, hearing
requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, any facts
bearing upon the desirability of a hearing on the matter, the reason
for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be
notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the
Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES:  Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street
NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090; Applicants: WicShares Trust and Water
Island Capital, LLC, 41 Madison Avenue, 42nd Floor, New York, New York
10010; Counsel for Applicants: Fatima S. Sulaiman, Esq. and Stacy L.
Fuller, Esq., K&L Gates LLP, 1601 K Street NW, Washington, DC 20006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Edward J. Rubenstein, Senior Special
Counsel, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Nadya B. Roytblat, Assistant Director,
at<PHONE_NUMBER> (Division of Investment Management, Chief Counsel's
Office).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained via the
Commission's website by searching for the file number, or for an
applicant using the Company name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Summary of Application

    1. Applicants request an order that would allow Funds to operate as
index exchange traded funds (``ETFs'').\1\ Fund shares will be
purchased and redeemed at their NAV in Creation Units only. All orders
to purchase Creation Units and all redemption requests will be placed
by or through an ``Authorized Participant,'' which will have signed a
participant agreement with the Distributor. Shares will be listed and
traded individually on a national securities exchange, where share
prices will be based on the current bid/offer market. Certain Funds may
operate as Feeder Funds in a master-feeder structure. Any order
granting the requested relief would be subject to the terms and
conditions stated in the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Applicants request that the order apply to the initial
series of the Trust and any additional series of the Trust, and any
other existing or future open-end management investment company or
existing or future series thereof (each, included in the term
``Fund''), each of which will operate as an ETF, and their
respective existing or future master funds, and will track a
specified index comprised of domestic and/or foreign equity
securities and/or domestic and/or foreign fixed income securities
(each, an ``Underlying Index'' Any Fund will (a) be advised by the
Initial Adviser or an entity controlling, controlled by, or under
common control with the Initial Adviser (each of the foregoing and
any successor thereto, an ``Adviser'') and (b) comply with the terms
and conditions of the application. For purposes of the requested
order, a ``successor'' is limited to an entity or entities that
result from a reorganization into another jurisdiction or a change
in the type of business organization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Each Fund will hold investment positions selected to correspond
closely to the performance of an Underlying Index. In the case of Self-
Indexing Funds, an affiliated person, as defined in section 2(a)(3) of
the Act (``Affiliated Person''), or an affiliated person of an
Affiliated Person (``Second-Tier Affiliate''), of the Trust or a Fund,
of the Adviser, of any sub-adviser to or promoter of a Fund, or of the
Distributor

will compile, create, sponsor, or maintain the Underlying Index.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Each Self-Indexing Fund will post on its website the
identities and quantities of the investment positions that will form
the basis for the Fund's calculation of its NAV at the end of the
day. Applicants believe that requiring Self-Indexing Funds to
maintain full portfolio transparency will help address, together
with other protections, conflicts of interest with respect to such
Funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Shares will be purchased and redeemed in Creation Units and
generally on an in-kind basis. Except where the purchase or redemption
will include cash under the limited circumstances specified in the
application, purchasers will be required to purchase Creation Units by
depositing specified instruments (``Deposit Instruments''), and
shareholders redeeming their shares will receive specified instruments
(``Redemption Instruments''). The Deposit Instruments and the
Redemption Instruments will each correspond pro rata to the positions
in the Fund's portfolio (including cash positions) except as specified
in the application.
    4. Because shares will not be individually redeemable, applicants
request an exemption from section 5(a)(1) and section 2(a)(32) of the
Act that would permit the Funds to register as open-end management
investment companies and issue shares that are redeemable in Creation
Units only.
    5. Applicants also request an exemption from section 22(d) of the
Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act as secondary market trading in shares
will take place at negotiated prices, not at a current offering price
described in a Fund's prospectus, and not at a price based on NAV.
Applicants state that (a) secondary market trading in shares does not
involve a Fund as a party and will not result in dilution of an
investment in shares, and (b) to the extent different prices exist
during a given trading day, or from day to day, such variances occur as
a result of third-party market forces, such as supply and demand.
Therefore, applicants assert that secondary market transactions in
shares will not lead to discrimination or preferential treatment among
purchasers. Finally, applicants represent that share market prices will
be disciplined by arbitrage opportunities, which should prevent shares
from trading at a material discount or premium from NAV.
    6. With respect to Funds that effect creations and redemptions of
Creation Units in kind and that are based on certain Underlying Indexes
that include foreign securities, applicants request relief from the
requirement imposed by section 22(e) in order to allow such Funds to
pay redemption proceeds within fifteen calendar days following the
tender of Creation Units for redemption. Applicants assert that the
requested relief would not be inconsistent with the spirit and intent
of section 22(e) to prevent unreasonable, undisclosed, or unforeseen
delays in the actual payment of redemption proceeds.
    7. Applicants request an exemption to permit Funds of Funds to
acquire Fund shares beyond the limits of section 12(d)(1)(A) of the
Act; and the Funds, and any principal underwriter for the Funds, and/or
any broker or dealer registered under the Exchange Act, to sell shares
to Funds of Funds beyond the limits of section 12(d)(1)(B) of the Act.
The application's terms and conditions are designed to, among other
things, help prevent any potential (i) undue influence over a Fund
through control or voting power, or in connection with certain
services, transactions, and underwritings, (ii) excessive layering of
fees, and (iii) overly complex fund structures, which are the concerns
underlying the limits in sections 12(d)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act.
    8. Applicants request an exemption from sections 17(a)(1) and
17(a)(2) of the Act to permit persons that are Affiliated Persons, or
Second Tier Affiliates, of the Funds, solely by virtue of certain
ownership interests, to effectuate purchases and redemptions in-kind.
The deposit procedures for in-kind purchases of Creation Units and the
redemption procedures for in-kind redemptions of Creation Units will be
the same for all purchases and redemptions, and Deposit Instruments and
Redemption Instruments will be valued in the same manner as those
investment positions currently held by the Funds. Applicants also seek
relief from the prohibitions on affiliated transactions in section
17(a) to permit a Fund to sell its shares to and redeem its shares from
a Fund of Funds, and to engage in the accompanying in-kind transactions
with the Fund of Funds.\3\ The purchase of Creation Units by a Fund of
Funds directly from a Fund will be accomplished in accordance with the
policies of the Fund of Funds and will be based on the NAVs of the
Funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The requested relief would apply to direct sales of shares
in Creation Units by a Fund to a Fund of Funds and redemptions of
those shares. Applicants, moreover, are not seeking relief from
section 17(a) for, and the requested relief will not apply to,
transactions where a Fund could be deemed an Affiliated Person, or a
Second-Tier Affiliate, of a Fund of Funds because an Adviser or an
entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with an
Adviser provides investment advisory services to that Fund of Funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    9. Applicants also request relief to permit a Feeder Fund to
acquire shares of another registered investment company managed by the
Adviser having substantially the same investment objectives as the
Feeder Fund (the ``Master Fund'') beyond the limitations in section
12(d)(1)(A) and permit the Master Fund, and any principal underwriter
for the Master Fund, to sell shares of the Master Fund to the Feeder
Fund beyond the limitations in section 12(d)(1)(B).
    10. Section 6(c) of the Act permits the Commission to exempt any
persons or transactions from any provision of the Act if such exemption
is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with
the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the
policy and provisions of the Act. Section 12(d)(1)(J) of the Act
provides that the Commission may exempt any person, security, or
transaction, or any class or classes of persons, securities, or
transactions, from any provision of section 12(d)(1) if the exemption
is consistent with the public interest and the protection of investors.
Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the Commission to grant an order
permitting a transaction otherwise prohibited by section 17(a) if it
finds that (a) the terms of the proposed transaction are fair and
reasonable and do not involve overreaching on the part of any person
concerned; (b) the proposed transaction is consistent with the policies
of each registered investment company involved; and (c) the proposed
transaction is consistent with the general purposes of the Act.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-14112 Filed 7-1-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: July 18, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 137)]
[Notices]
[Page 39394]
[DOCID:fr18jy07-44]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER07-1065-000]

Public Service Company of New Mexico; Notice of Filing

July 6, 2007.
    Take notice that on June 21, 2007, Public Service Company of New
Mexico (PNM), pursuant to section 205 of the Federal Power Act and Part
35 of the Commission's regulations, submits three agreements in order
to provide for an additional point of interconnection between PNM's
transmission facilities and those of the City of Farmington, New Mexico
at Farmington's Hogback Station.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on July 17, 2007.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-13822 Filed 7-17-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Assessment of Potential Costs and Emissions Impacts of Proposed New and Existing Source Standards Analyzed Separately
Abstract: RIA Appendix C - Assessment of Potential Costs and Emissions Impacts of Proposed New and Existing Source Standards Analyzed Separately analysis files


[Federal Register: December 1, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 230)]
[Notices]
[Page 74696-74697]
[DOCID:fr01de10-43]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC10-555-001]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-555); Comment
Request; Submitted for OMB Review

November 24, 2010.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of section 3507 of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507, the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC) has submitted the
information collection described below to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review of the information collection requirements. Any
interested person may file comments directly with OMB and should
address a copy of those comments to the Commission as explained below.
The Commission issued a Notice in the Federal Register (75 FR 57744,
09/22/2010) requesting public comments. FERC received no comments on
the FERC-555 and has made this notation in its submission to OMB.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due by January 3,
2011.

ADDRESSES: Address comments on the collection of information to the
Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Attention: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Desk Officer.
Comments to OMB should be filed electronically, c/o oira_
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and include OMB Control Number 1902-0098 for
reference. The Desk Officer may be reached by telephone at 202-395-
4638.
    A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission and should refer to Docket No. IC10-555-001.
Comments may be filed either electronically or in paper format. Those
persons filing electronically do not need to make a paper filing.
Documents filed electronically via the Internet must be prepared in an
acceptable filing format and in compliance with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission submission guidelines. Complete filing
instructions and acceptable filing formats are available at http://
www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. To file the document
electronically, access the Commission's Web site and click on Documents
& Filing, E-Filing (http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp), and
then follow the instructions for each screen. First time users will
have to establish a user name and password. The Commission will send an
automatic acknowledgement to the sender's e-mail address upon receipt
of comments.
    For paper filings, the comments should be submitted to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, and should refer to Docket No. IC10-
555-001.
    Users interested in receiving automatic notification of activity in
FERC Docket Number IC10-555 may do so through eSubscription at http://
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp. All comments may be viewed,
printed or downloaded remotely via the Internet through FERC's homepage
using the ``eLibrary'' link. For user assistance, contact
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by e-mail
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and by fax
at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information collected under the
requirements of FERC-555, ``Records Retention Requirements'' (OMB No.
1902-0098), is used by the Commission to carry out its responsibilities
in implementing the statutory provisions of sections 301, 304 and 309
of the Federal Power Act (FPA) (16 U.S.C. 825, 825c and 825h), sections
8, 10 and 16 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) (15 U.S.C. 717-717w), and
section 20 of the Interstate Commerce Act (ICA, 49 U.S.C. 20).
    The regulations for preservation of records establish retention
periods, necessary guidelines, and requirements for retention of
applicable records for the regulated public utilities, natural gas and
oil pipeline companies subject to the Commission's jurisdiction. These
records will be used by the regulated companies as the basis for their
required rate filings and reports for the Commission. In addition, the
records will be used by the Commission's audit staff during compliance
reviews, by enforcement staff during investigations, and for special
analyses as deemed necessary by the Commission.
    Action: The Commission is requesting a three-year extension of the
current expiration date, with no changes to the record keeping
requirements.
    Burden Statement: In order to obtain a more accurate burden figure,
Commission staff asked a small number of FERC-555 respondents to
estimate the burden imposed by this data collection. The results show
that the record retention requirements under FERC-555 were
underestimated in the previous renewal of this information
collection.\1\ The following table portrays the updated burden estimate
based on industry responses:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The previous estimate reported average burden hours per
response and total burden hours as 2,402 and 1,237,030 respectively.
Further, the previous estimate reported the average annual cost per
respondent and total annual cost as $141,045 and $72,638,045
respectively. Finally, the estimate for the number of respondents
has decreased from 515 to 475.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Number of      Average Number  Average  burden
            FERC data collection                respondents      of responses      hours per       Total annual
                                                  annually      per respondent    response \2\     burden hours
                                                         (1)              (2)              (3)   (1) x (2) x (3)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERC-555....................................             475                1            4,968        2,359,800
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The \2\ estimated total annual cost burden to respondents includes
labor costs associated with record retention ($65,597,025 or $152,423
per company) and both electronic and non-electronic record storage
costs ($72,400,925 or $138,099 per company). The estimated total annual
cost is $137,997,950; the

total annual cost per respondent is $290,522.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Record retention burden differs greatly by the size of the
company and this figure captures an average across all
jurisdictional companies. Thus a small company may require fewer
than 1,000 hours per year to comply while a large company may
require more than 10,000 hours per year to comply.
    \3\ These cost estimates are based on the information received
from contacting actual companies and asking for estimates of record
retention costs. There is no specific rate used in these cost
estimates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The reporting burden includes the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide
the information including: (1) Reviewing instructions; (2) developing,
acquiring, installing, and utilizing technology and systems for the
purposes of collecting, validating, verifying, processing, maintaining,
disclosing and providing information; (3) adjusting the existing ways
to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
(4) training personnel to respond to a collection of information; (5)
searching data sources; (6) completing and reviewing the collection of
information; and (7) transmitting, or otherwise disclosing the
information.
    The estimate of cost for respondents is based upon salaries for
professional and clerical support, as well as direct and indirect
overhead costs. Direct costs include all costs directly attributable to
providing this information, such as administrative costs and the cost
for information technology. Indirect or overhead costs are costs
incurred by an organization in support of its mission. These costs
apply to activities which benefit the whole organization rather than
any one particular function or activity.
    Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of the burden of
the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collections of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms
of information technology, e.g. permitting electronic submission of
responses.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-30255 Filed 11-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 12, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 155)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 48864-48867]
[DOCID:fr12au10-5]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2010-0035; FRL-9187-5]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; MN

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving Minnesota's request to amend its State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for sulfur dioxide (SO2). The
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) submitted the SIP revision
request to EPA on November 23, 2009, and supplemented it on March 3,
2010. EPA's approval revises SIP requirements applicable to Saint
Mary's Hospital, located in Rochester, Minnesota, by adding a 2500
kilowatt (KW) reciprocating internal combustion engine (RICE) electric
generator and reducing the allowable diesel fuel sulfur content for two
existing RICE electric generators. The revision also includes
administrative changes in the identification of emissions units. These
revisions are included in a joint Title I/Title V document for Saint
Mary's Hospital, which replaces the document currently approved into
the SIP for the facility. These revisions will result in reducing the
SO2 impact in the Rochester area, and strengthen the
existing SO2 SIP.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective October 12, 2010,
unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 13, 2010. If adverse
comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2010-0035, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: Jay Bortzer, Chief, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: Jay Bortzer, Chief, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office normal hours of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m. excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2010-0035. 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 docket are listed in the http://
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays.
We recommend that you telephone Charles Hatten, Environmental Engineer,
at<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Hatten, Environmental
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. General Information
II. What revision did the State request be incorporated into the
SIP?
III. What is EPA's analysis of the State submission?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action applies only to the Saint Mary's Hospital, located at
1216 Second St., Rochester, Minnesota (Olmsted County).

B. Has public notice been provided?

    Minnesota published a public notice of the revisions to the SIP on
August 22, 2009. The comment period began on August 23, 2009, and ended
on September 23, 2009. In the public notice, Minnesota stated it would
hold a public hearing if one were requested during the comment period.
This follows the alternative public participation process EPA approved
on June 5, 2006 (71 FR 32274). For limited types of SIP revisions that
the public has shown little interest in, a public hearing is not
automatically required. Because no one requested a public hearing,
Minnesota did not hold a public hearing.

Background

    Saint Mary's Hospital is a tertiary care hospital which includes
several buildings located on a 49 acre campus. The Saint Mary's
Hospital is owned and operated by the Mayo Foundation. The facility is
a culpable source located in the Rochester area's nonattainment plan
for the SO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).
However, the area currently meets the NAAQS for SO2, and was
officially redesignated as attainment on May 8, 2001. (66 FR 14087)
    The primary emission units at the facility are three identical
fossil fuel-

fired boilers (Nos. 1, 2, and 3), which exhaust through a common stack;
one cogeneration turbine; and two emergency RICE generators. Each
boiler burns natural gas as fuel with distillate oil as a backup fuel.
The cogeneration turbine burns only natural gas. One of the RICE
generators burns only distillate oil; the other can burn distillate oil
or operate in a dual-fuel mode (95% natural gas and 5% distillate oil/
very low sulfur diesel).
    Saint Mary's Hospital is planning to make a physical change to the
facility by adding a new RICE electric generator. The facility will
also be required to reduce the allowable diesel fuel sulfur content for
two existing emergency RICE electric generators. The State provided a
modeling analysis of the effect of the changes at the facility on local
SO2. Below, in Section III, a more detailed discussion of
the modeling analysis and its results can be found.

II. What revision did the State request be incorporated into the SIP?

    The State has requested that EPA approve, as a revision to the
Minnesota SIP, a new joint Title I/Title V document that incorporates:
(1) Administrative changes in the identification of emission units, (2)
the installation a 2500 KW RICE electric generator, and (3) a reduction
in the allowable diesel fuel sulfur content for two existing RICE
electric generators.

A. What prior SIP actions are pertinent to this action?

    The facility has been subject to a federally enforceable permit
incorporated into Minnesota's SIP as a joint Title I/Title V document,
containing requirements for ensuring the attainment of the NAAQS for
SO2. As a result, the facility is subject to fuel usage
limitations to restrict the total facility SO2 emissions.

B. What are Title I conditions and Joint Title I/Title V documents?

    SIP control measures were contained in permits issued to culpable
sources in Minnesota until 1990 when EPA determined that limits in
state-issued permits are not federally enforceable because the permits
expire. Minnesota then issued permanent Administrative Orders to
culpable sources in nonattainment areas from 1991 to February of 1996.
    Minnesota's consolidated permitting regulations, approved into the
SIP on May 2, 1995 (60 FR 21447), includes the term ``Title I
condition'' which was written, in part, to satisfy EPA requirements
that SIP control measures remain permanent. A ``Title I condition'' is
defined as ``any condition based on source-specific determination of
ambient impacts imposed for the purposes of achieving or maintaining
attainment with the national ambient air quality standard and which was
part of the state implementation plan approved by EPA or submitted to
the EPA pending approval under section 110 of the act * * *.'' The rule
also states that ``Title I conditions and the permittee's obligation to
comply with them, shall not expire, regardless of the expiration of the
other conditions of the permit.'' Further, ``any Title I condition
shall remain in effect without regard to permit expiration or
reissuance, and shall be restated in the reissued permit.''
    Minnesota has initiated using joint Title I/Title V documents as
the enforceable document for imposing emission limitations and
compliance requirements in SIPs. The SIP requirements in joint Title I/
Title V documents submitted by MPCA are cited as ``Title I
conditions,'' therefore ensuring that SIP requirements remain permanent
and enforceable. EPA reviewed the State's procedure for using joint
Title I/Title V documents to implement site-specific SIP requirements
and found it to be acceptable under both Titles I and V of the Clean
Air Act (July 3, 1997, letter from David Kee, EPA, to Michael J.
Sandusky, MPCA). Further, a June 15, 2006, letter from EPA to MPCA
clarifies procedures to transfer requirements from Administrative
Orders to joint Title I/Title V documents.

III. What is EPA's analysis of the State submission?

    This SIP revision replaces the joint Title I/Title V document
currently approved into the SIP for Saint Mary's Hospital with a new
joint Title I/Title V document, Air Permit No. 10900008-003. The new
joint document includes administrative changes in the identification of
emission units, adds a 2500 KW RICE electric generator, and reduces the
allowable diesel fuel sulfur content for two existing RICE electric
generators.

Administrative Changes

    The new joint document reflects administrative changes in how the
emission units are described. Boilers 1, 2, and 3 were listed in the
joint document previously issued to Saint Mary's Hospital and
identified as EU038, EU039, and EU040. In the new joint document, Air
Permit No. 10900008-003, these boilers are now identified as EU001,
EU002, and EU003. Correspondingly, the two existing emergency RICE
generators, which were previously identified as EU0041 and EU0042, are
now identified as EU005 and EU006.

New Electric Generator

    The amendment to the SIP allows the installation of a new RICE
electric generator. The new RICE generator, identified as EU012, is a
2500 kilowatt non-emergency compression ignition diesel engine subject
to 40 CFR part 60, subpart IIII, for 2007 model year engines with
displacement less than 10 liters per cylinder. In Sec.  60.4207 of 40
CFR part 60, subpart IIII, the new electric generator is subject to a
requirement to burn only diesel fuel with a sulfur content of less than
500 parts per million (ppm) by weight. This represents a limit of 0.05%
sulfur by weight. Further, as of October 1, 2010, this diesel fuel oil
limit will decrease to 15 ppm by weight (0.0015% sulfur by weight).
This new diesel fuel oil limit is imposed by 40 CFR 80.510 upon owners
or operators of new engines subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart IIII,
and is listed as a SIP condition to ensure that it will not exceed this
Federal standard.
    In addition to the above said requirements, the SO2
emissions for new RICE generator will be limited to 1.52 tons per year
based upon an operational restriction of 2045 hours per year.

Reduced SO2 Limits

    The existing boilers, cogeneration turbine, and generators are
subject to fuel sulfur limits in order to comply with the NAAQS
requirements for SO2. As noted above, the cogeneration
turbine burns only natural gas, and therefore is not subject to any
Title I SIP conditions for SO2. The SO2 SIP
emission limits for the boilers are unchanged. The boilers must burn
only natural gas and low-sulfur distillate fuel, less than 0.5% sulfur
by weight.
    The existing generators have been subject to a requirement to burn
distillate oil with sulfur content less than 0.41% by weight. In order
to add the new generator and ensure that the emissions from the
facility remain at or below current SIP levels, Saint Mary's Hospital
agreed to align the fuel sulfur requirements of the existing generators
with the new generator. Thus, the existing generators will be subject
to the same requirements as the new generator; namely, a requirement to
burn only diesel fuel with a sulfur content of less than 500 ppm by
weight. This new limit of 0.05% sulfur by weight is considerably lower
than the old limit of 0.41% sulfur by weight, resulting in a decrease
in the amount of SO2 emissions from the existing generators

by a factor of 8.2 (0.41/0.05). Further, the diesel fuel oil limit for
the existing generators will decrease to 15 ppm by weight (0.0015%
sulfur by weight) as of October 1, 2010, which is the same as the limit
imposed on the new generator by 40 CFR 80.510.

Modeling

    The SIP revision does not include any increases in SO2
emission limits but, because some of the changes being made to the
facility may affect the release and dispersion of SO2
emissions, Saint Mary's Hospital performed an air quality analysis to
address the facility's impact on the SO2 NAAQS. The facility
was modeled both with and without the new generator. The modeling was
done with the AERMOD air dispersion model using meteorological data
from 1986 to 1990, and included flagpole receptors in downtown
Rochester. The high-first-high results for each standard averaging time
(1 hour, 3 hour, 24 hour, and annual) were compared for the two
scenarios at each receptor. With the addition of the 500 ppm by weight
fuel oil sulfur content for the two existing generators, the results
showed equivalent or decreased ambient impacts from the facility at
each receptor, even after the installation of the new generator.

                                             Table--High-Second-High Ambient SO2 Concentration From Facility
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Modeled concentration ([mu]g/m\3\)
                       Averaging time                       ------------------------------------------------------  Background     Total       Standard
                                                               1986     1987     1988     1989     1990     Max
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Facility Prior to Modification
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-hour.....................................................      328      318      337      317      336      337           26          363         1300
3-hour.....................................................      244      253      249      269      250      269           13          282         1300
24-hour....................................................      124      134      110      127      132      134            5          139          365
Annual.....................................................       21       21       20       21       20       21            3           24           60
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Facility After Modification
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-hour.....................................................      301      300      320      303      319      320           26          346         1300
3-hour.....................................................      237      245      242      262      238      262           13          275         1300
24-hour....................................................      109      117       94      121      125      125            5          130          365
Annual.....................................................       15       15       14       14       13       15            3           18           60
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The modeling shows that the high-second-high impacts from the
facility will decrease due to the changes from this SIP revision: the
installation of the new generator and the decreased fuel oil sulfur
limits on the two existing generators. This assures that ambient air
quality will be protected.

IV. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving the revision to Minnesota's SIP to replace the
joint Title I/Title V document currently approved into the SIP for
Saint Mary's Hospital with a new joint Title I/Title V document, Air
Permit No. 10900008-003. The new joint document includes administrative
changes in the identification of emission units, adds a 2,500 KW RICE
electric generator, and reduces the allowable diesel fuel sulfur
content for two existing RICE electric generators. In approving this
joint Title I/Title V document, EPA is incorporating into the SIP only
those requirements in the joint document labeled as ``Title I
Condition: SIP for SO2 NAAQS.''
    Since this SIP revision will decrease SO2 impacts in the
Rochester area, Saint Mary's revision will strengthen the existing
SO2 SIP.
    We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective October 12,
2010 without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written
comments by September 13, 2010. If we receive such comments, we will
withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a
subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public
comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment
period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time. If we do not receive any comments, this action will be
effective October 12, 2010.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Clean Air Act
and applicable Federal regulations. 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 Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, 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 Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     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 Clean
Air Act; 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).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not 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 Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 12, 2010. 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur dioxide.

    Dated: August 2, 2010.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart Y--Minnesota

0
2. In Sec.  52.1220 the table in paragraph (d) is amended by revising
the entry for ``Saint Mary's Hospital'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *

                                 EPA-Approved Minnesota Source-Specific Permits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      State effective
          Name of source              Permit No.           date          EPA approval date         Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
St. Mary's Hospital..............      10900008-003          03/01/10  08/12/10, [Insert     Only conditions
                                                                        page number where     cited as ``Title I
                                                                        the document          condition: SIP for
                                                                        begins].              SO2 NAAQS.''

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

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2010-19822 Filed 8-11-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: October 2, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 192)]
[Notices]
[Page 57403-57404]
[DOCID:fr02oc08-130]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Public Notice for Waiver of Aeronautical Land-Use Assurance;
Mansfield Lahm International Airport, Mansfield, OH

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of intent of waiver with respect to land.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is considering a
proposal to change a portion of the airport from aeronautical use to
non-aeronautical use and to authorize the sale of the airport property.
The proposal consists of the sale of vacant, much of which is farmed or
vacant, containing trees, streams, and scattered wetland areas owned by
the City of Mansfield. The Miller Farm Parcel 50 is
approximately 100.521 acres. The land was acquired under FAA Project
No(s): AIP-90-2-3-39-0049-099l (Contract No. AlP FA91-GL-l806). There
are no impacts to the airport by allowing the airport to dispose of the
property. The proposed land for release is vacant, not required for
future development, safety, or compatible land use. The intended land
use is infrastructure development, including roads, utilities, and
industrial development. Approval does not constitute a commitment by
the FAA to financially assist in the disposal of the subject airport
property nor a determination of eligibility for grant-in-aid funding
from the FAA. The disposition of proceeds from the disposal of the
airport property will be

in accordance with FAA's Policy and Procedures Concerning the Use of
Airport Revenue, published in the Federal Register on February 16,
1999.
    In accordance with section 47107(h) of title 49, United States
Code, this notice is required to be published in the Federal Register
30 days before modifying the land-use assurance that requires the
property to be used for an aeronautical purpose.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 3, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Swann, Program Manager,
Detroit Airports District Office, 11677 South Wayne Road, Suite 107,
Romulus, Michigan 48174. Telephone Number:<PHONE_NUMBER>/FAX Number:
(734) 229-2950. Documents reflecting this FAA action may be reviewed at
this same location or at Mansfield Lahm International Airport,
Mansfield, Ohio.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Following is a legal description of the
property located in Franklin Township, County of Richland, State of
Ohio, and described as follows:

Legal Description of Property

    Being a part of the southwest quarter of section 33, township 22,
range 18 and being more particularly described as follows:
    Beginning at the base of an 8'' wood fence post found at the
northeast corner of said southwest quarter, referenced by a \5/8\''
rebar found bearing N 89[deg]-12'-33'' E, 0.79 feet;
    Thence with the following eight courses:
    S 00[deg]-08'-51'' E, 508.28 feet along the east line of said
southwest quarter to a \5/8\ inch rebar found at the northeast corner
of a conveyed to Charles R. and Dorothy A. Miller, Trustees by official
record volume 177, page 252;
    N 84[deg]-13'-51'' W, 148.00 feet along the northerly line of said
land of Charles R. and Dorothy A. Miller to a \5/8\ inch rebar found in
the northwest corner of said land.
    S 00[deg]-08'-51'' E, 296.00 feet along the west line of said land
of Charles R. and Dorothy A. Miller to a \5/8\ inch rebar with plastic
cap stamped ``Richland Eng. RLS 7209'' in the southwest corner of said
land.
    S 89[deg]-12'-33'' W, 1,244.71 feet to an iron pin set; S 00[deg]-
08'-51'' E, 1,825.57 feet to an iron pin set; S 89[deg]-28'-00'' W,
1,262.88 feet to an iron set in the west line of said southwest
quarter;
    N 00[deg]-38'-10'' W, 2,607.11 feet along said west line of said
southwest quarter to a inch water pipe found in the northwest corner of
said southwest quarter and passing through an iron pin found at 21.04
feet;
    Thence, N 89[deg]-12'-33'' E, 2,677.09 along the north line of said
southwest quarter to the place of beginning, containing 100.521 acres,
more or less of which 1,689 acres are in the southwest quarter of
section 33, Franklin Township and 96.832 acres are in the City of
Mansfield and subject to all legal highways and easements of record.
    Bearings: Survey X-230.
    According to a survey made in September 2007 by Roger L. Stevens,
Ohio Registered surveyor NO: 7052.
    All iron pins set are \5/8\ inch diameter rod with plastic cap
stamped ``S.J.L. INC.''

    Issued in Romulus, Michigan on July 28, 2008.
Matthew J. Thys,
Manager, Detroit Airports District Office, FAA, Great Lakes Region.
[FR Doc. E8-22982 Filed 10-1-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 59 (Monday, March 28, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17246-17248]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06455]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[USCG-2022-0064]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Blue Angels at Kaneohe Bay Air Show; Oahu, HI

AGENCY: Coast Guard, Homeland Security (DHS).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish a temporary safety
zone while the U.S. Navy Blue Angels Squadron conducts aerobatic
performances over Kaneohe Bay, Oahu, Hawaii, from 9:00 a.m. through
5:00 p.m., August 12-14, 2022. This safety zone is necessary to protect
watercraft and the general public from hazards associated with the U.S.
Navy Blue Angels aircraft low flying, high powered jet aerobatics over
open waters. Vessels desiring to transit through the zone can request
permission by contacting the Honolulu Captain of the Port (COTP) or his
designated representative. We invite your comments on this proposed
rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before April 27, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2022-0064 using the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email Chief Petty Officer Bradley Lindsey,
Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Honolulu;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    On January 27, 2022, Kaneohe Bay Air Show 2022 coordinators
informed the

U.S. Coast Guard of a State of Hawaii approved Air Show plan that
include an aerial performance ``show box'' extending beyond the Kaneohe
Bay Naval Defensive Sea Area as established by Executive Order 8681 of
February 14, 1941. Within this ``show box,'' the U.S. Navy Blue Angels
Squadron will conduct aerobatic performances, exhibiting their
aircraft's maximum performance capabilities, over Kaneohe Bay, Oahu,
Hawaii, during a 3-day period. Taking into account the hazards
associated within this ``show box'' during the Squadron's high powered
multiple jet aircraft performances, and that Kaneohe Bay normally
experiences heavy waterway traffic during the weekends, the COTP
determined that a safety zone for the portions of the ``show box'' that
extend beyond the Kaneohe Bay Naval Defensive Sea would be appropriate
to ensure the safety of all watercraft and the general public during
the Blue Angels' performances. The Coast Guard is proposing this
rulemaking under authority in 46 U.S.C. 70034 (previously 33 U.S.C.
1231).

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The COTP proposes to establish a temporary safety zone while the
U.S. Navy Blue Angels Squadron conducts aerobatic performances over
Kaneohe Bay, Oahu, Hawaii, from 9:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., August 12-
14, 2022. This safety zone would encompass a small area of the Kaneohe
Bay Naval Defensive Sea Area, including an area that extends
approximately 200 yards northeast and 1000 yards southwest of the Naval
Defensive Sea Area and is bound by the following points: 21[deg]26.159'
N, 157[deg]47.312' W; then south to 21[deg]25.890' N, 157[deg]47.250'
W; then northeast to 21[deg]27.943' N, 157[deg]44.953' W; then west to
21[deg]28.016' N, 157[deg]45.250' W; and returning southwest to the
starting point. This safety zone will extend from the surface of the
water to the ocean floor. These safety zones are necessary to protect
watercraft and the general public from hazards associated with the U.S.
Navy Blue Angels aircraft low flying, high powered jet aerobatics over
open waters. Vessels requiring emergency transit through the zone may
request permission by contacting the on scene Patrol Commander on VHF
channel 16 (156.800 MHz) or the Honolulu Captain of the Port at
telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>. The regulatory text we are proposing
appears at the end of this document.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed 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. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant
regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM
has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, and duration of the safety zone. Vessels will be able to
transit in the temporary safety zones with permission from the Honolulu
COTP or his designated representative and transit around the zone
freely.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
    Vessels will be allowed to transit in and around the temporary
safety zones in Kaneohe Bay once permission to enter is granted. 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. Before the effective period, we will
issue maritime advisories widely available to the Oahu maritime and
tourist communities.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this proposed rule
would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment
(see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to
what degree this rule would economically affect it.
    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 proposed rule
would affect your small business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or
options for compliance, please call or email the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not
retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this
proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would 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 proposed 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 proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments) because it would 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 proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please call or email the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

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 proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the potential effects of
this proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01, Rev. 1, associated implementing
instructions, and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a safety
zone that extends the Kaneohe Bay Naval Defensive Sea Area on both ends
that would prevent vessels from entering the fight paths for the Air
Show. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further
review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction
Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 1. A preliminary Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket.
For instructions on locating the docket, see the ADDRESSES section of
this preamble. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed
rule.

G. Protest Activities

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

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    Submitting comments. We encourage you to submit comments through
the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To
do so, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-2022-0064 in the
search box and click ``Search.'' Next, look for this document in the
Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment
option. If you cannot submit your material by using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the person in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this proposed rule for alternate
instructions.
    Viewing material in docket. To view documents mentioned in this
proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as
described in the previous paragraph, and then select ``Supporting &
Related Material'' in the Document Type column. Public comments will
also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following
instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. We review all comments received, but we will only
post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may
choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that
we receive.
    Personal information. We accept anonymous comments. Comments we
post to https://www.regulations.gov will include any personal
information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions
to the docket in response to this document, see DHS's eRulemaking
System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is
proposing to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-
6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
00170.1, Revision No. 01.2.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T14-0064 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T14-0064  Safety Zone; Blue Angels at Kaneohe Bay Air Show,
Oahu, Hawaii.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters
contained within an area composing of one box on Kaneohe Bay Naval
Defensive Sea Area as established by Executive Order 8681 of February
14, 1941, in Kaneohe Bay, Oahu, Hawaii. This safety zone extends
approximately 200 yards northeast and 1000 yards southwest of the Naval
Defensive Sea Area and is bound by the following points: 21[deg]26.159'
N, 157[deg]47.312' W; then south to 21[deg]25.890' N, 157[deg]47.250'
W; then northeast to 21[deg]27.943' N, 157[deg]44.953' W; then west to
21[deg]28.016' N, 157[deg]45.250' W; and returning southwest to the
starting point. This safety zone extends from the surface of the water
to the ocean floor. These coordinates are based upon the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coast Survey, Pacific Ocean,
Oahu, Hawaii, chart 19359 (NAD 83).
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain,
petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a
Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Honolulu (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety
zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in
subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative.
    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP or the COTP's
representative on VHF channel 16 (156.800 MHz) or the Honolulu Captain
of the Port at telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>. Those in the safety zone
must comply with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the
COTP or the COTP's designated representative.
    (d) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced daily between
the hours of 9:00 a.m. through 5:00 p.m., August 12-14, 2022.

    Dated: March 21, 2022.
A.B. Avanni,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Honolulu.
[FR Doc. 2022-06455 Filed 3-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 12, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 20233]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8538]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0869; Airspace Docket No. 10-AEA-21]

Revocation of Class E Airspace; Kutztown, PA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action removes Class E Airspace at Kutztown, PA. The
Kutztown Airport has been abandoned and therefore controlled airspace
associated with the airport is being removed.

DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, June 30, 2011. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Horrocks, Operations Support
Group, Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O.
Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    The FAA received a notice from its Aeronautical Products office
that the Kutztown Airport, PA, has been listed as abandoned as per
NFDD09-240 (12/16/2009). After evaluation it was decided the Class E
airspace associated with the Kutztown Airport is no longer required.
    Since this action eliminates the impact of controlled airspace on
users of the National Airspace System in the vicinity of the Kutztown
Airport, notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are
unnecessary. Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph
6005 of FAA Order 7400.9U dated August 18, 2010, and effective
September 15, 2010, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1.
The Class E designation listed in this document will be removed from
publication subsequently in the Order.

The Rule

    This amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 removes Class E airspace at Kutztown Airport, Kutztown, PA, as
the airport has been abandoned and all instrument approach procedures
cancelled.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current, is
non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore, (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. 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.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
subtitle VII, part A, subpart I, section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it removes controlled airspace at Kutztown, PA.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9U, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15, 2010, is
amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 700
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AEA PA E5 Kutztown, PA [Removed]

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on April 1, 2011.
Mark D. Ward,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
[FR Doc. 2011-8538 Filed 4-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 42 (Friday, March 2, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12829-12830]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5108]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2146-135]

Alabama Power Company; Notice of Application for Amendment of
License and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Amendment of License.
    b. Project No.: 2146-135.
    c. Date Filed: February 7, 2012.
    d. Applicant: Alabama Power Company.
    e. Name of Project: Coosa River Project.
    f. Location: The project is located on the Coosa River in Cherokee,
Etowah, Calhoun, St. Clair, Talladega, Shelby, Coosa, Chilton, and
Elmore counties, Alabama, and Floyd County, Georgia.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. James F. Crew, Alabama Power Company, 600
North 18th Street, P.O. Box 2641, Birmingham, AL 35291-8180, (205) 257-
4265.
    i. FERC Contact: Kelly Houff,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests: March 13, 2012.
    All documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit
brief comments up to 6,000 characters,

without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and
contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please
contact FERC Online Support. Although the Commission strongly
encourages electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To
paper-file, mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person whose name appears on the official service
list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or
documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that
may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they
must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    k. Description of Application: Alabama Power Company seeks approval
to replace turbine units 1 and 4 at the Lay Development, and turbine
unit 2 at the Bouldin Development of the Coosa River Project.
Specifically, at the Lay Development the licensee proposes to complete
turbine refurbishment of the two turbines, stator coil replacement,
wicket gate system rehabilitation, greaseless gate stem bushings
installation, turbine and generator bearing refurbishment, and related
component upgrades. For the Bouldin Development, the licensee proposes
complete turbine refurbishment, stator coil replacement, wicket gate
system rehabilitation or replacement, greaseless gate stem bushings
installation, turbine and generator bearing refurbishment, and related
component upgrades. The turbine unit modifications are expected to
increase the turbine rating for each unit by approximately 4 megawatts
(MW), as well as increase efficiency and annual generation. However,
since the units are generator-limited, the installed capacity at the
Lay and Bouldin developments will not change. The unit replacements at
the Lay Development would provide approximately 13.6 percent increase
in energy output, and the current full gate flow of 5,770 cubic feet
per second (cfs) is expected to remain the same, plus or minus 15
percent. The unit replacement at the Bouldin Development would provide
approximately 5 percent increase in energy output, and the current full
gate flow of 9,600 cfs is expected to remain the same, plus or minus 15
percent.
    l. A copy of the application is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary''
link. Enter the docket number (P-2146-135) excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, contact FERC Online Support. A copy is also available for
inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above.
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions To Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title
``COMMENTS,'' ``PROTEST,'' or ``MOTION TO INTERVENE,'' as applicable,
and the Project Number of the particular application to which the
filing refers. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served
upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular
application.
    o. Agency Comments: Federal, state, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the applicant. If
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing
comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.

    Dated: February 27, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-5108 Filed 3-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P