[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 110 (Friday, June 7, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34423-34424]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13513]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0316]

Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) Airman Testing
Standards and Training Working Group (ATSTWG)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Availability; reopening of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the reopening of the comment period on
the availability of draft Airman Certification Standards (ACS)
documents developed by the Airman Testing Standards and Training WG for
the private pilot certificate and the instrument rating. These
documents are available for public review, download, and comment.

DATES: The comment period for the notice published on April 24, 2013
(78 FR 24289) closed May 24, 2013, and is reopened until July 8, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2013-0316
using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA dockets, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
    Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
http://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Van L. Kerns, Manager, Regulatory
Support Division, FAA Flight Standards Service, AFS 600, FAA Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center P.O. Box 25082 Oklahoma City, OK 73125;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On April 24, 2013, the FAA established Docket No. FAA-2013-0316 for
the purpose of enabling the public to comment on some draft documents
developed by the Airman Testing Standards and Training Working Group.
The following documents were placed in that docket for public review
and comment:
    (1) Background Information; Industry-Led Changes to FAA Airman
Testing Standards and Training
    (2) Draft PRIVATE PILOT--AIRPLANE Airman Certification Standards;
    (3) Draft Change Tracking Matrix referenced to FAA-S-8081-14B,
Private Pilot Practical Test Standards for Airplane (Single Engine Land
and Single-Engine Sea Areas of Operation); Section 1: Private Pilot
    (4) Draft INSTRUMENT RATING--Airman Certification Standards; and
    (5) Draft Change Tracking Matrix referenced to FAA-S-8081-4E,
Instrument Rating Practical Test Standards for Airplane, Helicopter,
and Powered Lift
    During the initial 30-day comment period, which closed on May 24,
2013, more than 130 individuals and organizations posted comments on
these documents. The ATSTWG received a wide range of comments that
provided suggestions on how the ATSTWG could further improve its draft
PRIVATE PILOT--AIRPLANE and draft INSTRUMENT RATING Airman

Certification Standards documents. Given the size and scope of the
documents, which align the aeronautical knowledge testing standards
with the flight proficiency standards set out in the existing Practical
Test Standards (PTS), several commenters requested additional time to
review the material and develop their response.
    The ATSTWG's work is intended to improve the relevance,
reliability, validity, and effectiveness of the FAA's aeronautical
testing and training materials, as well as to support the FAA's goal of
reducing fatal general aviation accidents by incorporating task-
specific risk management considerations into each Area of Operation.
Because the ACS documents are intended to be the foundation for
transitioning to a more integrated and systematic approach to airman
certification testing and training, the ATSTWG wishes to benefit from
the broadest possible range of public comment on the work it will
submit to the FAA via the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee in
September 2013. The ATSTWG has asked the FAA to extend the public
comment period by an additional 30 days, and the FAA has accordingly
reopened the docket, as noted in the DATES section above.
    The ATSTWG will continue its additional work on remaining
assignments, including development of the authorized instructor ACS
document. The ATSTWG expects to make the authorized instructor ACS
document available for public review and comment at a later date.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 3, 2013.
Lirio Liu,
Designated Federal Officer, Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 2013-13513 Filed 6-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: July 30, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 147)]
[Notices]
[Page 44313-44314]
[DOCID:fr30jy08-128]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2008-0078]

Commercial Driver's License (CDL) Standards; Rotel North American
Tours, LLC; Exemption Application

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to grant Rotel North American
Tours, LLC (Rotel), an exemption to enable 22 drivers with German
commercial driver's licenses (CDLs) to operate 11 commercial motor
vehicles (CMVs) in the U.S. without a CDL issued by one of the States.
Rotel conducts tours of the U.S. on a seasonal basis for Europeans. It
uses motor coaches that are equipped with onboard sleeping and eating
facilities. The drivers, in addition to operating the CMVs, provide
oral commentary in German. Rotel previously was able to conduct these
operations without exemption because its drivers were able to obtain
(and renew) non-resident CDLs from certain States. However, there are
currently no States willing to issue non-resident CDLs. Rotel states
that it must obtain this exemption or end its specialty tour
operations.

DATES: This exemption is effective from July 30, 2008 through July 30,
2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert F. Schultz, Jr., FMCSA
Driver and Carrier Operations Division, Office of Bus and Truck
Standards and Operations. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. E-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315 and 31136(e), FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the CDL requirements in 49 CFR 383.23 for a two-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety that would be
achieved absent such exemption'' (49 CFR 381.305(a)).

Request for Exemption

    Rotel, headquartered in Terre Haute, Indiana, conducts bus tours of
the United States, Canada, and Mexico for Europeans from the end of
March through the middle of October each year. It currently has 22 bus
drivers and 11 customized buses dedicated to these operations. Rotel
states that it offers a unique touring experience in that each of its
buses is equipped with a galley that allows Rotel to offer dining with
European cuisine. In addition, each bus is equipped with sleeping
accommodations for the passengers.
    Rotel drivers operate the buses and deliver oral commentary in
German during the tour. The Rotel buses are CMVs as that term is
defined in 49 CFR 383.5. Therefore, the operators of the buses must
possess a valid U.S. CDL (49 CFR 383.23). Until recently, German
drivers could obtain a non-resident CDL in most States. However, Rotel
reports that because of heightened security concerns across the U.S.,
no State currently issues non-resident CDLs. Rotel requests that FMCSA
exempt its 22 bus drivers from the requirement that they possess a CDL
issued by a State, so that the drivers may operate these 11 buses
without a U.S. CDL on a seasonal basis for a period of 2 years.
    Rotel's drivers are residents and citizens of Germany. They hold
German CDLs, but the German CDL is not recognized in the U.S. Rotel
prefers to use native German drivers to conduct the tours. Rotel
experimented with using other drivers, but found that the quality of
its service was affected adversely.
    A complete list of the names and addresses of the drivers is
included in the docket of this matter. Rotel believes these drivers
possess sufficient knowledge, skills, and experience to ensure a level
of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety
that would be obtained by complying with the requirement for a U.S.
CDL. A copy of Rotel's application for exemption is available for
review in the docket for this notice.

Comments

    On March 20, 2008, FMCSA published notice of this application, and
asked for public comment (73 FR 15044). Two comments were received to
the public docket. Ms. Deb Carlson of the Department of Public Safety
for the State of Minnesota supported the application by pointing out
that Germany has ``an extensive driver education requirement'' and that
``there should not be any concerns'' in terms of safety if these
drivers were allowed to

operate in the U.S. The American Bus Association (ABA) opposed the
application, citing safety information about Rotel that it located on
public FMCSA Web sites. ABA expressed concern about Rotel's safety
performance with regard to drivers, CMVs, and overall safety
management. The Agency has examined the safety record of Rotel closely
in each of these areas, and concludes that, while Rotel's safety record
may reflect certain regulatory compliance issues, the information does
not relate to driver licensing and their employees' qualifications to
operate large passenger-carrying vehicles. The record reflects that
Rotel is responsive in correcting safety deficiencies brought to its
attention and that, as a result of an onsite compliance review
conducted by FMCSA in 2007, Rotel currently has a ``satisfactory''
safety rating, as defined in 49 CFR part 385.

FMCSA Decision

    The FMCSA has evaluated Rotel's application and the public comments
on their merits. The Agency believes that Rotel's overall safety
performance as reflected in its ``satisfactory'' rating, as well as the
knowledge and skills possessed by these drivers as a result of the
training program to which all German CDL applicants are exposed, ensure
that each of these 22 drivers will likely achieve a level of safety
that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety achieved
without the exemption (49 CFR 381.305(a)). The Agency hereby grants the
exemption for a two-year period, beginning July 30, 2008 and ending
July 30, 2010 for the following Rotel drivers: Josef Dangl, Reinfried
Dangl, Herbert Erber, Helmut Erbersdobler, Wilhelm Fuchs, Ludwig
Gerlsberger, Christian Hafner, Peter Hess, Michael Huber, Gerhard
Kinateder, Hermann Lichtenauer, Franz Manzinger, Fabian Maurer, Jens
Radloff, Rudolf Ramsl, Paul Schl[ouml]gl, Walter Schreiner, Josef
Stockinger, Josef Vogl, Klaus Weber, Markus W[ouml]lfl, and Norbert
Zechmeister.
    Interested parties possessing information that would demonstrate
that any or all of these drivers are not achieving the requisite
statutory level of safety should immediately notify FMCSA. The Agency
will evaluate any such information and, if safety is being compromised
or if the continuation of the exemption is not consistent with 49
U.S.C. 31315(b)(4) and 31136(e), will take immediate steps to revoke
the exemption of the driver(s) in question, as well as Rotel's
exemption, if warranted.

    Issued on: July 23, 2008.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. E8-17393 Filed 7-29-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 32 (Tuesday, February 18, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8879-8881]
[FR Doc No: 2020-03115]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket Nos. FDA-2017-E-5899 and FDA-2017-E-5911]

Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent
Extension; INTRAROSA

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) has
determined the regulatory review period for INTRAROSA and is publishing
this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA has made the
determination because of the submission of applications to the Director
of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Department of
Commerce, for the extension of a patent which claims that human drug
product.

DATES: Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published (see
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION) are incorrect may submit either electronic
or written comments and ask for a redetermination by April 20, 2020.
Furthermore, any interested person may petition FDA for a determination
regarding whether the applicant for extension acted with due diligence
during the regulatory review period by August 17, 2020. See
``Petitions'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for more
information.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before April 20, 2020. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of April 20, 2020. Comments received
by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be
considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service
acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:

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

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket Nos.
FDA-2017-E-5899 and FDA-2017-E-5911 for ``Determination of Regulatory
Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; INTRAROSA.'' Received
comments, those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be
placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential
Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at
the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with Sec.  10.20 (21 CFR 10.20) and
other applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's
posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18,
2015, or access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory
Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg.
51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984
(Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term
Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide that a patent may
be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item
(human drug product, animal drug product, medical device, food
additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA
before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory
review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension
an applicant may receive.
    A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A
testing phase and an approval phase. For human drug products, the
testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical
investigations of the drug becomes effective and runs until the
approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial
submission of an application to market the human drug product and
continues until FDA grants permission to market the drug product.
Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward
the actual amount of extension that the Director of USPTO may award
(for example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any
time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's
determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a human
drug product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase
as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).
    FDA has approved for marketing the human drug product, INTRAROSA
(prasterone), indicated for the treatment of moderate to severe
dyspareunia, a symptom of vulvar and vaginal atrophy, due to menopause.
Subsequent to this approval, the USPTO received patent term restoration
applications for INTRAROSA (U.S. Patent Nos. 8,629,129 and 8,957,054)
from Endorecherche, Inc., and the USPTO requested FDA's assistance in
determining the patents' eligibility for patent term restoration. In a
letter dated February 20, 2018, FDA advised the USPTO that this human
drug product had undergone a regulatory review period and that the
approval of INTRAROSA represented the first permitted commercial
marketing or use of the product. Thereafter, the USPTO requested that
FDA determine the product's regulatory review period.

II. Determination of Regulatory Review Period

    FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for
INTRAROSA is 3,381 days. Of this time, 2,983 days occurred during the
testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 398 days occurred
during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the
following dates:
    1. The date an exemption under section 505(i) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 355(i)) became effective:
August 17, 2007. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that the date
the investigational new drug application became effective was August
17, 2007.
    2. The date the application was initially submitted with respect to
the human drug product under section 505 of the FD&C Act: October 16,
2015. FDA has verified the applicant's claim that the new drug
application (NDA) for INTRAROSA (NDA 208470) was initially submitted on
October 16, 2015.

    3. The date the application was approved: November 16, 2016. FDA
has verified the applicant's claim that NDA 208470 was approved on
November 16, 2016.
    This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the
maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO
applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual
period for patent extension. In its applications for patent extension,
this applicant seeks 717 days or 518 days of patent term extension.

III. Petitions

    Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are
incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and, under
21 CFR 60.24, ask for a redetermination (see DATES). Furthermore, as
specified in Sec.  60.30 (21 CFR 60.30), any interested person may
petition FDA for a determination regarding whether the applicant for
extension acted with due diligence during the regulatory review period.
To meet its burden, the petition must comply with all the requirements
of Sec.  60.30, including but not limited to: Must be timely (see
DATES), must be filed in accordance with Sec.  10.20, must contain
sufficient facts to merit an FDA investigation, and must certify that a
true and complete copy of the petition has been served upon the patent
applicant. (See H. Rept. 857, part 1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41-42,
1984.) Petitions should be in the format specified in 21 CFR 10.30.
    Submit petitions electronically to https://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FDA-2013-S-0610. Submit written petitions (two copies are
required) to the Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

    Dated: February 12, 2020.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-03115 Filed 2-14-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register: December 29, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 248)]
[Notices]
[Page 68814]
[DOCID:fr29de09-72]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP10-30-000]

Port Barre Investments, LLC (d/b/a Bobcat Gas Storage); Notice of
Amendment Application

December 22, 2009.
    On December 15, 2009, Bobcat Gas Storage (Bobcat), pursuant to
section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act, as amended, and parts 157 and 284
of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations,
filed to amend its certificate. The requested amendment would expand
the Bobcat Gas Storage Project certificated in CP09-19-000 on March 19,
2009, to add working gas capacity totaling 9.3 billion cubic feet (Bcf)
in two existing plus three new salt dome storage caverns. The amendment
would expand total storage project working gas capacity to 48.9 Bcf. No
construction is proposed in Bobcat's application. Bobcat also requests
that the Commission reaffirm its market-based rates authorization and
issue all requested authorizations on or before March 31, 2010.
    Questions regarding this application should be directed to Paul
Bieniawski, Bobcat Gas Storage, 11200 Westheimer, Suite 625, Houston,
TX 77042,<PHONE_NUMBER> or Lisa Tonery, Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P.,
666 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10103,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a
copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
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 online 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 January 12, 2010.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-30814 Filed 12-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


E& P STORM WATER OVERVIEW Domestic Onshore Energy E& P STORM WATER OVERVIEW Domestic Onshore Energy May 10, 2005 Road to Domestic Energy Road to Domestic Energy Road to Domestic Energy:

Geological & Geophysical Road to Domestic Energy:

Geological & Geophysical

1st st look at look at subsurface subsurface

Define geologic Define geologic target using target using surface surface geophysical geophysical equipment equipment

Subsurface driven Subsurface driven The Road to Domestic Energy:

Land Leasing The Road to Domestic Energy:

Land Leasing

Leases have terms,

Leases have terms,

penalties, deadlines penalties, deadlines and a expiration date and a expiration date that drives a project that drives a project timeline timeline

Leases have multiple Leases have multiple surface and surface and subsurface owners subsurface owners

Split Estates; surface Split Estates; surface and mineral and mineral ownership different ownership different

Multiple mineral lease Multiple mineral lease agreements and agreements and requirements requirements

Competitive situation Competitive situation

The lease situation The lease situation drives our clock drives our clock The Road to Domestic Energy:

Permitting The Road to Domestic Energy:

Permitting

There are numerous There are numerous permit considerations permit considerations   Private Private   State State   Federal Federal

Oil & Gas Agency Oil & Gas Agency   Drilling Drilling   Construction Construction   Pipeline ROW Pipeline ROW

Environmental Protection Environmental Protection   Air Air   Water Water   Waste Waste   Historical & Cultural Historical & Cultural   Vegetation & Wetlands Vegetation & Wetlands   Wildlife Wildlife The Road to Domestic Energy:

Construction The Road to Domestic Energy:

Construction

Exploration or Exploration or development well development well   lease road lease road   well pad well pad

Access Right of Ways Access Right of Ways have to accommodate have to accommodate environmental and environmental and surface conditions surface conditions

Allow for:

Allow for:

  Surface sensitivities Surface sensitivities   Landowner requests Landowner requests   Surface structures Surface structures   Balance surface Balance surface conditions to reach conditions to reach subsurface target subsurface target The Road to Domestic Energy:

Production The Road to Domestic Energy:

Production If Successful If Successful   Well finalized Well finalized   Rig moves off Rig moves off   Production Production equipment installed equipment installed   O& G to sales and O& G to sales and water to disposal water to disposal   Drill site reduced Drill site reduced and reseeded and reseeded     Foot Print Foot Print

reduced reduced If Unsuccessful If Unsuccessful   Plug & Abandon Plug & Abandon   Restore location Restore location Storm Water Comparison: Real Estate vs. Oil & Gas Storm Water Comparison: Real Estate vs. Oil & Gas Real Estate Development Real Estate Development Oil & Gas Development Oil & Gas Development

Static Plan Static Plan

Blueprint Designed Upfront Blueprint Designed Upfront

Construction Follows Blueprint Construction Follows Blueprint

Real Estate is All Surface Real Estate is All Surface

Dynamic Plan Dynamic Plan

Design As We Go Design As We Go

Each Well Tells a Geologic Story Each Well Tells a Geologic Story

Oil & Gas is Sub Oil & Gas is Sub Surface Dependent Surface Dependent = Storm Water Comparison: Real Estate vs. Oil & Gas Storm Water Comparison: Real Estate vs. Oil & Gas Real Estate

Surface Use Driven

Land Owned

Timeline more Flexible

Planning Certainty

Metropolitan/ Centralized

Single Site SW Administration

Oil & Gas

Subsurface Driven

Land Leased

Timeline Is Critical

Uncertainty

Remote/ Decentralized

Scattered Multi Site SW Administration

Because of differences E& P needs regulatory flexibility Because of differences E& P needs regulatory flexibility " One Rule Does Not Fit All Industries One Rule Does Not Fit All Industries" Cost Cost Future State Future State * Refer to Department of Energy 2005 Cost Impact Study * Refer to Department of Energy 2005 Cost Impact Study

US Drilling Wells:

US Drilling Wells:

30,000 per year 30,000 per year

SWPPP Implementation:

SWPPP Implementation:

$ 5,000 to $ 15,000 per well $ 5,000 to $ 15,000 per well

Well Construction Size:

Well Construction Size:

2 to 10 acres 2 to 10 acres Current State Current State

Government Government   Recordkeeping Recordkeeping   Inspection Inspection   Monitoring Monitoring   Permit approvals timeline increases Permit approvals timeline increases   Staff Staff   Administrative burden Administrative burden

Industry Industry   Increased Increased   notice of intent notice of intent  filing filing   Delayed NOI approval Delayed NOI approval   Annual cost burden $ 150 Annual cost burden $ 150$ 450 million*

$ 450 million*

  Limited qualities resources Limited qualities resources   Lease expiration risks are real Lease expiration risks are real Summary   Take Away Summary   Take Away  Intent of Storm water regulations are to protect Intent of Storm water regulations are to protect surface waters from sediment and erosion surface waters from sediment and erosion runoff created by construction activities runoff created by construction activities  Covered Oil & Gas Process Covered Oil & Gas Process  Comparisons/ Differences between Oil & Gas Comparisons/ Differences between Oil & Gas and Real Estate and Real Estate  Stormwater Regulations Are Not Manageable Stormwater Regulations Are Not Manageable For Oil & Gas For Oil & Gas Conclusion   Take Away Conclusion   Take Away There is a better alternative than the There is a better alternative than the proposed stormwater rule change:

proposed stormwater rule change:

 No Storm water permit No Storm water permit  Implementation of RAPPS for all Oil &

Implementation of RAPPS for all Oil &

Gas construction will control sediment Gas construction will control sediment and erosion runoff and erosion runoff  Implementation of RAPPS for all Oil &

Implementation of RAPPS for all Oil &

Gas construction Gas construction E& P STORM WATER OVERVIEW E& P STORM WATER OVERVIEW May 10, 2005


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

    \90\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-17165 Filed 8-29-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: November 7, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 214)]
[Notices]
[Page 67474-67475]
[DOCID:fr07no05-78]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP05-91-000]

Calhoun LNG, L.P.; Notice of Technical Conference

November 1, 2005.
    On Tuesday, November 15, 2005, at 8:30 a.m. (CST), staff of the
Office of Energy Projects will convene a cryogenic design and technical
conference regarding the proposed Calhoun LNG Project. The cryogenic
conference will be held in the Bauer Community Center. The community
center is located at 2300 North Highway 35, Port Lavaca, TX 77979. For
center details call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    In view of the nature of critical energy infrastructure information
and security issues to be explored, the cryogenic conference will not
be open to the public. Attendance at this conference will be limited to
existing parties to the proceeding (anyone who has

specifically requested to intervene as a party) and to representatives
of interested Federal, State, and local agencies. Any person planning
to attend the November 15th cryogenic conference must register by close
of business on Thursday, November 10, 2005. Registrations may be
submitted either online at http://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/ registration/

cryo-conf-form.asp or by faxing a copy of the form (found at the
referenced online link) to<PHONE_NUMBER>. All attendees must sign a
non-disclosure statement prior to entering the conference. Upon arrival
at the community center, check the reader board in the lobby area for
the venue. For additional information regarding the cryogenic
conference, please contact Ghanshyam Patel at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-6152 Filed 11-4-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Minnesota Emissions Summary Comparison ( Power Sector emissions, thousand tons)

Base Case 2004 = Original 2004 base case used for CAIR air quality modeling Base Case 2004_ MN Sensitivity = Sensitivity base case with changes to Excel units per Xcel Energy comment Base Case 2004 Base Case 2004_ MN Sensitivity Base Case 2004 Base Case 2004_ MN Sensitivity State Name Total SO2 Total SO2 Total NOx Total NOx Minnesota 95 89 74 58 2010


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 121 (Friday, June 22, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29013-29014]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13353]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 170

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0184; FRL-9979-50]
RIN 2070-AJ22

Pesticides; Agricultural Worker Protection Standard; Notification
of Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notification of availability.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing the availability of training materials
covering the expanded training content required by the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act Worker Protection Standard
(WPS) for both agricultural workers and pesticide handlers. The
publication of this notification of availability triggers the WPS
requirement that training programs must include all of the topics
specified in the 2015 revisions to the WPS.

DATES: Training programs must include all of the topics specified in 40
CFR 170.401(c)(3)(i)-(xxiii) and 170.501(c)(3)(i)-(xiv) no later than
December 19, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: EPA is not requesting, and does not
expect to receive, comments on this notification of availability.
Questions should be directed to: Jennifer Park, Field and External
Affairs Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you work in or
employ persons working in crop production agriculture where pesticides
are applied. The following list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive,
but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this
document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include:
     Agricultural Establishments (NAICS code 111000), e.g.,
establishments or persons, such as farms, orchards, groves,
greenhouses, and nurseries, primarily engaged in growing crops, plants,
vines, or trees and their seeds.
     Nursery and Tree Production (NAICS code 111421), e.g.,
establishments or persons primarily engaged in (1) growing nursery
products, nursery stock, shrubbery, bulbs, fruit stock, sod, and so
forth, under cover or in open fields and/or (2) growing short rotation
woody trees with a growth and harvest cycle of 10 years or less for
pulp or tree stock.
     Timber Tract Operations (NAICS code 113110), e.g.,
establishments or persons primarily engaged in the operation of timber
tracts for the purpose of selling standing timber.
     Forest Nurseries and Gathering of Forest Products (NAICS
code 113210), e.g., establishments or persons primarily engaged in (1)
growing trees for reforestation and/or (2) gathering forest products,
such as gums, barks, balsam needles, rhizomes, fibers, Spanish moss,
ginseng, and truffles.
     Farm Workers (NAICS codes 11511, 115112, and 115114),
e.g., establishments or persons primarily engaged in providing support
activities for growing crops; establishments or persons primarily
engaged in performing a soil preparation activity or crop production
service, such as plowing, fertilizing, seed bed

preparation, planting, cultivating, and crop protecting services; and
establishments or persons primarily engaged in performing services on
crops, subsequent to their harvest, with the intent of preparing them
for market or further processing.
     Pesticide Handling on Farms (NAICS code 115112), e.g.,
establishments or persons primarily engaged in performing a soil
preparation activity or crop production service, such as seed bed
preparation, planting, cultivating, and crop protecting services.
     Farm Labor Contractors and Crew Leaders (NAICS code
115115), e.g., establishments or persons primarily engaged in supplying
labor for agricultural production or harvesting.
     Pesticide Handling in Forestry (NAICS code 115310), e.g.,
establishments or persons primarily providing support activities for
forestry, such as forest pest control.
     Pesticide Manufacturers (NAICS code 325320), e.g.,
establishments primarily engaged in the formulation and preparation of
agricultural and household pest control chemicals (except fertilizers).
     Farm Worker Support Organizations (NAICS codes 813311,
813312, and 813319), e.g., establishments or persons primarily engaged
in promoting causes associated with human rights either for a broad or
specific constituency; establishments or persons primarily engaged in
promoting the preservation and protection of the environment and
wildlife; and establishments primarily engaged in social advocacy.
     Farm Worker Labor Organizations (NAICS code 813930), e.g.,
establishments or persons primarily engaged in promoting the interests
of organized labor and union employees.
     Crop Advisors (NAICS codes 115112, 541690, 541712) e.g.,
establishments or persons who primarily provide advice and assistance
to businesses and other organizations on scientific and technical
issues related to pesticide use and pest pressure.

II. Background

    On November 2, 2015, EPA published a final rule making changes to
the WPS, 40 CFR part 170, referred to as the ``2015 revised WPS'' (80
FR 67496) (FRL-9931-81). The WPS is a regulation primarily intended to
reduce the risks of injury or illness resulting from agricultural
workers' and handlers' use of and contact with agricultural pesticides
on farms, forests, nurseries and greenhouses. The rule primarily seeks
to protect workers (those who perform hand-labor tasks on pesticide-
treated crops, such as harvesting, thinning or pruning) and handlers
(those who mix, load and apply pesticides). The 2015 revised WPS
requirements retained many of the 1992 WPS requirements, while
increasing the stringency of some standards and adding new
requirements.

III. Availability of Training Materials and Deadline for Compliance
With New Training Requirements

    Sections 170.401 and 170.501 of the 2015 revised WPS allowed
employers to omit certain topics from training materials until 180 days
after EPA publishes in the Federal Register a notification of
availability of new WPS training materials. EPA is announcing the
availability of new training materials covering the expanded training
content for both workers and handlers. These materials, developed
through a cooperative agreement with the Pesticide Education Resources
Collaborative (PERC), are available at http://pesticideresources.org/.
These materials have been approved by EPA and contain the content
required by the 2015 revised WPS. There are also new training materials
developed by other organizations that have been approved by EPA and
contain the content required by the 2015 revised WPS; some of these
materials are available on the PERC website and others are proprietary.
    EPA is currently reconsidering three requirements of the 2015
revised WPS and plans to solicit comments on potential changes to the
designated representative provision, the minimum age for handlers and
early-entry workers, and the application exclusion zone. If those
requirements are changed through a final rulemaking, training materials
may need to be amended to reflect such changes.
    The publication of this notification of availability of the
training materials specified in 40 CFR 170.401(c)(3) and 170.501(c)(3)
commences the 180-day period provided in those provisions. Per
Sec. Sec.  170.401(c)(3) and 170.501(c)(3), WPS training programs must
include all of the topics specified in Sec. Sec.  170.401(c)(3)(i)-
(xxiii) and 170.501(c)(3)(i)-(xiv) no later than December 19, 2018.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 170

    Environmental protection, Agricultural worker, Employer, Farms,
Forests, Greenhouses, Nurseries, Pesticide handler, Pesticides, Worker
protection standard.

    Dated: June 13, 2018.
Charlotte Bertrand,
Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical
Safety and Pollution Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2018-13353 Filed 6-21-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: August 2, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 148)]
[Notices]
[Page 43725-43726]
[DOCID:fr02au06-51]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP06-424-000]

Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline, Inc.; Notice of Request Under
Blanket Authorization

July 25, 2006.
    Take notice that on July 19, 2006, Southern Star Central Gas
Pipeline, Inc. (Southern Star), 4700 Highway 56, Owensboro, Kentucky
42301, filed in Docket No. CP06-424-000, a request pursuant to sections
157.205 and 157.208 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural
Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205 and 157.208) for authorization to replace
certain facilities and upon replacement, increase the maximum allowable
operating pressure (MAOP) in the State of Kansas, under Southern Star's
blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-479-000 pursuant to
section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set forth in the
application which is on file with the Commission and open to public
inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov
 using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number

excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TYY,

(202) 502-8659.
    Southern Star proposes to replace approximately 7.25 miles of 12-
inch diameter pipeline with 10-inch pipe, a part of the Pittsburg
Delivery Lateral or Line FD, located in Cherokee County, Kansas, and
upon replacement, increase the MAOP from 260 psig to 720 psig, as
described more fully in the request. Southern Star proposes to replace
the entire 17.2 miles of pipe with 10-inch diameter pipeline in two
phases over a two-year period. Southern Star states that the
replacement project will include the installation of a pig launcher,
which will allow for future cleaning and integrity testing of the
lateral, when Phase II is completed with an associated pig launcher
installed. Southern Star estimates the cost of the replacement project
to be approximately $3,300,000.
    Any person or the Commission's Staff may, within 45 days after the
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to
intervene or notice of intervention and, pursuant to Section 157.205 of
the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (NGA) (18 CFR
157.205) a protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the
time allowed therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be
authorized effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a
protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time
allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as
an application for authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
David N. Roberts, Manager, Regulatory Affairs, Southern Star Central
Gas Pipeline, Inc., 4700 Highway 56, Owensboro, Kentucky 42301, or call
(270) 852-4654 or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests, and interventions via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the

Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ``e-Filing''

link.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-12392 Filed 8-1-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 92 (Friday, May 11, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27666-27667]
[FR Doc No: 2012-11404]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2011-1366; Airspace Docket No. 11-ANE-13]

Proposed Amendment of Class E Airspace; Bar Harbor, ME

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class E Airspace at Bar Harbor,
ME, as the Surry Non-Directional Radio Beacon (NDB) has been
decommissioned and new Standard Instrument Approach Procedures have
been developed at Hancock County-Bar Harbor Airport. This action would
enhance the safety and airspace management of Instrument Flight Rules
(IFR) operations at the airport. This action also would update the
geographic coordinates of the airport.

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, Comments must be received on or before June
25, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this rule to: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001;
Telephone: 1-800-647-5527; Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify the
Docket Number FAA-2011-1366; Airspace Docket No. 11-ANE-13, at the
beginning of your comments. You may also submit and review received
comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as they may desire.
Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and
suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned
regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited
on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and
energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2011-1366; Airspace Docket No. 11-ANE-13) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Persons wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on
this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket
No. FAA-2011-1366; Airspace Docket No. 11-ANE-13.'' The postcard will
be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded from and
comments submitted through http://www.regulations.gov. Recently
published rulemaking documents can also be accessed through the FAA's
Web page at http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
Holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the Eastern Service Center, Federal
Aviation Administration, room 350, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park,
Georgia 30337.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
request a copy of Advisory circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    The FAA is considering an amendment to Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to amend Class E airspace extending upward
from 700 feet above the surface to support new Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures developed at Hancock County-Bar Harbor Airport, Bar
Harbor, ME. Airspace reconfiguration is necessary due to the
decommissioning of the Surry NDB and cancellation of the NDB approach,
and for continued safety and management of IFR operations at the
airport. The geographic coordinates of the airport also would be
adjusted to coincide with the FAAs aeronautical database.
    Class E airspace designations are published in Paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.9V, dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15,
2011, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designation listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.
    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to

keep them operationally current. 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 proposed rule,
when promulgated, would 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 proposed 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 proposed regulation is within the scope
of that authority as it would amend Class E airspace at Hancock County-
Bar Harbor Airport, Bar Harbor, ME.
    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1E, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 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

    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]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 9, 2011, effective September 15, 2011,
is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

ANE ME E5 Bar Harbor, ME [Amended]

Hancock County-Bar Harbor Airport, ME
    (Lat. 44[deg]26'59'' N., long. 68[deg]21'42'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 7.4-mile radius of Hancock County-Bar Harbor Airport.

    Issued in College Park, Georgia, on April 30, 2012.
Barry A. Knight,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern Service Center, Air Traffic
Organization.
[FR Doc. 2012-11404 Filed 5-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 186 (Friday, September 25, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57834-57835]
[FR Doc No: 2015-24335]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[USCG-2015-0751]

Cook Inlet Regional Citizen's Advisory Council (CIRCAC) Charter
Renewal

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of recertification.

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

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is to inform the public that the
Coast Guard has recertified the Cook Inlet Regional Citizen's Advisory
Council (CIRCAC) as an alternative voluntary advisory group for Cook
Inlet, Alaska. This certification allows the CIRCAC to monitor the
activities of terminal facilities and crude oil tankers under the Cook
Inlet Program established by statute.

DATES: This recertification is effective for the period from September
1, 2015 through August 31, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LTJG Katharine Martorelli, Seventeenth
Coast Guard District (dpi), by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail at P.O. Box 25517, Juneau,
Alaska 99802.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background and Purpose

    As part of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, Congress passed the Oil
Terminal and Oil Tanker Environmental Oversight and Monitoring Act of
1990 (the Act), 33 U.S.C. 2732, to foster a long-term partnership among
industry, government, and local communities in overseeing compliance
with environmental concerns in the operation of crude oil terminals and
oil tankers.
    On October 18, 1991, the President delegated his authority under 33
U.S.C 2732 (o) to the Secretary of Transportation in Executive Order
12777, section 8(g) (see 56 FR 54757; October 22, 1991) for purposes of
certifying advisory councils, or groups, subject to the Act. On March
3, 1992, the Secretary re-delegated that authority to the Commandant of
the USCG (see 57 FR 8582; March 11, 1992). The Commandant re-delegated
that authority to the Chief, Office of Marine Safety, Security and
Environmental Protection (G-M) on March 19, 1992 (letter #5402).
    On July 7, 1993, the USCG published a policy statement, 58 FR
36504, to clarify the factors that shall be considered in making the
determination as to whether advisory councils, or groups, should be
certified in accordance with the Act.
    The Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety and Environmental
Protection (G-M), re-delegated recertification authority for advisory
councils, or groups, to the Commander, Seventeenth Coast Guard District
on February 26, 1999 (letter #16450).
    On September 16, 2002, the USCG published a policy statement, 67 FR
58440, that changed the recertification procedures such that applicants
are required to provide the USCG with comprehensive information every
three years (triennially). For each of the two years between the
triennial application procedures, applicants submit a letter requesting
recertification that includes a description of any substantive changes
to the information provided at the previous triennial recertification.
Further, public comment is not solicited prior to recertification
during

streamlined years, only during the triennial comprehensive review.
    On September 1, 2014, the Coast Guard recertified the Cook Inlet
Regional Citizen's Advisory Council through August 31, 2015. Under the
Oil Terminal and Oil Tanker Environmental Oversight Act of 1990 (33
U.S.C. 2732), the Coast Guard may certify, on an annual basis, an
alternative voluntary advisory group for Cook Inlet, Alaska. This
advisory group monitors the activities of terminal facilities and crude
oil tankers under the Cook Inlet Program established by Congress, 33
U.S.C. 2732 (b).

Recertification

    By letter dated August 20, 2015, the Commander, Seventeenth Coast
Guard certified that the CIRCAC qualifies as an alternative voluntary
advisory group under 33 U.S.C. 2732(o). This recertification terminates
on August 31, 2016.

    Dated: August 20, 2015.
D. B. Abel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, Seventeenth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2015-24335 Filed 9-24-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


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

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:

I am writing as an individual consumer to request an extension of the comment period for the Food and Drug Administration's ("FDA") Proposed Rule Deeming Tobacco Products to be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking and Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (the "Proposed Rule") published at 79 Fed. Reg. 23,142 and Federal Register No. 2014-09491. On behalf of myself, I am requesting that the comment period for the Proposed Rule be extended by the FDA for an additional 105 days, from its current 75-day period, to 180 days.

The Proposed Rule raises many significant issues and questions that are important and relevant to me, as a consumer of products that are proposed for regulation under the Proposed Rule. The Proposed Rule asks about a hundred different questions I might want to respond to. I want to provide my thoughts and comments on many of these issues, but my time to devote to researching and providing thoughtful comments on these important questions is limited. I have already spent many hours researching and dissecting these issues, but they take time. I know that the FDA took many years to even come up with the Proposed Rule, so I do not think it is at all unreasonable to allow the public a mere six months to comment on it. This is our only opportunity, as consumers, to provide our feedback.

I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes as an alternative to combustible cigarettes. I firmly believe that they have dramatically improved my life. I wish to provide you with my personal story, as well as science- and evidence-based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I realize that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.

Thank you for your consideration.