[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 75 (Friday, April 18, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 21913]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08869]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP14-729-000.
    Applicants: Bison Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Cost and Revenue Study--Compliance to CP09-161-000.
    Filed Date: 4/10/14.
    Accession Number: 20140410-5109.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/22/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-730-000.
    Applicants: Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.
    Description: Update Tariff Map 2014 to be effective 5/12/2014.
    Filed Date: 4/11/14.
    Accession Number: 20140411-5049.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/23/14.

    Docket Numbers: RP14-731-000.
    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Update Tariff Map 2014 to be effective 5/12/2014.
    Filed Date: 4/11/14.
    Accession Number: 20140411-5050.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/23/14.

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

    Dated: April 11, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-08869 Filed 4-17-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


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

General Comment:FDA, I am asking you to please extend the 75 day comment period to at least 150 days.  We as a community need more time to collect our thoughts and do more studying  so that we can review these proposals and better respond during this comment period.  I just think it's fair since its taken you years to write these proposals, that we should be given a fair chance to respond.   Thank you for your time and consideration.


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 202 (Tuesday, October 20, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63624-63626]
[FR Doc No: 2015-26577]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-76156; File No. SR-BYX-2015-43]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Y-Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 3.22, Concerning Gifts and Gratuities in Relation to the Business
of the Employer of the Recipient, and Renaming the Rule ``Influencing
or Rewarding Employees of Others''

October 15, 2015.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on September 30, 2015, BATS Y-Exchange, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``BYX'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. The
Exchange has designated this proposal as a ``non-controversial''
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and
Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon
filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange filed a proposal to amend Rule 3.22, Gratuities, to
conform to the rules of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority,
Inc. (``FINRA'') for purposes of an agreement between

the Exchange and FINRA pursuant to Rule 17d-2 under the Act.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 17 CFR 240.17d-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    Pursuant to Rule 17d-2 under the Act,\6\ the Exchange and FINRA
entered into an agreement to allocate regulatory responsibility for
common rules (the ``17d-2 Agreement''). The 17d-2 Agreement covers
common members of the Exchange and FINRA and allocates to FINRA
regulatory responsibility, with respect to common members, for the
following: (i) Examination of common members of the Exchange and FINRA
for compliance with certain federal securities laws, rules and
regulations and rules of the Exchange that the Exchange has certified
as identical or substantially similar to FINRA rules; (ii)
investigation of common members of the Exchange and FINRA for
violations of certain federal securities laws, rules or regulations, or
Exchange rules that the Exchange has certified as identical or
substantially identical to a FINRA rule; and (iii) enforcement of
compliance by common members with certain federal securities laws,
rules and regulations, and the rules of the Exchange that the Exchange
has certified as identical or substantially similar to FINRA rules.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 240.17d-2.
    \7\ See Securities and Exchange Release No. 63102 (October 14,
2010), 75 FR 64765 (October 20, 2010) (approving File No. 4-613).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 17d-2 Agreement included a certification by the Exchange that
states that the requirements contained in certain Exchange rules are
identical to, or substantially similar to, certain FINRA rules that
have been identified as comparable. To conform to comparable FINRA
rules for purposes of the 17d-2 Agreement, the Exchange proposes [sic]
delete the current text of Rule 3.22, Gratuities, and adopt text that
is identical to FINRA Rule 3220 and to rename the rule ``Influencing or
Rewarding Employees of Others''. The proposed rule text is also
identical to New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NYSE'') Rule 3220, which
has been approved by the Commission.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 59965 (May 21,
2009), 74 FR 25783 (May 29, 2009) (SR-NYSE-2009-25).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, Exchange Rule 3.22 is excluded from the 17d-2 Agreement
because it is not identical, or substantially similar to, FINRA Rules
3220. Exchange Rule 3.22 prohibits Members from giving any compensation
or gratuity in any one year in excess of $50.00 to any employee of the
Exchange or in excess of $100.00 to any employee of any other Member or
of any non-Member broker, dealer, bank or institution, without the
prior consent of the employer and of the Exchange. FINRA Rule 3220
currently prevents gifts in excess of a fixed amount, currently
$100.00, where the gifts or gratuity is in relation to the business of
the employee \9\ of the recipient. Unlike FINRA Rule 3220, current
Exchange Rule 3.22 does not include record keeping requirements or an
exclusion for payments made pursuant to bona fide, written employment
contracts. Exchange Rule 3.22 was, therefore, excluded from the 17d-2
Agreement because it was not identical or substantially similar to
FINRA Rule 3220. To harmonize its rules with FINRA, the Exchange
proposes to delete the current text of Rule 3.22 and adopt text that is
identical to FINRA Rule 3220 so that it may be incorporated into the
17d-2 Agreement in its entirety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Commission notes that both FINRA Rule 3220 and proposed
BYX Rule 3.22 limit gifts and gratuities in relation to the employer
of the recipient, rather than those in relation to the ``employee''
of the recipient as stated above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that these changes will help to avoid
confusion among Members of the Exchange that are also members of FINRA
by further aligning the Exchange Rule 3.22 with FINRA Rule 3220. The
proposed changes to Rule 3.22 are designed to enable the Exchange to
incorporate Rule 3.22 into the 17d-2 Agreement, further reducing
duplicative regulation of Members that are also members of FINRA. For
the avoidance of doubt, Rule 3.22 would equally apply to Exchange-only
Members as the Exchange believes it appropriately protects against
improprieties that might arise when substantial gifts or monetary
payments are given to certain persons. The Exchange will issue a
Regulatory Notice to its Members, including Exchange-only Members that
may not also be FINRA Members, and those Members registered with FINRA,
clarifying that FINRA's interpretive guidance related to FINRA Rule
3220 is considered part of Exchange Rule 3.22, and that all Members are
required to regulate their conduct according to Rule 3.22 and the
interpretive guidance related to FINRA Rule 3220.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See, e.g., FINRA's interpretative guidance concerning
business entertainment expenses, including a June 24, 1999, Letter
to Henry H. Hopkins and Sarah McCafferty, T. Rowe Price Investment
Services, Inc. This interpretative letter and other interpretive
guidance concerning gifts and gratuities expenses are currently
available at FINRA's Web site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As amended, like FINRA Rule 3220(a), proposed paragraph (a) of Rule
3.22 would prevent gifts in excess of $100.00 per individual per year
where the gift or gratuity is in relation to the business of the
employee of the recipient. A gift of any kind would be considered a
gratuity. The Rule would also contain an express exclusion for payments
made pursuant to bona fide, written employment contracts. Specifically,
like FINRA Rule 3220(b), proposed paragraph (b) of Rule 3.22 would
state that the rule would not apply to contracts of employment with or
to compensation for services rendered by persons enumerated in
paragraph (a) of the Rule, provided that there is in existence prior to
the time of employment or before the services are rendered, a written
agreement between the member and the person who is to be employed to
perform such services. Proposed paragraph (c) would require such
agreement to include the nature of the proposed employment, the amount
of the proposed compensation, and the written consent of such person's
employer or principal.
    The Rule would also require each Member to maintain a separate
record of all gifts or gratuities. Like FINRA Rule 3220(c), proposed
paragraph (c) of Rule 3.22 would require a separate record of all
payments or gratuities in any amount known to the member, the
employment agreement referred to in proposed paragraph (b) of Rule 3.22
and any employment compensation paid as a result thereof shall be
retained by the member for the period specified by Exchange Act Rule
17a-4.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 240.17a-4.

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

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that proposed rule change is consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\12\ which requires, among other things,
that the Exchange's rules be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with
persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change will further these requirements by providing
greater harmonization between Exchange and FINRA rules of similar
purpose, resulting in greater uniformity and less burdensome and more
efficient regulatory compliance. As such, the proposed rule change
would foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
facilitating transactions in securities and would remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system in accordance with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change would
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
not designed to address any competitive issues but rather to provide
greater harmonization among Exchange and FINRA rules of similar
purpose, resulting in less burdensome and more efficient regulatory
compliance for common members and facilitating FINRA's performance of
its regulatory functions under the 17d-2 Agreement.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change.

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

    The Exchange has designated this rule filing as non-controversial
under Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \14\ and paragraph (f)(6) of Rule
19b-4 thereunder.\15\ The proposed rule change effects a change that
(A) does not significantly affect the protection of investors or the
public interest; (B) does not impose any significant burden on
competition; and (C) by its terms, does not become operative for 30
days after the date of the filing, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate if consistent with the protection of investors
and the public interest; provided that the self-regulatory organization
has given the Commission written notice of its intent to file the
proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the
proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of
filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated
by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is: (1)
Necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (2) for the protection
of investors; or (3) otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the
Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission shall
institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule should be
approved or disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-BYX-2015-43 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-BYX-2015-43. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing will also be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File No. SR-BYX-2015-43 and should be
submitted on or before October 23, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-26577 Filed 10-19-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


     UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

                             OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY
AND POLLUTION PREVENTION

RE:  	Meeting with LyondellBasell, Di-isobutyl Phthalate (DIBP) Consortium representatives and EPA to discuss uses of DIBP.
List of Documents
 Meeting Summary
 Attendees
Meeting Summary
On June 7, 2021, OPPT participated in a conference call with LyondellBasell and Di-isobutyl Phthalate (DIBP) Consortium representatives, including B&C Consortia Management, L.L.C. (BCCM) and Bergeson & Campbell, P.C. (B&C). The purpose of the call was to discuss the conditions of use of di-isobutyl phthalate (CASRN 84-69-5). LyondellBasell shared information on use of DIBP as a catalyst component for polyolefins production. The DIBP Consortium inquired about further status updates of a possible section 4 Test Order and a possible TSCA section 8(d) rule. EPA conveyed that the agency is continuing to determine data needs that would be addressed via a section 4 Test Order. Similarly, EPA indicated that the agency is continuing to work on a section 8(d) rule.
Attendees
EPA:
Collin Beachum
Marc Edmonds
Diana Fahning
Jordan Garbin
Jake McFarley
Jennifer Nichols
Andrew Sayer
David Turk

LyondellBasell:
Erik Rushton

BCCM:
Heather Blankenship

B&C:
Amy Babcock
Richard Engler
Todd Stedeford


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 54 (Monday, March 21, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15231-15233]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6336]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

Docket No. FAA-2010-1241; Airspace Docket No. 10-AWP-22

Proposed Amendment of Class D and E Airspace; Palmdale, CA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class D airspace and Class E
airspace at Palmdale, CA, to accommodate aircraft using Instrument
Landing System (ILS) Localizer (LOC) standard instrument approach
procedures at Palmdale Regional Airport/USAF Plant 42. This action
would enhance the safety and management of aircraft operations at
Palmdale Regional Airport/USAF Plant 42. This action would also correct
the name of the airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 5, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2010-
1241; Airspace

Docket No. 10-AWP-22, at the beginning of your comments. You may also
submit comments through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eldon Taylor, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 1601
Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98057; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking 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 2010-1241 and Airspace Docket No. 10-AWP-22) 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.
    Commenters 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 FAA
Docket No. FAA-2010-1241 and Airspace Docket No. 10-AWP-22''. The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified closing date
for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date
for comments. 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 through the
Internet at 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 the address and phone number)
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Northwest Mountain Regional Office of the Federal
Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service
Center, Operations Support Group, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA
98057.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRM's should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by modifying Class D airspace, Class E
airspace designated as an extension to a Class D surface area, and
Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface, at
Palmdale Regional Airport/USAF Plant 42, Palmdale, CA. Controlled
airspace is necessary to accommodate aircraft using the ILS LOC
standard instrument approach procedures at the airport. This action
would enhance the safety and management of aircraft operations at
Palmdale Regional Airport/USAF Plant 42, Palmdale, CA. This would also
correct the airport name from Palmdale Production Flight/Test
Installation Air Force Plant Number 42 Airport, to Palmdale Regional
Airport/USAF Plant 42.
    Class D and Class E airspace designations are published in
paragraph 5000, 6004 and 6005, respectively, 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 D airspace and the
Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in this Order.
    The FAA has determined this proposed regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation; (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 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 U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, section 106, describes
the authority for 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 the
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 establishes additional controlled airspace at Palmdale Regional
Airport/USAF Plant 42, Palmdale, CA.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, 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 14 CFR 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 the 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 5000 Class D airspace.

* * * * *

AWP CA D Palmdale, CA [Amended]

Palmdale Regional Airport/USAF Plant 42
    (Lat. 34[deg]37'46'' N., long. 118[deg]05'04'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
5,000 feet MSL

within a 4.3-mile radius of Palmdale Regional Airport/USAF Plant 42.
This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific dates
and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in
the Airport/Facility Directory.

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Designated as an Extension to a
Class D Surface Area.

* * * * *

AWP CA E4 Palmdale, CA [Amended]

Palmdale Regional Airport/USAF Plant 42
    (Lat. 34[deg]37'46'' N., long. 118[deg]05'04'' W.)
Palmdale VORTAC
    (Lat. 34[deg]37'53'' N., long. 118[deg]03'50'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 2.6 miles
each side of the ILS localizer east course, extending from the 4.3-
mile radius of Palmdale Regional Airport/USAF Plant 42 to 6.5 miles
east of the LOM, and within 1.8 miles south of and parallel to the
Palmdale VORTAC 099[deg] radial extending from the 4.3-mile radius
of the airport to 7 miles east of the VORTAC. This Class E airspace
area is effective during the specific dates and times established in
advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will
thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility
Directory.

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

* * * * *

AWP CA E5 Palmdale, CA [Modify]

Palmdale Regional Airport/USAF Plant 42
    (Lat. 34[deg]37'46'' N., long. 118[deg]05'04'' W.)
Palmdale VORTAC
    (Lat. 34[deg]37'53'' N., long. 118[deg]03'50'' W.)
Lancaster, Gen. William J. Fox Airfield, CA

    (Lat. 34[deg]44'28'' N., long. 118[deg]13'07'' W.)
    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within 1.8 miles south and 6.1 miles north of the Palmdale VORTAC
298[deg] radial extending from the VORTAC to 15.6 miles northwest,
and within 1.8 miles each side of the 310[deg] bearing from the Gen.
William. J. Fox Airfield extending from a 4-mile radius of Gen.
William J. Fox Airfield to 9.1 miles northwest of the Airfield, and
within 5.2 miles south and 10.4 miles north of the Palmdale VORTAC
298[deg] and 118[deg] radials extending from 9.6 miles northwest to
11.3 miles southeast of the VORTAC, and within 8 miles south and 4
miles north of the 086[deg] bearing from Palmdale Regional Airport/
USAF Plant 42 extending 21.7 miles east of Palmdale Regional
Airport/USAF Plant 42. That airspace extending upward from 1,200
feet above the surface bounded by a line beginning at lat.
35[deg]36'30'' N., long. 118[deg]45'03'' W.; to lat. 35[deg]44'00''
N., long. 117[deg]53'03'' W.; to lat. 36[deg]07'00'' N., long.
117[deg]53'03'' W.; to lat. 36[deg]07'00'' N., long. 117[deg]35'03''
W.; to lat. 35[deg]47'46'' N., long. 116[deg]55'23'' W.; to lat.
35[deg]21'36'' N., long. 116[deg]55'23'' W.; to lat. 35[deg]34'30''
N., long. 116[deg]29'43'' W.; to lat. 35[deg]34'30'' N., long.
116[deg]23'33'' W.; to lat. 35[deg]28'35'' N., long. 116[deg]18'48''
W.; to lat. 35[deg]21'30'' N., long. 116[deg]13'03'' W.; to lat.
34[deg]43'00'' N., long. 116[deg]13'03'' W.; thence west along lat.
34[deg]43'00'' N., to the southeast boundary of V-21, thence along
the southeast boundary of V-21 to lat. 34[deg]30'00'' N., thence
west along lat. 34[deg]30'00'' N., to long. 118[deg]20'03'' W.;
thence north along long. 118[deg]20'03'' W., to the south boundary
of V-137, thence west along the south boundary of V-137 to long.
118[deg]45'03'' W.; thence to the point of beginning.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on March 8, 2011.
John Warner,
Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2011-6336 Filed 3-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


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, Environmental Protection Agency, OTAQ, CCD 2. OMB control number b. G None a_ 2060 0132 __ __ __ __

3. Type of information collection ( check one) a. G New collection b. G Revision of a currently approved collection c. G Extension of a currently approved collection d. G Reinstatement, without change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired e. X 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 Nonconformance Penalties for Heavy duty Engines and Heavy duty Vehicles, Including Light Duty Trucks Reporting And Recordkeeping Requirements 8. Agency form number( s) ( If applicable) 1285.05 9. Keywords Nonconformance Penalties, Highway heavy duty engines, Highway heavy duty vehicles & Light duty trucks 10. Abstract: On highway engine manufacturers must obtain a certificate of compliance with applicable emission standards before the engine may be introduced into commerce. Nonconformance penalties allow a manufacturer to introduce into commerce heavy duty engines( HDE) or heavy duty vehicles ( HDV), including light duty trucks( LDT), which fail to conform with certain emission standards upon payment of a monetary penalty. A manufacturer that elects to pay a nonconformance penalty must perform a Production Compliance Audit ( PCA) to establish the penalty amount. The collection activities include periodic reports and other information .

11. Affected public ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. Individuals or households d. Farms b. P Business or other for profit e. Federal Government c. Not for profit institutions f. State, Local or Tribal Government 12. Obligation to respond ( Mark primary with " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. G Voluntary b. X Required to obtain or retain benefits c. P Mandatory 13. Annual reporting and recordkeeping hour burden a. Number of respondents 2 b. Total annual responses 52 1. Percentage of these responses collected electronically 90% c. Total hours requested 1178 d. Current OMB inventory 906 e. Difference 272 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program Change 272 2. Adjustment 0 14. Annual reporting and recordkeeping cost burden ( in thousands of dollars)

a. Total annualized capital/ startup costs 0 b. Total annual costs ( O& M) 18 c. Total annualized cost requested 18 d. Current OMB inventory 0 e. Difference 18 f. Explanation of difference 1. Program change 18 2. Adjustment 0 15. Purpose of information collection ( Mark Primary With " P" and all others that apply with " X") a. X 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. x Quarterly 5. Q Semi annually 6. x Annually 7. Q Biannually 8. a Other ( describe)

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: Anthony Erb Phone: 202 564 9259 OMB 83 I 10/ 95 19. Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submissions On behalf of this Federal agency, 1 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 Gregory Green, Director Certification & Compliance Division Office of Transportaion & Air Quality Date Signature of Senior Official or designee Oscar Morales, Director Collection Strategies Division Office of Environmental Information Date OMB 83 I 10/ 95


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 83 (Tuesday, April 30, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25234-25235]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10178]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0266; Airspace Docket No. 13-AGL-11]

Proposed Establishment of Class E Airspace; Walker, MN

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish Class E airspace at Walker,
MN. Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate new Standard
Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAP) at Walker Municipal Airport. The
FAA is taking this action to enhance the safety and management of
Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations for SIAPs at the airport.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 14, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001. You
must identify the docket number FAA-2013-0266/Airspace Docket No. 13-
AGL-11, at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments
through the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. You may review the
public docket containing the proposal, any comments received, and any
final disposition in person in the Dockets Office between 9:00 a.m. and
5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket
Office (telephone 1-800-647-5527), is on the ground floor of the
building at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone: (817) 321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking 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 and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2013-0266/
Airspace Docket No. 13-AGL-11.'' The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at 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 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 Central Service Center, 2601
Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137.

    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

    This action proposes to amend Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR), Part 71 by establishing Class E airspace extending upward
from 700 feet above the surface within a 8-mile radius to accommodate
new standard instrument approach procedures at Walker Municipal
Airport, Walker, MN. Controlled airspace is needed for the safety and
management of IFR operations at the airport.
    Class E airspace areas are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order
7400.9W, dated August 8, 2012 and effective September 15, 2012, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace
designation listed in this document would 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 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 U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, 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 would establish controlled airspace at Walker Municipal Airport,
Walker, MN.

Environmental Review

    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

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 FAA Order 7400.9W,
Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 8, 2012, and
effective September 15, 2012, is amended as follows:

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

* * * * *

AGL MN E5 Walker, MN [New]

Walker Municipal Airport, MN
    (Lat. 47[deg]09'34'' N., long. 94[deg]38'43'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within an 8-mile radius of Walker Municipal Airport.

    Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on April 16, 2013.
David P. Medina,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2013-10178 Filed 4-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 191 (Tuesday, October 2, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 49508-49509]
[FR Doc No: 2018-21395]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 573

[Docket No. FDA-2018-F-3347]

Kemin Industries, Inc.; Filing of Food Additive Petition (Animal
Use)

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notification; petition for rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that
Kemin Industries, Inc., has filed a petition proposing that the food
additive regulations be amended to provide for the safe use of chromium
propionate as a source of supplemental chromium in horse feed.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the petitioner's
environmental assessment by November 1, 2018.

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 November 1, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
midnight Eastern Time at the end of November 1, 2018. 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 comment, 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 No.
FDA-2018-F-3347 for ``Food Additives Permitted in Feed and Drinking
Water of Animals; chromium propionate.'' 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 comment 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 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.gpo.gov/fdsys/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: Chelsea Trull, Center for Veterinary
Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville,
MD 20855,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (section 409(b)(5) (21 U.S.C. 348(b)(5)), notice is given that a
food additive petition (FAP 2306) has been filed by Kemin Industries,
Inc., 1900 Scott Ave., Des Moines, IA 50317. The petition proposes to
amend Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in part 573
Food Additives Permitted in Feed and Drinking Water of Animals (21 CFR
part 573) to provide for the safe use of chromium propionate (21 CFR
573.304) as a source of supplemental chromium in horse feed.
    The potential environmental impact of this action is being
reviewed. To encourage public participation consistent with regulations
issued under the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR 1501.4(b)),
the Agency is placing the environmental assessment (EA) submitted with
the petition that is the subject of this notice on public display at
the Dockets Management Staff for public review and comment (see DATES
and ADDRESSES). FDA will also place on public display any amendments
to, or comments on, the petitioner's EA without further announcement in
the Federal Register.
    If, based on its review, the Agency finds that an environmental
impact statement is not required and this petition results in a
regulation, the

notice of availability of the Agency's finding of no significant impact
and the evidence supporting that finding will be published with the
regulation in the Federal Register in accordance with 21 CFR 25.51(b).

    Dated: September 26, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-21395 Filed 10-1-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 175 (Thursday, September 10, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54468-54471]
[FR Doc No: 2015-22863]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2009-0805; FRL-9933-66-Region 5]

Wisconsin; Disapproval of Infrastructure SIP With Respect to
Oxides of Nitrogen as a Precursor to Ozone Provisions for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
disapprove an element of State Implementation Plan (SIP) submissions
from Wisconsin regarding the infrastructure requirements of section 110
of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2006 fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The
infrastructure requirements are designed to ensure that the structural
components of each state's air quality management program are adequate
to meet the state's responsibilities under the CAA. This action
pertains specifically to an infrastructure requirement for states to
correctly address oxides of nitrogen (NOX) as a precursor to
ozone in their respective prevention of significant deterioration (PSD)
programs.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 13, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2009-0805 by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and

Maintenance Section, 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. EPA-R05-OAR-2009-
0805. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at
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 www.regulations.gov or email. The
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 email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email
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
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 U.S. 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 Sarah Arra, Environmental
Scientist, at<PHONE_NUMBER>, before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarah Arra, Environmental Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), U.S. 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. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. What is the background of this SIP submission?
III. What is EPA's review of this SIP submission?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.

I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    When submitting comments, remember to:
    1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and page number).
    2. Follow directions--EPA may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
    7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.

II. What is the background of this SIP submission?

    This rulemaking addresses a January 24, 2011, submission
supplemented on June 29, 2012, from the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources (WDNR) intended to address all applicable infrastructure
requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
    The requirement for states to make a SIP submission of this type
arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1),
states must make SIP submissions ``within 3 years (or such shorter
period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a
national primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision
thereof),'' and these SIP submissions are to provide for the
``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS. The
statute directly imposes on states the duty to make these SIP
submissions, and the requirement to make the submissions is not
conditioned upon EPA's taking any action other than promulgating a new
or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific
elements that ``[e]ach such plan'' submission must address.
    This specific rulemaking is only taking action on a specific
requirement of PSD, NOX as a precursor to ozone, which is a
component under the infrastructure elements described in CAA sections
110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J). The majority of the other
infrastructure elements were approved in an October 29, 2012 (77 FR
65478) rulemaking.

III. What is EPA's review of this SIP submission?

    On September 13, 2013, EPA issued ``Guidance on Infrastructure
State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections
110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)'' (2013 Memo). As noted in the 2013 Memo,
pursuant to CAA section 110(a), states must provide reasonable notice
and opportunity for public hearing for all infrastructure SIP
submissions. WDNR provided public comment opportunities on both its
January 24, 2011 and October 29, 2012 submittals. EPA is also
soliciting comments on the specific requirement we are evaluating in
this proposed rulemaking. WDNR provided a detailed synopsis of how
various components of its SIP meet each of the applicable requirements
in section 110(a)(2) for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, as
applicable. The following review only evaluates the state's submissions
for PSD provisions that explicitly identify NOX as a
precursor to ozone in the PSD program.
    EPA's ``Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standard--Phase 2; Final Rule to Implement Certain Aspects
of the 1990 Amendments Relating to New Source Review and Prevention of
Significant Deterioration as They Apply in Carbon Monoxide, Particulate
Matter, and Ozone NAAQS; Final Rule for Reformulated Gasoline'' (Phase
2 Rule) was published on November 29, 2005

(see 70 FR 71612). Among other requirements, the Phase 2 Rule obligated
states to revise their PSD programs to explicitly identify NOx as a
precursor to ozone (70 FR 71612 at 71679, 71699-71700). This
requirement was codified in 40 CFR 51.166.
    The Phase 2 Rule required that states submit SIP revisions
incorporating the requirements of the rule, including those identifying
NOX as a precursor to ozone, by June 15, 2007 (see 70 FR
71612 at 71683, November 29, 2005).
    During the comment period following the proposed approval for the
infrastructure requirements of the 1997 ozone and PM2.5
NAAQS (76 FR 23757), two commenters observed that although EPA proposed
to approve Wisconsin's infrastructure SIP as meeting the correct
requirements for NOx as a precursor to ozone in the State's PSD
program, Wisconsin's PSD SIP does not contain the most recent PSD
program revisions required by EPA for this purpose. A subsequent review
of Wisconsin's PSD SIP indicated that the commenters were correct in
their assertion. Specifically, Wisconsin had not made necessary
revisions to its PSD program with respect to the identification of
NOX as a precursor to ozone, consistent with the explicit
requirements of the Phase 2 Rule. This led EPA to disapprove
Wisconsin's infrastructure SIP in June 2012 for this narrow portion of
section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 1997 ozone and
PM2.5 (77 FR 35870).
    This final disapproval triggered the requirement under section
110(c) that EPA promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) no later
than two years from the effective date of the disapproval unless the
State corrects the deficiency, and the Administrator approves the plan
revision before the Administrator promulgates such FIP. Wisconsin has
taken multiple steps to address NOX as a precursor to ozone
in its PSD rules, starting in June 2012 with a note in rule. The state
followed up with rule changes, effective August 2014, and SIP approved
on October 6, 2014. (79 FR 60064) Prior to the effective date of the
August 2014 rules, four additional areas requiring updated language
were identified by EPA. Wisconsin was too far in the rule process to
add additional changes at that point. Wisconsin immediately started a
new rule package to address these additional areas, but these changes
will not be effective until approximately August 2016 due to the length
of the administrative rule process in Wisconsin.
    In our initial rulemaking on Wisconsin's 2006 PM2.5
infrastructure SIP, we did not take action on this provision because of
our previous disapproval. However, a proposed consent decree \1\
between the Sierra Club and EPA requires EPA to take action on this
portion of Wisconsin's submittal by November 30, 2015. Today's
disapproval does not trigger a new FIP clock because the missing
provisions are the same as those disapproved in the 1997 ozone and
PM2.5 action. The evaluation of a state's PSD program is a
requirement under the elements described in section 110 (a)(2)(C) and
(J), and the most common way to comply with section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Therefore, EPA is proposing to narrowly disapprove
the PSD provision of NOX as a precursor to ozone in the PSD
portion of these three elements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Case 3:12-cv-06472-CRB, filed on January 21, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing to narrowly disapprove portions of a submission
from Wisconsin certifying that its current SIP is sufficient to meet
required infrastructure elements. Specifically, EPA is proposing to
disapprove the NOX as a precursor to ozone provisions for
the PSD portions of infrastructure elements under CAA sections
110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

 V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and, therefore, is
not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rulemaking does not impose an information collection burden
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This action merely proposes to disapprove state law as not meeting
Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies
that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Because this rulemaking proposes to disapprove pre-existing
requirements under state law and does not impose any additional
enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it 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).

Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action also does not have Federalism implications because it
does not have substantial direct effects 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999). This action merely proposes to disapprove a state rule, and
does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the CAA.

Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments

    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the proposed rule does not have tribal implications and would
not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November
9, 2000).

Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks

    This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it proposes to
disapprove a state rule.

Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use

    Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).

National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    In reviewing state submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a state
submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: August 28, 2015.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2015-22863 Filed 9-9-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 64 (Monday, April 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 19220]
[FR Doc No: 2016-07598]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3375-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2016-0001]

Michigan; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of an Emergency Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency for the State of
Michigan (FEMA-3375-EM), dated January 16, 2016, and related
determinations.

DATES: Effective Date: March 25, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the emergency
assistance being provided under this emergency declaration is extended
to August 14, 2016.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2016-07598 Filed 4-1-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 145 (Friday, July 27, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44142-44143]
[FR Doc No: 2012-18401]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2012-0682]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Neches River, Beaumont, TX

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation from regulations.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the Kansas City Southern vertical lift
span bridge across the Neches River, mile 19.5, at Beaumont, Texas. The
deviation is necessary to replace south vertical lift joints on the
bridge. This deviation allows the bridge to remain closed to navigation
for eight consecutive hours.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7 a.m. through 3 p.m. on
Wednesday, August 8, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2012-0682 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2012-0682 in the
``Keyword'' box and then clicking ``Search''. They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Kay Wade, Bridge Administration Branch, Coast Guard;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have
questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager,
Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Kansas City Southern Railroad has

requested a temporary deviation from the operating schedule of the
vertical lift span bridge across the Neches River at mile 19.5 in
Beaumont, Texas. The vertical clearance of the bridge in the closed-to-
navigation position is 13 feet above Mean High Water and 140 feet above
Mean High Water in the open-to-navigation position.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.971, the vertical lift span of the
bridge is automated and normally not manned but will open on signal for
the passage of vessels. This deviation allows the vertical lift span of
the bridge to remain closed to navigation from 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. on
Wednesday, August 8, 2012.
    The closure is necessary in order to replace the south vertical
lift joints on the bridge, which allow the bridge to be raised. This
maintenance is essential for the continued operation of the bridge.
Notices will be published in the Eighth Coast Guard District Local
Notice to Mariners and will be broadcast via the Coast Guard Broadcast
Notice to Mariners System.
    Navigation on the waterway consists of commercial and recreational
fishing vessels, small to medium crew boats, and small tugs with and
without tows. No alternate routes are available for the passage of
vessels; however, the closure was coordinated with waterway interests
who have indicated that they will be able to adjust their operations
around the proposed work schedule. Small vessels may pass under the
bridge while in the closed-to-navigation position provided caution is
exercised.
    The bridge will be able to open manually in the event of an
emergency, but it will take about one hour to do so.
    Due to prior experience and coordination with waterway users, it
has been determined that this closure will not have a significant
effect on vessels that use the waterway.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: July 17, 2012.
David M. Frank,
Bridge Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2012-18401 Filed 7-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


DOE (U.S. Department of Energy), 2013. Energy Information Administration. Form EIA-860, Annual Electric Generator Report, 2013.

(10 excel spreadsheets)