Vol. 77 Friday, No. 165 August 24, 2012
Pages 51459–51680
OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER
VerDate Mar 15 2010 16:58 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\24AUWS.LOC 24AUWS mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGWS II Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012
The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office PUBLIC of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Subscriptions: Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Committee of the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and (Toll-Free) Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Paper or fiche 202–741–6005 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 202–741–6005 Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the issuing agency requests earlier filing. For a list of documents FEDERAL REGISTER WORKSHOP currently on file for public inspection, see www.ofr.gov. The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration THE FEDERAL REGISTER: WHAT IT IS AND HOW TO USE IT authenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publication FOR: Any person who uses the Federal Register and Code of established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, Federal Regulations. the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. WHO: Sponsored by the Office of the Federal Register. It is also available online at no charge at www.fdsys.gov, a service WHAT: Free public briefings (approximately 3 hours) to present: of the U.S. Government Printing Office. 1. The regulatory process, with a focus on the Federal The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under the Register system and the public’s role in the develop- authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register as the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions ment of regulations. (44 U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6:00 a.m. each 2. The relationship between the Federal Register and day the Federal Register is published and includes both text and Code of Federal Regulations. graphics from Volume 59, 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. 3. The important elements of typical Federal Register doc- Government Printing Office. Phone 202-512-1800 or 866-512-1800 uments. (toll free). E-mail, [email protected]. 4. An introduction to the finding aids of the FR/CFR sys- The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper tem. edition is $749 plus postage, or $808, plus postage, for a combined WHY: To provide the public with access to information nec- Federal Register, Federal Register Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA) subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal essary to research Federal agency regulations which di- Register including the Federal Register Index and LSA is $165, rectly affect them. There will be no discussion of spe- plus postage. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half cific agency regulations. the annual rate. The prevailing postal rates will be applied to llllllllllllllllll orders according to the delivery method requested. The price of a single copy of the daily Federal Register, including postage, WHEN: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 is based on the number of pages: $11 for an issue containing 9 a.m.–12:30 p.m. less than 200 pages; $22 for an issue containing 200 to 400 pages; and $33 for an issue containing more than 400 pages. Single issues WHERE: Office of the Federal Register of the microfiche edition may be purchased for $3 per copy, Conference Room, Suite 700 including postage. Remit check or money order, made payable to the Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO 800 North Capitol Street, NW. Deposit Account, VISA, MasterCard, American Express, or Washington, DC 20002 Discover. Mail to: U.S. Government Printing Office—New Orders, P.O. Box 979050, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000; or call toll free 1- RESERVATIONS: (202) 741–6008 866-512-1800, DC area 202-512-1800; or go to the U.S. Government Online Bookstore site, see bookstore.gpo.gov. There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearing in the Federal Register. How To Cite This Publication: Use the volume number and the page number. Example: 77 FR 12345. Postmaster: Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents, Federal Register, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402, along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.
.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 16:58 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\24AUWS.LOC 24AUWS mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGWS III
Contents Federal Register Vol. 77, No. 165
Friday, August 24, 2012
Agriculture Department Bostock 50th Anniversary Fireworks, Long Island Sound; See Farm Service Agency Manursing Island, NY, 51473–51475 See Food Safety and Inspection Service Swim Around Charleston, Charleston, SC, 51471–51473 See Forest Service NOTICES Commerce Department Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, See International Trade Administration Submissions, and Approvals, 51511 See National Institute of Standards and Technology See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Air Force Department NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Meetings: Submissions, and Approvals, 51514 US Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, 51526–51527 Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau Severely Disabled NOTICES NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Procurement List; Additions and Deletions, 51521–51523 Submissions, and Approvals: Firearms Transaction Record, Part 1, Over-the-Counter, Community Development Financial Institutions Fund 51576–51577 NOTICES National Response Team Customer Satisfaction Survey, Meetings: 51577–51578 Community Development Advisory Board, 51616
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Board Efficiency
NOTICES NOTICES Meetings: Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board Ad Hoc Rulemaking Committees, etc., 51513–51514 Membership, 51523–51526
Army Department Defense Department See Engineers Corps See Air Force Department See Engineers Corps Arts and Humanities, National Foundation See Navy Department See National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities PROPOSED RULES Federal Acquisition Regulations: Blind or Severely Disabled, Committee for Purchase From Basic Safeguarding of Contractor Information Systems, People Who Are 51496–51499 See Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled Energy Department NOTICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, NOTICES Submissions, and Approvals, 51530 Medicare and Medicaid Programs: Application from Hospital for Waiver for Organ Engineers Corps Procurement Service Area, 51539–51540 NOTICES Continued Approval of Det Norske Veritas Healthcare’s Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Hospital Accreditation Program, 51537–51539 Proposed Widening of the Pascagoula Lower Sound/ Medicare Program: Bayou Casotte Channel, Jackson County, MS, 51527 Advisory Panel on Hospital Outpatient Payment; Requests for Nominations, 51542–51543 Environmental Protection Agency Renewal of Deeming Authority of the Accreditation RULES Association for Ambulatory Health Care, Inc., etc., 2012 Technical Corrections, Clarifying and Other 51540–51542 Amendments to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule, etc., 51477–51495 Coast Guard Source Specific Federal Implementation Plans: RULES Implementing Best Available Retrofit Technology for Drawbridge Operations: Four Corners Power Plant; Navajo Nation, 51620– Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, St. Petersburg/Tampa, FL, 51648 51470–51471 NOTICES Safety Zones: Amended Environmental Impact Statement Filing System Apache Pier Labor Day Fireworks; Myrtle Beach, South Guidance, 51530–51532 Carolina, 51475–51477 Environmental Impact Statements; Weekly Receipt, 51532
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:20 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\24AUCN.SGM 24AUCN tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CONTENTS IV Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Contents
Meetings: Foreign Assets Control Office Good Neighbor Environmental Board, 51533–51534 NOTICES SFIREG POM Working Committee, 51533 Additional Designations, Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Prospective Purchaser Agreements, 51534 Designation Act, 51616–51617
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Forest Service RULES NOTICES Change of Address for Merit Systems Protection Board, Meetings: 51469–51470 Allegheny Resource Advisory Committee, 51512–51513 Lawrence County Resource Advisory Committee, 51513 Farm Service Agency General Services Administration RULES PROPOSED RULES End-Use Certificate Program Requirements; suspension, Federal Acquisition Regulations: 51459 Basic Safeguarding of Contractor Information Systems, 51496–51499 Federal Aviation Administration RULES Geological Survey Airworthiness Directives: NOTICES BRP–Powertrain GmbH & Co KG Rotax Reciprocating Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Engine, 51462–51464 Submissions, and Approvals: Pratt and Whitney Division Turbofan Engines, 51459– National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program, 51557– 51462 51558 Amendments of Class E Airspace: Augusta, GA, 51464–51465 Health and Human Services Department NOTICES See Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, See Health Resources and Services Administration Submissions, and Approvals: See National Institutes of Health Commercial Space Transportation Licensing Regulations, See Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 51608 Administration NOTICES Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Meetings: NOTICES National Biodefense Science Board, 51537 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, National Vaccine Advisory Committee, 51536–51537 Submissions, and Approvals, 51534–51535 Health Resources and Services Administration Federal Emergency Management Agency NOTICES NOTICES Meetings: Major Disaster Declarations: National Advisory Committee on Rural Health and Colorado; Amendment No. 4, 51546 Human Services, 51543–51544
Federal Trade Commission Homeland Security Department NOTICES See Coast Guard Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, See Federal Emergency Management Agency NOTICES Submissions, and Approvals, 51535–51536 Exercise of Authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act, 51545 Fish and Wildlife Service PROPOSED RULES Housing and Urban Development Department Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: RULES Impact Analyses of Critical Habitat, 51503–51510 Strengthening Risk Management through Responsible FHA– NOTICES Approved Lenders, 51465–51469 Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: NOTICES Great Lakes Islands National Wildlife Refuges in Federal Properties Suitable as Facilities to Assist Homeless, Michigan and Wisconsin; Draft Comprehensive 51546–51551 Conservation Plan, 51552–51553 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Indian Affairs Bureau Habitat Conservation Plan and Application for Incidental NOTICES Take Permit; Beech Ridge Energy, 51554–51555 Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: Sheldon National Wildlife Refuge, Humboldt County and Proposed Pokagon Band Tribal Village Fee-to-Trust Washoe County, NV, also Lake County, OR; Final Acquisition and Casino Project, City of South Bend, Comprehensive Conservation Plan, 51556–51557 St. Joseph County, IN, 51558–51559
Food Safety and Inspection Service Interior Department NOTICES See Fish and Wildlife Service Meetings: See Geological Survey Codex Alimentarius Commission, Committee on See Indian Affairs Bureau Processed Fruits and Vegetables, 51511–51512 See Land Management Bureau
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:20 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\24AUCN.SGM 24AUCN tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CONTENTS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Contents V
See National Park Service Land Management Bureau See Ocean Energy Management Bureau NOTICES NOTICES Environmental Assessments; Availability, etc.: Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Proposed Cameron to Milford-138 kV Transmission Line Submissions, and Approvals: Project, etc., Cedar City Field Office, Cedar City, UT, Alternatives Process in Hydropower Licensing, 51551– 51559–51560 51552 Filings of Plats of Surveys: North Dakota, 51560 Internal Revenue Service Realty Actions: PROPOSED RULES Termination of Recreation and Public Purposes Act Prohibited Payment Option under Single-Employer Defined Classifications and Opening of Lands; Wyoming, Benefit Plan of Plan Sponsor in Bankruptcy: 51560–51561 Hearing Cancellation, 51496 Temporary Restriction Order for Skinny Dipper Hot Springs, Boise County, Idaho, 51561–51562 International Trade Administration National Aeronautics and Space Administration NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Antidumping Duty Investigations; Results, Extensions, Federal Acquisition Regulations: Amendments, etc.: Basic Safeguarding of Contractor Information Systems, Steel Wire Garment Hangers from Socialist Republic of 51496–51499 Vietnam, Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 51514–51518 National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities NOTICES International Trade Commission Meetings: NOTICES Humanities Panel; Correction, 51579 Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations; Results, Extensions, Amendments, etc.: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Large Residential Washers from Korea and Mexico; RULES Scheduling of Final Phase, 51569–51570 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards: Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders; Motorcycle Brake Systems, 51650–51680 Investigations; Results, Extensions, Amendments, etc.: PROPOSED RULES Certain Lined Paper School Supplies from China, India, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency and Indonesia, 51570–51571 Standards: Complaints: Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles, 51499– Certain Wireless Communication Devices, Portable Music 51503 NOTICES and Data Processing Devices, Computers, etc., 51571 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Investigations: Submissions, and Approvals, 51609–51610 Certain Wireless Consumer Electronics Devices and Funding Availabilities: Components Thereof, 51572–51573 Distracted Driving Grant Program, 51610–51612 Investigations; Determinations, Results, etc.: Petitions for Exemptions from Vehicle Theft Prevention Certain Automated Media Library Devices, 51573–51574 Standard: Investigations; Terminations, Modifications and Rulings, Mitsubishi Motors R and D of America, Inc., 51612– etc.: 51614 Certain Devices with Secure Communication Capabilities, etc., 51575 National Institute of Standards and Technology NOTICES Justice Department Alternative Personnel Management System, 51518–51519 See Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau See Justice Programs Office National Institutes of Health NOTICES NOTICES Lodgings of Consent Decrees: Meetings: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation Center for Scientific Review, 51544–51545 and Liability Act, 51575–51576 National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Lodgings of Proposed Consent Decrees: Skin Diseases, 51544 Clean Air Act; Fourth Amendment, 51576 National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, 51544 Justice Programs Office National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Submissions, and Approvals: Impact Analyses of Critical Habitat, 51503–51510 National Corrections Reporting Program, 51578–51579 NOTICES Applications Labor Department Marine Mammals; File No. 17403, 51519–51520 NOTICES Endangered and Threatened Species: Meetings: Take of Anadromous Fish, 51520 Advisory Committee on Veterans Employment, Training Meetings: and Employer Outreach, 51579 New England Fishery Management Council, 51521
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:20 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\24AUCN.SGM 24AUCN tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CONTENTS VI Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Contents
North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 51521 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: BATS Exchange, Inc., 51602–51604 National Park Service EDGA Exchange, Inc., 51594–51595 NOTICES EDGX Exchange, Inc., 51593–51594 Intents to Repatriate Cultural Items: ICE Clear Credit LLC, 51600–51602 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Coconino New York Stock Exchange LLC, 51596–51599 National Forest, Flagstaff, AZ, 51562 NYSE MKT LLC, 51590–51593 Inventory Completions: Herrett Center for Arts and Science, College of Southern State Department Idaho, Twin Falls, ID, 51564–51565 NOTICES Southern Oregon Historical Society, Medford, OR, 51565– Certifications Related to Khmer Rouge Tribunal, 51604– 51566 51606 Thomas Burke Memorial Washington State Museum, Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition: University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 51564 Extravagant Inventions; The Princely Furniture of the University of Washington, Department of Anthropology, Roentgens, etc., 51606 Seattle, WA, 51563 Requests for Environmental Experts: National Register of Historic Places: To Assist CAFTA–DR Secretariat for Environmental Pending Nominations and Related Actions, 51566–51568 Matters with Preparation of Factual Records, 51606– 51607 Navy Department NOTICES State Justice Institute Environmental Impact Statements; Availability, etc.: NOTICES Proposed Modernization and Expansion of Townsend Meetings: Bombing Range, GA, 51527–51528 Board of Directors, 51607–51608 Public Hearings: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Outdoor Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Research, Development, Test and Evaluation Administration Activities, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren Division, Dahlgren, VA, 51528–51530 NOTICES Nuclear Regulatory Commission Meetings: NOTICES Center for Mental Health Services; Amendment, 51545 Applications: License to Export High-Enriched Uranium, 51579–51580 Surface Transportation Board Meetings: NOTICES Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, 51580–51581 Abandonment Exemptions: Requests for Export Licenses: CSX Transportation, Inc., Niagara County, NY, 51614 Nuclear Grade Graphite, 51581–51582 Union Pacific Railroad Co., Polk County, Iowa, 51614– 51615 Ocean Energy Management Bureau Acquisitions of Control Exemptions: NOTICES DMH Trust fbo Martha M. Head; Twin Cities and Western Outer Continental Shelf, Gulf of Mexico, Oil and Gas Lease Railroad Co., Minnesota Prairie Line, Inc. and Sales: Sisseton Milbank Railroad Co., 51615–51616 Western Planning Area Lease Sale 233 and Central Planning Area Lease Sale 231, 51568–51569 Transportation Department See Federal Aviation Administration Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES See Surface Transportation Board Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, NOTICES Submissions, and Approvals: Funding Availabilities: Qualified Domestic Relations Orders Submitted to PBGC, Small Business Transportation Resource Center Program; 51582–51583 Extension, 51608
Postal Regulatory Commission Treasury Department NOTICES See Community Development Financial Institutions Fund New Postal Products, 51583 See Foreign Assets Control Office See Internal Revenue Service Postal Service NOTICES Product Changes: Separate Parts In This Issue First-Class Package Service Negotiated Service Agreement, 51583–51584 Part II Securities and Exchange Commission Environmental Protection Agency, 51620–51648 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Part III Submissions, and Approvals, 51584–51589 Transportation Department, National Highway Traffic Applications and Temporary Orders: Safety Administration, 51650–51680 ReconTrust Co., N.A., et al., 51589–51590
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:20 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\24AUCN.SGM 24AUCN tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CONTENTS Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Contents VII
Reader Aids To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this page for LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http:// phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list and notice of recently enacted public laws. archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow the instructions.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:20 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\24AUCN.SGM 24AUCN tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with CONTENTS VIII Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Contents
CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE
A cumulative list of the parts affected this month can be found in the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue.
7 CFR 782...... 51459 14 CFR 39 (2 documents) ...... 51459, 51462 71...... 51464 24 CFR 25...... 51465 30...... 51465 201...... 51465 202...... 51465 203...... 51465 206...... 51465 26 CFR Proposed Rules: 1...... 51496 29 CFR 1614...... 51469 33 CFR 117...... 51470 165 (3 documents) ...... 51471, 51473, 51475 40 CFR 49...... 51620 98...... 51477 48 CFR Proposed Rules: 4...... 51496 7...... 51496 12...... 51496 42...... 51496 52...... 51496 49 CFR 571...... 51650 Proposed Rules: 535...... 51499 50 CFR Proposed Rules: 424...... 51503
VerDate Mar 15 2010 16:59 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\24AULS.LOC 24AULS mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGLS 51459
Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 77, No. 165
Friday, August 24, 2012
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER FSA regulations regarding the U.S. SUMMARY: We are adopting a new contains regulatory documents having general end-use certificate program were airworthiness directive (AD) for Pratt & applicability and legal effect, most of which implemented in 7 CFR part 782, End Whitney Division PW4052, PW4152, are keyed to and codified in the Code of Use Certificate Program. These PW4056, PW4156A, PW4060, Federal Regulations, which is published under regulations provide, in part, that the PW4060A, PW4060C, PW4062, 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. provisions of the regulations will be PW4062A, PW4158, PW4460, PW4462, The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by suspended 30 calendar days following PW4164, PW4164C, PW4164C/B, the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of the date Canada eliminates its end-use PW4168, and PW4168A turbofan new books are listed in the first FEDERAL certificate requirement. engines with certain high-pressure REGISTER issue of each week. Canada announced that effective turbine (HPT) stage 1 front hubs August 1, 2012, it will no longer require installed. This AD was prompted by end-use certificates on U.S. produced Pratt & Whitney’s updated low-cycle- DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE wheat entering Canada. Therefore, by fatigue analysis that indicated certain the statutory and regulatory authorities HPT stage 1 front hubs could initiate a Farm Service Agency mentioned above, effective August 31, crack prior to the published life limit. 2012, FSA is suspending the End-Use This AD requires removing the affected 7 CFR Part 782 Certificate filing requirements in 7 CFR HPT stage 1 front hubs from service Suspension of End-Use Certificate part 782. Accordingly, beginning August using a drawdown plan. We are issuing Program Requirements 31, 2012, importers and end-users of this AD to prevent failure of the HPT Canadian wheat will no longer be stage 1 front hub, which could lead to AGENCY: Farm Service Agency, USDA. required to file either the End-Use an uncontained engine failure and ACTION: Final rule. Certificate for Wheat (FSA–750) or the damage to the airplane. End-Use Certificate Program Canadian DATES: This AD is effective September SUMMARY: This final rule suspends Wheat Consumption and Resale Report 28, 2012. indefinitely the Farm Service Agency (FSA–751). The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (FSA) regulation requiring end-use List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 782 certificates and tracking of wheat of certain publications listed in the AD produced in Canada that enters the Administrative practice and as of September 28, 2012. United States. This action is being taken procedure, Barley, Reporting and ADDRESSES: For service information in response to the discontinuation of recordkeeping requirements, Wheat. identified in this AD, contact Pratt & Canada’s end-use certificate program. Whitney, 400 Main St., East Hartford, As a result of these changes, importers PART 782—[SUSPENDED] CT 06108; phone: 860–565–7700; fax: and end-users of Canadian produced ■ Accordingly, under the authority of 7 860–565–1605. You may view this wheat are no longer required to provide U.S.C. 6932, 15 U.S.C. 714b and 714c service information at the FAA, Engine FSA end-use certificates or and 19 U.S.C. 3391, the Farm Security & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England consumption and resale reports on administration suspends indefinitely 7 Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For wheat produced in Canada. CFR part 782. information on the availability of this DATES: Effective August 31, 2012. material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. Signed on August 3, 2012. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Juan M. Garcia, Examining the AD Docket Helen Linden, Farm Service Agency, Administrator, Farm Service Agency. You may examine the AD docket on Commodity Operations Division, the Internet at http:// telephone (202) 690–4321, or email [FR Doc. 2012–20983 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–05–P www.regulations.gov; or in person at the [email protected]. Docket Management Facility between 9 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 321(f) of the North American Free Trade DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD Agreement (NAFTA) Implementation docket contains this AD, the regulatory Act requires the Secretary of Agriculture Federal Aviation Administration evaluation, any comments received, and to: other information. The address for the (1) Establish end-use certificates for 14 CFR Part 39 Docket Office (phone: 800–647–5527) is imports of wheat and barley from a Document Management Facility, U.S. foreign country that requires end-use [Docket No. FAA–2012–0079; Directorate Department of Transportation, Docket Identifier 2012–NE–06–AD; Amendment 39– Operations, M–30, West Building certificates for imports of U.S. produced 17148; AD 2012–16–01] wheat or barley; and Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 (2) Suspend end-use certificate RIN 2120–AA64 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, requirements if the foreign countries DC 20590. that have similar requirements Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: terminate such requirements. Canada Whitney Division Turbofan Engines James Gray, Aerospace Engineer, Engine was the only country requiring end-use AGENCY: Federal Aviation Certification Office, FAA, 12 New certificates, and wheat was the only Administration (FAA), DOT. England Executive Park, Burlington, commodity subject to end-use certificate MA; phone: 781–238–7742; fax: 781– ACTION: Final rule. requirements. 238–7199; email: [email protected].
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51460 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: service until the next piece-part of an ASB because we do not know the exposure above the number of cycles contents of SBs not yet published. We Discussion listed in this AD. For this reason, we did not change the AD based on UPS’s We issued a notice of proposed also cannot adjust the compliance time comment. rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR to account for potential stub life Request To Modify Compliance part 39 to include an AD that would problems that might occur in the other apply to the specified products. That rotors. We did not change the AD. Wording NPRM published in the Federal P&W requested that the phrase ‘‘or at Register on March 23, 2012 (77 FR Request To Reference the PW4000 Engine Manual Chapter 05 Life Limits the next piece-part exposure after the 16967). That NPRM proposed to require effective date of this AD, whichever removing the affected HPT stage 1 front Commenters MNG Airlines and P&W occurs first’’ be removed from the hubs from service using a drawdown requested that the phrase ‘‘former life compliance paragraphs (f)(1)(ii) and plan. limits cannot be exceeded’’ be added to (f)(2)(ii). P&W indicated that, based on compliance paragraphs (f)(1)(ii) and Comments the proposed AD, operators may not be (f)(2)(ii) of the proposed AD (77 FR able to run HPT stage 1 front hubs, We gave the public the opportunity to 16967, March 23, 2012), or that some identified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and participate in developing this AD. The other reference to the PW4000 Engine (c)(1)(ii), that are exposed at piece-part following presents the comments Manual Chapter 05 life limits be added between 17,000 and 18,000 cycles-since- received on the proposal and the FAA’s when the stage 1 front hub is operating new (CSN) and HPT stage 1 front hubs, response to each comment. during the 1,000 cycle drawdown. identified in paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3), United commented that a reference to Support for the NPRM that are exposed between 12,700 and the reduced life limits be included in 13,700 CSN, to the full 1,000 cycle One commenter, The Boeing Chapter 05 of the Airworthiness drawdown. Company, supported the contents of the Limitations Section (ALS) of the We partially agree. We agree that the proposed AD (77 FR 16967, March 23, PW4000 Engine Manual. AD if adopted as proposed could have 2012), as written. We do not agree. The Chapter 05 life forced removal of HPT stage 1 front limits cannot be exceeded. For those Request To Modify Applicability hubs prior to reaching 18,000 CSN and hubs beneath the Chapter 05 life limit, 13,700 CSN, respectively. We disagree Commenters United Airlines, United this AD requires removal according to that we should remove the at piece-part Parcel Service Co. (UPS), Pratt & the drawdown schedule in the AD, exposure wording from paragraphs Whitney (P&W), and MNG Airlines which is before the Chapter 05 limit is (f)(1)(ii) and (f)(2)(ii) of the AD, because requested that part numbers (P/Ns) reached. This AD’s requirements are HPT stage 1 front hubs that are exposed 52L301 and 51L201–021 be added to the independent from the Chapter 05 life at piece-part after 18,000 CSN and applicability paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) limits in the ALS of the PW4000 Engine 13,700 CSN should not go back into of the proposed AD (77 FR 16967, Manual. We did not change the AD. March 23, 2012). The commenters noted service, even if they have not that the applicability of the proposed Request Revisions to Service accumulated an additional 1,000 cycles AD is inconsistent since it includes Information To Be Incorporated by in service. We therefore, revised some assembly P/Ns and some detail Reference paragraphs (f)(1)(ii) and (f)(2)(ii) of the P/Ns. P&W, UPS, and United requested proposed AD (77 FR 16967, March 23, We agree. We revised the applicability revisions to the service information that 2012), to clarify that these HPT stage 1 paragraphs of this AD to include the is incorporated by reference in the AD. front hubs should be removed at the referenced P/Ns for consistency. P&W requested that the AD reference next piece-part exposure above 18,000 the new P&W Alert Service Bulletin CSN and 13,700 CSN, respectively, Request To Change Compliance Time (ASB) No. PW4ENG A72–821, dated rather than at the next piece-part Commenters UPS, MNG Airlines, and July 6, 2012 and P&W ASB No. PW4G– exposure after the effective date of the Onur Air requested that the compliance 100–A72–246, dated June 28, 2012, AD. This change is consistent with the time be changed to ‘‘at next piece-part which address the unsafe condition and installation prohibition for HPT stage 1 exposure after the effective date of this contain the affected part numbers by front hubs in paragraph (g) of this AD. AD or before accumulating the number serial number for the PW4000–94’’ and Request for Allowance for Mixed-Model of cycles listed in this AD, whichever PW4000–100’’ engines. UPS also asked Management occurs later.’’ MNG Airlines indicated that the AD be revised to note that any that its engines would lose 1,382 flight subsequent revision of the service United asked that the AD include an cycles, which would cost more than bulletin (SB) can be used for allowance for mixed-model $1,000,000 and force early shop visits. compliance. management. Onur Air noted that its engines would We agree in part. Our proposed AD We do not agree. The AD does not lose 1,300 cycles and it would cause (77 FR 16967, March 23, 2012), restrict use of mixed-model stub life problems on other life limited referenced the P/N-serial number (S/N) management. If an operator uses mixed- parts. UPS also expressed its concern tables of affected parts in the old SBs. model management, then 18,000 CSN over the increased shop burden from a We agree that we should use the new and 13,700 CSN should be used in the hub life reduction. P&W SBs. We changed paragraph (c) of calculation for the respective engine We do not agree. We determined that this AD to incorporate the P/N–S/N models included in paragraph (c) of this removal of the HPT stage 1 front hubs tables from the new P&W ASBs, AD. We did not change the AD. according to the compliance times in specifically from P&W ASB No. Request To Add Credit for Prior paragraph (f) of this AD provides an PW4ENG A72–821, dated July 6, 2012 Compliance acceptable level of safety for the fleet. and P&W ASB No. PW4G–100–A72– This acceptable level of safety would 246, dated June 28, 2012. FedEx Express (FedEx) asked that the not be maintained if all HPT stage 1 We disagree that the AD should be AD include credit for compliance to front hubs were allowed to remain in revised to incorporate future revisions prior SBs.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51461
We do not agree. Operators can take these engines, we estimate the lost life on a substantial number of small entities credit for previous actions based on to have a value of about $22,013 per under the criteria of the Regulatory paragraph (e) of this AD. We did not engine. Based on these figures, we Flexibility Act. change the AD. estimate the total cost of the AD to U.S. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Request To Clarify Requirements for operators is $6,981,578. P/N 51L901 Authority for This Rulemaking Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, FedEx asked that the AD requirements Title 49 of the United States Code Safety. for stage 1 front hub, P/N 51L901, be specifies the FAA’s authority to issue clarified. FedEx claimed that the rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Adoption of the Amendment relevant service information section of section 106, describes the authority of the AD and its applicability are the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Accordingly, under the authority contradictory. Aviation Programs, describes in more delegated to me by the Administrator, We do not agree. We reviewed the detail the scope of the Agency’s the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as P/N references and find no authority. follows: contradictions between the two We are issuing this rulemaking under sections. We did not change the AD. PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS the authority described in Subtitle VII, DIRECTIVES Revision to Cost of Compliance Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that In reviewing our cost of compliance ■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 section, Congress charges the FAA with estimate made in the NPRM (77 FR continues to read as follows: promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 16967, March 23, 2012), we found that air commerce by prescribing regulations Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. our estimate was wrong. Specifically, for practices, methods, and procedures we found that we based our estimate on § 39.13 [Amended] the Administrator finds necessary for the number of engines installed on safety in air commerce. This regulation ■ airplanes worldwide rather than just on 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding is within the scope of that authority the U.S. fleet. Therefore, we changed the following new airworthiness our estimate to reflect U.S. operators because it addresses an unsafe condition directive (AD): that is likely to exist or develop on only. This change reduced the number 2012–16–01 Pratt & Whitney Division: products identified in this rulemaking of engines affected from 954 to 289 and Amendment 39–17148; Docket No. the total cost estimate from $23,049,537 action. FAA–2012–0079; Directorate Identifier to $6,981,578. Regulatory Findings 2012–NE–06–AD. Conclusion This AD will not have federalism (a) Effective Date We reviewed the relevant data, implications under Executive Order This AD is effective September 28, 2012. considered the comments received, and 13132. This AD will not have a (b) Affected ADs substantial direct effect on the States, on determined that air safety and the None. public interest require adopting the AD the relationship between the national with the changes described previously. government and the States, or on the (c) Applicability We also determined that these changes distribution of power and This AD applies to the following Pratt & will not increase the economic burden responsibilities among the various Whitney Division turbofan engines: on any operator nor increase the scope levels of government. (1) PW4052, PW4152, and PW4056 of the AD. For the reasons discussed above, I turbofan engines, including models with any certify that this AD: dash number suffix, with a high-pressure Costs of Compliance (1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory turbine (HPT) stage 1 front hub part number We estimate that this AD would affect action’’ under Executive Order 12866, (P/N) listed in Table 1 to paragraph (c) of this 289 engines installed on airplanes of (2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under AD installed. DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (2) PW4156A, PW4060, PW4060A, U.S. registry. About 183 engines use a PW4060C, PW4062, PW4062A, PW4158, 20,000 CSN life limit for the HPT stage (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), PW4460, and PW4462 turbofan engines, 1 front hub. For these engines, we (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation including models with any dash number estimate the lost part life to have a value in Alaska, and suffix, with an HPT stage 1 front hub P/N of about $25,400 per engine. About 106 (4) Will not have a significant listed in Table 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD engines use a 15,000 CSN life limit. For economic impact, positive or negative, installed.
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (C)
P/N 51L601 ...... All serial numbers (S/Ns). P/N 52L401 ...... With a S/N not listed in Table 5 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Pratt & Whitney Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. PW4ENG A72–821, dated July 6, 2012. P/N 51L201, P/N 51L201–001, P/N 51L201–021 ...... All S/Ns. P/N 51L901, P/N 52L301 ...... With an S/N not listed in Table 7 of the Accomplishment Instructions of Pratt & Whitney ASB No. PW4ENG A72–821, dated July 6, 2012.
(3) PW4164, PW4164C, PW4164C/B, & Whitney ASB No. PW4G–100–A72–246, (d) Unsafe Condition PW4168, and PW4168A turbofan engines dated June 28, 2012. This AD was prompted by Pratt & with an HPT stage 1 front hub, P/N 51L901, Whitney’s updated low-cycle-fatigue analysis installed with an S/N not listed in Table 3 that indicated certain HPT stage 1 front hubs of the Accomplishment Instructions of Pratt could initiate a crack prior to the published
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51462 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
life limit. This AD requires removing the (IBR) of the following service information deterioration and contamination of the affected HPT stage 1 front hubs from service under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. carburetor, which could result in an in- using a drawdown plan. We are issuing this (2) You must use the following service flight engine shutdown, forced landing AD to prevent failure of the HPT stage 1 front information to do the actions required by this and damage to the airplane. hub, which could lead to an uncontained AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise: engine failure and damage to the airplane. (i) Pratt & Whitney Alert Service Bulletin DATES: This AD becomes effective (e) Compliance (ASB) No. PW4ENG A72–821, dated July 6, September 10, 2012. 2012. Comply with this AD within the We must receive comments on this (ii) Pratt & Whitney ASB No. PW4G–100– AD by October 9, 2012. compliance times specified, unless already A72–246, dated June 28, 2012. done. (3) For service information identified in The Director of the Federal Register (f) Removal of HPT Stage 1 Front Hubs From this AD, contact Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main approved the incorporation by reference Service St., East Hartford, CT 06108; phone: 860– of BRP-Powertrain GmbH & Co KG, 565–7700; fax: 860–565–1605. Rotax Aircraft Engines Alert Service (1) For HPT stage 1 front hubs listed in (4) You may review this service paragraph (c)(1) of this AD, do the following: Bulletin No. ASB–912–061R1, dated information at the FAA, Engine & Propeller (i) If the HPT stage 1 front hub has May 31, 2012, listed in the AD as of Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, accumulated 17,000 or fewer cycles-since- September 10, 2012. Burlington, MA. For information on the new (CSN) on the effective date of this AD, availability of this material at the FAA, call ADDRESSES: You may send comments by remove the HPT stage 1 front hub from any of the following methods: service before accumulating 18,000 CSN. 781–238–7125. (ii) If the HPT stage 1 front hub has (5) You may also review the service • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to accumulated more than 17,000 CSN on the information that is incorporated by reference http://www.regulations.gov and follow effective date of this AD, remove the HPT at the National Archives and Records the instructions for sending your stage 1 front hub from service before Administration (NARA). For information on comments electronically. the availability of this material at NARA, call accumulating an additional 1,000 cycles-in- • Mail: U.S. Department of service (CIS) or at the next piece-part 202–741–6030, or go to: http:// exposure above 18,000 CSN, whichever www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr- Transportation, 1200 New Jersey occurs first. locations.html. Avenue SE., West Building Ground (2) For HPT stage 1 front hubs listed in Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3) of this AD, do the July 26, 2012. 20590–0001. following: Peter A. White, • Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail (i) If the HPT stage 1 front hub has address above between 9 a.m. and 5 accumulated 12,700 or fewer CSN on the Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, effective date of this AD, remove the HPT Aircraft Certification Service. p.m., Monday through Friday, except stage 1 front hub from service before [FR Doc. 2012–20842 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Federal holidays. • accumulating 13,700 CSN. BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Fax: 202–493–2251. (ii) If the HPT stage 1 front hub has For service information identified in accumulated more than 12,700 CSN on the this AD, contact BRP-Powertrain GmbH effective date of this AD, remove the HPT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION stage 1 front hub from service before & Co KG, Welser Strasse 32, A–4623 Gunskirchen, Austria, or go to: http:// accumulating an additional 1,000 CIS or at Federal Aviation Administration the next piece-part exposure above 13,700 www.rotax-aircraft-engines.com. You CSN, whichever occurs first. may view this service information at the 14 CFR Part 39 FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 (g) Installation Prohibition [Docket No. FAA–2012–0603; Directorate New England Executive Park, After the effective date of this AD, do not Identifier 2012–NE–17–AD; Amendment 39– Burlington, MA 01803. For information install into any engine any HPT stage 1 front hubs listed in paragraph (c)(1) of this AD that 17160; AD 2012–16–13] on the availability of this material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. are at piece-part exposure and exceed 18,000 RIN 2120–AA64 CSN, or any HPT stage 1 front hubs listed in Examining the AD Docket paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3) of this AD that Airworthiness Directives; BRP- are at piece-part exposure and exceed 13,700 Powertrain GmbH & Co KG Rotax You may examine the AD docket on CSN. Reciprocating Engines the Internet at http:// (h) Definition www.regulations.gov; or in person at the AGENCY: Federal Aviation For the purpose of this AD, piece-part Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. exposure means that the part is completely Administration (FAA), DOT. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, disassembled and removed from the engine. ACTION: Final rule; request for except Federal holidays. The AD docket comments. contains this AD, the regulatory (i) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) evaluation, any comments received, and SUMMARY: We are adopting a new other information. The street address for The Manager, Engine Certification Office, airworthiness directive (AD) for BRP- may approve AMOCs for this AD. Use the the Docket Operations office (phone: Powertrain GmbH & Co KG Rotax 912 800–647–5527) is the same as the Mail procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make F2; 912 F3; 912 F4; 912 S2; 912 S3; and your request. address provided in the ADDRESSES 912 S4 reciprocating engines. This AD section. Comments will be available in (j) Related Information requires replacing the pressure side fuel the AD docket shortly after receipt. For more information about this AD, hose on certain fuel pumps and contact James Gray, Aerospace Engineer, inspecting the carburetors connected to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Engine Certification Office, FAA, 12 New those fuel pumps for contamination Alan Strom, Aerospace Engineer, Engine England Executive Park, Burlington, MA; within 5 flight hours after the effective Certification Office, FAA, Engine & phone: 781–238–7742; fax: 781–238–7199; date of this AD. This AD was prompted Propeller Directorate, 12 New England email: [email protected]. by reports of fuel pumps having Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; (k) Material Incorporated by Reference pressure side fuel hoses not meeting the email: [email protected]; phone: 781– 238–7143; fax: 781–238–7199. (1) The Director of the Federal Register design specification. We are issuing this approved the incorporation by reference AD to prevent pressure side fuel hose SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51463
Discussion for public comment before issuing this Regulatory Findings The European Aviation Safety Agency AD are impracticable and that good We determined that this AD will not (EASA), which is the Technical Agent cause exists for making this amendment have federalism implications under for the Member States of the European effective in fewer than 30 days. Executive Order 13132. This AD will Community, has issued EASA AD 2012– Comments Invited not have a substantial direct effect on 0097–E, dated May 31, 2012, and AD the States, on the relationship between 2012–0097R1, dated June 1, 2012 This AD is a final rule that involves the national government and the States, (referred to after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to requirements affecting flight safety, and or on the distribution of power and correct an unsafe condition for the we did not precede it by notice and responsibilities among the various specified products. The MCAI states: opportunity for public comment. We levels of government. Reports from the field confirmed a non- invite you to send any written relevant For the reasons discussed above, I compliance of the pressure side fuel hoses data, views, or arguments about this AD. certify this AD: installed on certain P/N 893114 fuel pumps, Send your comments to an address 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory which may have resulted in a latent defect listed under the ADDRESSES section. action’’ under Executive Order 12866; on a limited number of engines. The affected Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA–2012–0603; 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the hoses may not be fuel resistant in accordance Directorate Identifier 2012–NE–17–AD’’ DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures with the specification. This condition, if not (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and corrected, could lead to detachment of at the beginning of your comments. We particles from the fuel hose and irregularities specifically invite comments on the 3. Will not have a significant in the carburetor function, possibly resulting overall regulatory, economic, economic impact, positive or negative, in in-flight engine shutdown, and forced environmental, and energy aspects of on a substantial number of small entities landing, damage to the aeroplane and injury this AD. We will consider all comments under the criteria of the Regulatory to occupants. received by the closing date and may Flexibility Act. You may obtain further information by amend this AD because of those We prepared a regulatory evaluation examining the MCAI in the AD docket. comments. of the estimated costs to comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. Relevant Service Information We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http:// List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 BRP-Powertrain GmbH & Co KG has www.regulations.gov, including any issued Alert Service Bulletin No. ASB– Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation personal information you provide. We 912–061R1, dated May 31, 2012. The safety, Incorporation by reference, will also post a report summarizing each actions described in this service Safety. substantive verbal contact with FAA information are intended to correct the Adoption of the Amendment unsafe condition identified in the personnel concerning this AD. Using the MCAI. search function of the Web site, anyone Accordingly, under the authority can find and read the comments in any delegated to me by the Administrator, FAA’s Determination and Requirements of our dockets, including, if provided, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as of This AD the name of the individual who sent the follows: This product has been approved by comment (or signed the comment on the aviation authority of Austria, and is behalf of an association, business, labor PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS approved for operation in the United union, etc.). You may review the DOT’s DIRECTIVES States. Pursuant to our bilateral complete Privacy Act Statement in the ■ agreement with the European Federal Register published on April 11, 1. The authority citation for part 39 Community, EASA has notified us of 2000 (65 FR 19477–78). continues to read as follows: the unsafe condition described in the Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. Authority for This Rulemaking MCAI and service information § 39.13 [Amended] referenced above. We are issuing this Title 49 of the United States Code ■ AD because we evaluated all specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding information provided by EASA and rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, the following new airworthiness determined the unsafe condition exists section 106, describes the authority of directive (AD): and is likely to exist or develop on other the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 2012–16–13 BRP-Powertrain GmbH & Co. products of the same type design. This Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more KG (formerly BRP-Rotax GmbH & Co AD requires replacing the pressure side detail the scope of the Agency’s KG, Bombardier-Rotax GmbH & Co. KG, fuel hose on certain fuel pumps and authority. and Bombardier-Rotax GmbH): inspecting the carburetors connected to Amendment 39–17160; Docket No. those fuel pumps for contamination We are issuing this rulemaking under FAA–2012–0603; Directorate Identifier within 5 flight hours after the effective the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 2012–NE–17–AD. date of the AD. Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: (a) Effective Date General requirements.’’ Under that FAA’s Determination of the Effective This airworthiness directive (AD) becomes section, Congress charges the FAA with effective September 10, 2012. Date promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in An unsafe condition exists that air commerce by prescribing regulations (b) Affected ADs requires the immediate adoption of this for practices, methods, and procedures None. AD. The FAA has found that the risk to the Administrator finds necessary for (c) Applicability the flying public justifies waiving notice safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority This AD applies to BRP-Powertrain GmbH and comment prior to adoption of this & Co KG Rotax 912 F2; 912 F3; 912 F4; 912 rule because the compliance time in this because it addresses an unsafe condition S2; 912 S3; and 912 S4 reciprocating engines, AD is within 5 flight hours after the that is likely to exist or develop on with a fuel pump part number (P/N) 893114 effective date of the AD. Therefore, we products identified in this rulemaking having a serial number (S/N) listed in Table determined that notice and opportunity action. 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51464 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (C)— (2) Refer to European Aviation Safety (IFR) operations within the Augusta, AFFECTED FUEL PUMP S/NS Agency AD 2012–0097–E, dated May 31, GA, airspace area. This action also 2012, and AD 2012–0097R1, dated June 1, updates the geographic coordinates of 2012, for related information. 11.3117 through 11.3325 inclusive. Burke County Airport. 11.4036 through 11.4355 inclusive. (j) Material Incorporated by Reference DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, November 11.4516 through 11.4595 inclusive. (1) The Director of the Federal Register 15, 2012. The Director of the Federal 12.0251 through 12.0270 inclusive. approved the incorporation by reference Register approves this incorporation by (IBR) of the service information listed in this reference action under title 1, Code of (d) Reason paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to This AD was prompted by reports of fuel part 51. the annual revision of FAA Order pumps having pressure side fuel hoses not (2) You must use this service information 7400.9 and publication of conforming as applicable to do the actions required by meeting the design specification. We are amendments. issuing this AD to prevent pressure side fuel this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. hose deterioration and contamination of the (i) BRP-Powertrain GmbH & Co KG, Rotax FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John carburetor, which could result in an in-flight Aircraft Engines Alert Service Bulletin No. Fornito, Operations Support Group, engine shutdown, forced landing and damage ASB–912–061R1, dated May 31, 2012. Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation to the airplane. (ii) Reserved. Administration, P.O. Box 20636, (3) For BRP-Powertrain GmbH & Co KG Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone (404) (e) Actions and Compliance service information identified in this AD, 305–6364. Unless already done, within 5 flight hours contact BRP-Powertrain GmbH & Co KG, after the effective date of the AD do the Welser Strasse 32, A–4623 Gunskirchen, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Austria, or go to: http://www.rotax-aircraft- following: History (1) Replace the pressure side fuel hose on engines.com. the fuel pump with a fuel hose eligible for (4) You may view this service information On April 10, 2012, the FAA published installation on the pressure side of the fuel at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, in the Federal Register a notice of pump. 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend (2) Inspect the carburetors for MA. For information on the availability of Class E airspace in the Augusta, GA area contamination. Use paragraph 3.1.2 of BRP- this material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. (5) You may view this service information (77 FR 21506). Interested parties were Powertrain GmbH & Co KG, Rotax Aircraft invited to participate in this rulemaking Engines Alert Service Bulletin No. ASB–912– at the National Archives and Records 061R1, dated May 31, 2012, to perform your Administration (NARA). For information on effort by submitting written comments inspection. the availability of this material at NARA, call on the proposal to the FAA. No 202–741–6030, or go to: http:// comments were received. Subsequent to (f) Definition www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr- publication, the FAA found an error in For the purpose of this AD, a fuel hose locations.html. the latitudinal coordinate for Burke eligible for installation is one that was not Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on County Airport and makes the from any of the affected fuel pumps with an July 30, 2012. correction in the rule. Except for S/N listed in Table 1 to paragraph (c) of this Peter A. White, editorial changes, and the change noted AD. Manager, Engine & Propeller Directorate, above, this rule is the same as published (g) Installation Prohibition Aircraft Certification Service. in the NPRM. (1) After the effective date of this AD, do [FR Doc. 2012–20748 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Class E airspace designations are not install a P/N 893114 fuel pump with an BILLING CODE 4910–13–P published in paragraph 6005 of FAA S/N listed in Table 1 to paragraph (c) of this Order 7400.9V dated August 9, 2011, AD onto any engine, unless the pressure side and effective September 15, 2011, which fuel hose has been replaced as required by DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR this AD. 71.1. The Class E airspace designations (2) After the effective date of this AD, do Federal Aviation Administration listed in this document will be not install a Rotax 912 engine with a P/N 893114 fuel pump with an S/N listed in published subsequently in the Order. 14 CFR Part 71 Table 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD in any The Rule airplane unless it has been inspected and the [Docket No. FAA–2011–1334; Airspace This amendment to Title 14, Code of pressure side fuel hose replaced as required Docket No. 11–ASO–43] by this AD. Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 (3) After the effective date of this AD, do Amendment of Class E Airspace; amends Class E airspace extending approve for return to service any product or Augusta, GA upward from 700 feet above the surface article with a fuel hose removed from a P/ at Augusta, GA. Airspace N 893114 fuel pump with an S/N listed in AGENCY: Federal Aviation reconfiguration is necessary due to the Table 1 to paragraph (c) of this AD. Administration (FAA), DOT. decommissioning of the Bushe NDB at (h) Alternative Methods of Compliance ACTION: Final rule. Augusta Regional at Bush Field Airport, (AMOCs) Augusta, GA, and the Burke County The Manager, Engine Certification Office, SUMMARY: This action amends Class E NDB at Burke County Airport, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Use the Airspace in Augusta, GA. The Bushe Waynesboro, GA, thereby cancelling the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19 to make Non-Directional Beacon (NDB) and the NDB approaches. This action ensures your request. Burke County NDB have been the continued safety and management of (i) Related Information decommissioned and new Standard IFR operations within the Augusta, GA Instrument Approach Procedures have airspace area. This action also adjusts (1) For more information about this AD, been developed at Augusta Regional the latitude degree coordinate of the contact Alan Strom, Aerospace Engineer, ° ° Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Airport at Bush Field, Augusta, GA, and Burke County Airport from 32 to 33 to Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Burke County Airport, Waynesboro, GA, be in concert with the FAA’s Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; respectively. Airspace reconfiguration is aeronautical database. email: [email protected]; phone: 781–238– necessary for the continued safety and The FAA has determined that this 7143; fax: 781–238–7199. management of instrument flight rules regulation only involves an established
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51465
body of technical regulations for which PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND frequent and routine amendments are B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR URBAN DEVELOPMENT necessary to keep them operationally TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND current, is non-controversial and REPORTING POINTS 24 CFR Parts 25, 30, 201, 202, 203, and unlikely to result in adverse or negative 206 comments. It, therefore, (1) is not a ■ 1. The authority citation for part 71 [Docket No. FR–5622–F–01] ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under continues to read as follows: RIN 2502–AJ13 Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565; 3 CFR, 1959– Federal Housing Administration: Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 1963; Comp., p. 389. Strengthening Risk Management FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) Through Responsible FHA-Approved does not warrant preparation of a § 71.1 [Amended] Lenders Regulatory Evaluation as the anticipated ■ AGENCY: Office of the Assistant impact is so minimal. Since this is a 2. The incorporation by reference in Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing routine matter that will only affect air 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Commissioner, HUD. traffic procedures and air navigation, it Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace ACTION: Final rule; clarification and is certified that this rule, when Designations and Reporting Points, correction. promulgated, will not have a significant dated August 9, 2011, effective September 15, 2011, is amended as economic impact on a substantial SUMMARY: As part of HUD’s efforts to follows: number of small entities under the strengthen the risk management criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas practices of the Federal Housing The FAA’s authority to issue rules extending upward from 700 feet or more Administration (FHA), HUD published a regarding aviation safety is found in above the surface of the earth. final rule on April 20, 2010, revising its regulations pertaining to the FHA- Title 49 of the United States Code. * * * * * Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the approval of mortgage lenders. The April 20, 2010, final rule increased the net authority of the FAA Administrator. ASO GA E5 Augusta, GA [Amended] worth requirement for FHA-approved Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, Augusta Regional at Bush Field Airport, GA lenders and mortgagees, eliminated describes in more detail the scope of the (Lat. 33°22′12″ N., long. 81°57′52″ W.) HUD’s approval of loan correspondents, agency’s authority. Emory NDB (Lat. 33°27′46″ N., long. 81°59′49″ W.) and amended the general approval This rulemaking is promulgated Daniel Field standards for lenders and mortgagees. under the authority described in (Lat. 33°27′59″ N., long. 82°02′22″ W.) This final rule makes several Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section Waynesboro, Burke County Airport, GA nonsubstantive clarifications and 40103. Under that section, the FAA is (Lat. 33°02′29″ N., long. 82°00′10″ W.) corrections to the provisions of the charged with prescribing regulations to Millen Airport April 20, 2010, final rule. The changes assign the use of airspace necessary to (Lat. 32°53′37″ N., long. 81°57′55″ W.) will improve the clarity of HUD’s ensure the safety of aircraft and the Millen NDB regulatory requirements and, thereby, efficient use of airspace. This regulation (Lat. 32°53′41″ N., long. 81°58′01″ W.) facilitate program participant is within the scope of that authority as That airspace extending upward from 700 compliance and improve HUD’s ability it amends controlled airspace in the feet above the surface within an 8.6-mile to monitor and enforce its risk Augusta, GA area. radius of Augusta Regional at Bush Field management regulations. Airport, and within 3.2 miles either side of DATES: Effective Date: September 24, Environmental Review the 168° bearing from the airport extending 2012. The FAA has determined that this from the 8.6-mile radius to 12.5 miles south FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: action qualifies for categorical exclusion of the airport, and within a 7-mile radius of Richard Toma, Deputy Director, Office Daniel Field Airport, and within 8 miles west under the National Environmental of Lender Activities and Program and 4 miles east of the 349° bearing from the Policy Act in accordance with FAA Compliance, Office of Housing, Emory NDB extending from the 7-mile radius Department of Housing and Urban Order 1050.1E, ‘‘Environmental to 16 miles north of the Emory NDB, and Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’ Development, 490 L’Enfant Plaza East within a 6.6-mile radius of Burke County SW., Room P3214, Washington, DC paragraph 311a. This airspace action is Airport, and within a 7.3-mile radius of the not expected to cause any potentially 20024–8000; telephone number 202– Millen Airport, and within 4 miles east and 708–1515 (this is not a toll-free significant environmental impacts, and ° 8 miles west of the 357 bearing from the number). Persons with hearing or no extraordinary circumstances exist Millen NDB extending from the 7.3-mile speech impairments may access this that warrant preparation of an radius to 16 miles north of the airport. number through TTY by calling the toll- environmental assessment. Issued in College Park, Georgia, on August free Federal Relay Service at 800–877– Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 16, 2012. 8339. Barry A. Knight, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern I. Background Navigation (air). Service Center, Air Traffic Organization. [FR Doc. 2012–20809 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] As part of HUD’s efforts to strengthen Adoption of the Amendment FHA risk management, HUD published BILLING CODE 4910–13–P In consideration of the foregoing, the a final rule on April 20, 2010, entitled, Federal Aviation Administration ‘‘Federal Housing Administration: proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as Continuation of FHA Reform; follows: Strengthening Risk Management Through Responsible FHA-Approved
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51466 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Lenders’’ (75 FR 20718). The April 20, of net worth that must be held in liquid third-party originator may hold a Title 2010, final rule increased the net worth assets. This difference is due to the I Contract of Insurance or Title II requirement for FHA-approved lenders grammatical context in which these Origination Approval Agreement if it is and mortgagees, eliminated HUD’s provisions are located. also an FHA-approved lender or approval of loan correspondents, and While the intent of the final rule was mortgagee. amended the general approval standards that the liquidity requirements apply C. Consistent Use of the Term for lenders and mortgagees. This final solely to the required minimum net ‘‘Sponsored Third-Party Originator’’ in rule makes the following nonsubstantive worth, HUD is concerned that the FHA Regulations clarifications and corrections to the variation in wording is unclear and has provisions of the April 20, 2010, final the potential to confuse lenders and In addition, this rule will make rule. The changes will improve the regulators alike. HUD has consistently technical corrections to HUD’s clarity of HUD’s regulatory requirements interpreted the liquidity requirements as regulations by removing references to and, thereby, facilitate program applying to the required minimum net loan correspondents, loan originators, participant compliance and improve worth; however, questions have arisen and other outdated terms, where HUD’s ability to monitor and enforce its whether FHA-approved lenders and applicable. Where appropriate, this final risk management regulations. mortgagees are required to maintain rule replaces these terms with liquid assets equivalent to 20 percent of ‘‘sponsored third-party originator.’’ A. Liquidity REQUIREMENTS for FHA- their total net worth. In order to However, since HUD does not approve Approved Lenders and Mortgagees alleviate confusion and institute clarity, sponsored third-party originators, The revised net worth requirements this final rule amends § 202.5(n)(2)(iii) references to loan correspondents, loan established by the April 20, 2010, final and (iv) to explicitly refer to the originators, and like phrases will be rule are codified in 24 CFR 202.5(n). As approved lender or mortgagee’s required removed without replacement where the of May 20, 2011, FHA-approved non- minimum net worth. regulations are applicable only to FHA- small business lenders and mortgagees In addition, this final rule makes a approved entities. were required to have a minimum net related technical correction to § 202.7, The HUD regulations affected by these worth of $1 million ‘‘of which no less which sets forth requirements governing corrections are those governing the than 20 percent must be liquid assets nonsupervised lenders and mortgagees. Mortgagee Review Board (24 CFR part consisting of cash or its equivalent This final rule removes outdated 25), civil money penalties (24 CFR part acceptable to the Secretary’’ paragraph (b)(2) of § 202.7, which 30), FHA Title I property improvements (§ 202.5(n)(2)(iii)). As of that same date, formerly contained the liquidity and manufactured home loans (24 CFR existing FHA-approved small business requirements for nonsupervised lenders part 201), approval of lending lenders and mortgagees were required to and mortgagees, but has been institutions and mortgagees (24 CFR have a minimum net worth of $500,000 superseded by the liquidity part 202), single-family mortgage ‘‘of which no less than 20 percent must requirements established by the April insurance (24 CFR part 203) and home be liquid assets consisting of cash or its 20, 2010, final rule at § 202.5(n). Section equity conversions mortgage insurance equivalent acceptable to the Secretary’’ 202.5(n) specifies that the new net (24 CFR part 206). The specific (§ 202.5(n)(2)(iv)).1 worth and liquidity requirements regulations revised by this final rule are By May 20, 2013, all FHA-approved ‘‘apply to supervised and nonsupervised §§ 25.3, 25.5, 25.6, 30.10, 30.36, 30.60, lenders and mortgagees, irrespective of lenders and mortgagees.’’ 201.2, 202.8, 203.5, 203.255, and 206.31. size, are required to have a minimum B. Definition of Sponsored Third-Party II. Justification for Final Rulemaking net worth of $1 million, plus an Originator additional net worth of one percent of In general, HUD publishes a rule for the total volume in excess of $25 The April 20, 2010, final rule public comment before issuing a rule for million of FHA single-family insured eliminated HUD’s approval of loan effect, in accordance with HUD’s mortgages originated, underwritten, correspondents. Loan correspondents regulations on rulemaking at 24 CFR purchased, or serviced during the prior may continue to participate in the part 10. Part 10, however, provides, in fiscal year. Further, the regulations origination of FHA mortgage loans as § 10.1, for exceptions from that general require that ‘‘[n]o less than 20 percent sponsored third-party originators rule where HUD finds good cause to of the * * * required net worth must be through association with a sponsoring omit advance notice and public liquid assets consisting of cash or its FHA-approved mortgagee, but participation. The good cause equivalent acceptable to the Secretary’’ sponsored third-party originators are no requirement is satisfied when the prior (§ 202.5(n)(3)(i)). longer subject to the FHA lender public procedure is ‘‘impracticable, As the quoted language above approval process. unnecessary, or contrary to the public indicates, the wording of the liquidity Removing the required HUD approval interest.’’ requirement differs slightly between for loan correspondents was not meant HUD finds that good cause exists to § 202.5(n)(2)(iii) and (iv) (which to preclude FHA-approved mortgagees publish this rule for effect without establishes the requirements effective on from acting as sponsored third-party soliciting public comment, on the basis May 20, 2011) and § 202.5(n)(3)(i) originators. However, the current that public procedure is unnecessary. (which establishes the requirements definition of a sponsored third-party All of the changes made by this rule are effective on May 20, 2013). Specifically, originator in § 202.8(a)(3) could be read technical in nature and do not make any § 202.5(n)(2)(iii) and (iv) omit the word as prohibiting FHA-approved substantive changes to HUD’s ‘‘required’’ when referring to the portion mortgagees from acting as sponsored requirements for individuals and third-party originators. It states that a entities participating in FHA programs. 1 A small business lender or mortgagee is an ‘‘third-party originator does not hold a This rule merely makes conforming existing lender or mortgagee whose size is less than Title I Contract of Insurance or Title II changes to provisions regarding the or equal to ‘‘the size standard for its industry Origination Approval agreement liquidity requirements of FHA-approved classification established by the Small Business lenders and mortgagees in order to Administration at 13 CFR 121.201 Sector 52 * * *.’’ This final rule revises the (Finance and Insurance), Subsector 522 (Credit definition of a sponsored third-party provide clarification, removes or Intermediation and Related Activities).’’ originator to clarify that a sponsored replaces obsolete references to ‘‘loan
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51467
correspondents’’ and other outdated Unfunded Mandates Reform Act PART 25—MORTGAGEE REVIEW terms, and clarifies the original intent of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates BOARD the sponsored third-party originator Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531– ■ 1. The authority citation for part 25 definition. 1538) (UMRA) establishes requirements continues to read as follows: III. Findings and Certifications for federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on state, Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1708(c), 1708(d), Regulatory Flexibility Act local, and tribal governments, and on 1709(s), 1715b, and 1735(f)–14; 42 U.S.C. the private sector. This final rule would 3535(d). The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) not impose any federal mandates on any (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) generally requires ■ state, local, or tribal governments, or on 2. In § 25.3, remove the definition of an agency to conduct a regulatory the private sector, within the meaning of ‘‘Loan correspondent’’ and revise the flexibility analysis of any rule subject to the UMRA. definition of ‘‘Mortgagee’’ to read as notice and comment rulemaking follows: requirements unless the agency certifies Catalogue of Federal Domestic that the rule will not have a significant Assistance § 25.3 Definitions. economic impact on a substantial The Catalogue of Federal Domestic * * * * * Mortgagee. For purposes of this part, number of small entities. As discussed Assistance Number for the principal above in this preamble, this rule does FHA single-family mortgage insurance the term ‘‘mortgagee’’ includes: (1) The original lender under the not establish or revise any FHA program program is 14.117. requirements. This final rule is limited mortgage, as that term is defined at to conforming changes, technical List of Subjects sections 201(a) and 207(a)(1) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. corrections, and clarifications that 24 CFR Part 25 reflect existing requirements. The rule 1707(a), 1713(a)(1)); Administrative practice and does not make any substantive changes (2) A lender, as defined in this procedure, Loan programs—housing to HUD’s regulations and, therefore, section; and community development, does not affect a substantial number of (3) A branch office or subsidiary of Organization and functions small entities. Accordingly, for the the mortgagee or lender; or (Government agencies), Reporting and (4) Successors and assigns of the above reasons, the undersigned certifies recordkeeping requirements. mortgagee or lender, as are approved by that this rule will not have a significant the Commissioner. economic impact on a substantial 24 CFR Part 30 * * * * * number of small entities. Administrative practice and ■ 3. In § 25.5, revise paragraphs (d)(1)(ii) Executive Order 13132, Federalism procedure, Grant programs—housing and community development, Loan and (e)(1)(ii) to read as follows: Executive Order 13132 (entitled programs—housing and community § 25.5 Administrative actions. ‘‘Federalism’’) prohibits an agency from development, Mortgages, Penalties. * * * * * publishing any rule that has federalism 24 CFR Part 201 (d) * * * implications if the rule either imposes (1) * * * substantial direct compliance costs on Claims, Health facilities, Historic (ii) During the period of suspension, state and local governments and is not preservation, Home improvement, Loan a lender may not originate new Title I required by statute, or the rule preempts programs—housing and community loans under its Title I Contract of state law, unless the agency meets the development, Manufactured homes, Insurance or apply for a new Contract of consultation and funding requirements Mortgage insurance, Reporting and Insurance. recording requirements. of section 6 of the Executive Order. This * * * * * rule will not have federalism 24 CFR Part 202 (e) * * * implications and would not impose Administrative practice and (1) * * * substantial direct compliance costs on procedure, Home improvement, (ii) During the period of withdrawal, state and local governments or preempt Manufactured homes, Mortgage a lender may not originate new Title I state law within the meaning of the insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping loans under its Title I Contract of Executive Order. requirements. Insurance or apply for a new Contract of Environmental Impact Insurance. The Board may limit the 24 CFR Part 203 geographical extent of the withdrawal, This rule does not direct, provide for Hawaiian Natives, Home or limit its scope (e.g., to either the assistance or loan and mortgage improvement, Indians—lands, Loan single family or multifamily activities of insurance for, or otherwise govern or programs—housing and community a withdrawn mortgagee). Upon the regulate, real property acquisition, development, Mortgage insurance, expiration of the period of withdrawal, disposition, leasing, rehabilitation, Reporting and recordkeeping the mortgagee may file a new alteration, demolition or new requirements, Solar energy. application for approval under 24 CFR construction, or establish, revise, or part 202. 24 CFR Part 206 provide for standards for construction or * * * * * construction materials, manufactured Aged, Condominiums, Loan ■ 4. Revise § 25.6(cc) to read as follows: housing, or occupancy. This rule is programs—housing and community limited to clarification and corrections development, Mortgage insurance, § 25.6 Violations creating grounds for to HUD’s regulations. Accordingly, Reporting and recordkeeping administrative action. under 24 CFR 50.19(c)(1), this rule is requirements. * * * * * categorically excluded from Accordingly, for the reasons stated in (cc) Violation by a Title I lender of environmental review under the the preamble, HUD amends 24 CFR any of the applicable provisions of this National Environmental Policy Act of parts 25, 30, 201, 202, 203, and 206, as section or 24 CFR 202.11(a)(2). 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321). follows: * * * * *
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51468 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
PART 30—CIVIL MONEY PENALTIES: (1) Holds a valid Title I contract of section for a non-small business CERTAIN PROHIBITED CONDUCT insurance and is approved by the approved lender or mortgagee by the Secretary under 24 CFR part 202 to last day of the fiscal year in which the ■ 5. The authority citation for part 30 originate, purchase, hold, service, and/ audited financial statement or other continues to read as follows: or sell loans insured under this part; or financial report, as applicable, was Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1701q–1, 1703, 1723i, (2) Is under suspension or holds a submitted. 1735f–14, and 1735f–15; 15 U.S.C. 1717a; 28 Title I contract of insurance that has * * * * * U.S.C. 2461 note; 42 U.S.C. 1437z–1 and been terminated, but that remains ■ 13. In § 202.7, revise paragraph (b)(1), 3535(d). responsible for servicing or selling Title remove paragraph (b)(2), and I loans that it holds and is authorized to redesignate paragraphs (b)(3), (4), and ■ 6. In § 30.10, remove the definition of file insurance claims on such loans. (5) as paragraphs (b)(2), (3), and (4), ‘‘Loan correspondent’’ and add the * * * * * respectively. definition of ‘‘Sponsored third-party The revision reads as follows: originator’’ in alphabetical order to read PART 202—APPROVAL OF LENDING as follows: INSTITUTIONS AND MORTGAGEES § 202.7 Nonsupervised lenders and mortgagees. § 30.10 Definitions. ■ 11. The authority citation for part 202 * * * * * * * * * * continues to read as follows: (b) * * * Sponsored third-party originator. A Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1703, 1709, and (1) Net worth and liquid assets. The sponsored third-party originator as 1715b; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d). net worth and liquidity requirements defined at § 202.8 of this title. ■ 12. In § 202.5, revise paragraphs appear in § 202.5(n). ■ 7. Revise § 30.36(a)(8) to read as (n)(2)(iii) and (iv) to read as follows: * * * * * follows: ■ 14. In § 202.8: § 202.5 General approval standards. § 30.36 Other participants in FHA ■ a. Revise the section heading; programs. * * * * * ■ b. In paragraph (a), revise the (a) * * * (n) * * * definition of ‘‘Sponsored third-party (8) Sponsored third-party originators; (2) * * * originator’’; (iii) Net worth requirements for non- ■ * * * * * c. Revise paragraph (b); and small businesses. Each approved lender ■ d. Remove paragraph (c). ■ 8. In § 30.60, revise the section or mortgagee that exceeds the size The revisions read as follows: heading, paragraph (a) introductory text, standard for its industry classification and paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows: established by the Small Business § 202.8 Sponsored third-party originators. § 30.60 Dealers or sponsored third-party Administration at 13 CFR 121.201 * * * * * originators. Sector 52 (Finance and Insurance), (a) * * * (a) General. The Assistant Secretary Subsector 522 (Credit Intermediation Sponsored third-party originator. A for Housing-Federal Housing and Related Activities) shall have a sponsored third-party originator may Commissioner, or his or her designee, required minimum net worth of not less hold a Title I Contract of Insurance or may initiate a civil money penalty than $1,000,000. No less than 20 percent Title II Origination Approval Agreement action against any dealer or sponsored of the approved lender or mortgagee’s if it is an FHA-approved lender or third-party originator that violates required minimum net worth must be mortgagee. If the sponsored third-party section 2(b)(7) of the National Housing liquid assets consisting of cash or its originator is not an FHA-approved Act (12 U.S.C. 1703). Such violations equivalent acceptable to the Secretary. lender or mortgagee, then the sponsored include, but are not limited to: (iv) Net worth requirements for small third-party originator may not hold a businesses. Each approved lender or Title I Contract of Insurance or Title II * * * * * mortgagee that meets the size standard Origination Approval Agreement. A (3) Failing to sign a credit application for its industry classification established sponsored third-party originator is if the dealer or sponsored third-party by the Small Business Administration at authorized to originate Title I direct originator assisted the borrower in 13 CFR 121.201 Sector 52 (Finance and loans or Title II mortgage loans for sale completing the application; Insurance), Subsector 522 (Credit or transfer to a sponsor or sponsors, as * * * * * Intermediation and Related Activities) defined in this section, that holds a shall have a required minimum net valid Title I Contract of Insurance or PART 201—TITLE I PROPERTY worth of not less than $500,000. No less Title II Origination Approval Agreement IMPROVEMENT AND MANUFACTURED than 20 percent of the approved lender and is not under suspension, subject to HOME LOANS or mortgagee’s required minimum net the sponsor determining that the third- ■ 9. The authority citation for part 201 worth must be liquid assets consisting party originator has met the eligibility is amended to read as follows: of cash or its equivalent acceptable to criteria of paragraph (b) of this section. the Secretary. If, based on the audited (b) Eligibility to originate loans to be Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1703; 42 U.S.C. financial statement or other financial insured by FHA. A sponsored third- 3535(d). report that is required to be prepared at party originator may originate loans to ■ 10. In § 201.2, remove the definition the end of its fiscal year and provided be insured by FHA, provided that: of ‘‘Loan correspondent’’ and revise the to HUD at the commencement of the (1) The sponsored third-party definition of ‘‘Lender’’ to read as new fiscal year, an approved lender or originator is working with and through follows: mortgagee no longer meets the Small an FHA-approved lender or mortgagee; Business Administration size standard and § 201.2 Definitions. for its industry classification, the (2) The sponsored third-party * * * * * approved lender or mortgagee shall originator or an officer, partner, director, Lender means a financial institution meet the net worth requirements set principal, manager, supervisor, loan that: forth in paragraph (n)(2)(iii) of this processor, or loan originator of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51469
sponsored third-party originator has not applicable handbook or similar Hayot, Senior Attorney, (202) 663–4695, been subject to the sanctions or publication that is distributed to all Office of Legal Counsel, 131 M St. NE., administrative actions listed in Direct Endorsement mortgagees; Washington, DC 20507. Copies of this § 202.5(j), as determined and verified by * * * * * final rule are available in the following the FHA-approved lender or mortgagee. alternate formats: Large print, Braille, ■ 15. Revise § 202.12(a)(1)(ii) to read as PART 206—HOME EQUITY electronic computer disk, and audio- follows: CONVERSION MORTGAGE tape. Requests for this notice in an INSURANCE alternative formal should be made to the § 202.12 Title II. Publications Center at 1–800–699–3362 * * * * * ■ 19. The authority citation for part 206 (voice), 1–800–800–3302 (TTY), or 703– (a) * * * continues to read as follows: 821–2098 (Fax—this is not a toll free (1) * * * Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1715b, 1715z–1720; number). (ii) Customary lending practices. The 42 U.S.C. 3535(d). customary lending practices of a SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ■ 20. In § 206.31, revise paragraph (a)(1) mortgagee include all single family Regulatory Procedures insured mortgages originated by the to read as follows: Executive Order 12866 mortgagee, including mortgages that § 206.31 Allowable charges and fees. were originated by the mortgagee’s This action pertains to agency (a) * * * sponsored third-party originator(s). organization, management or personnel (1) A charge to compensate the matters and therefore is not a rule * * * * * mortgagee for expenses incurred in within the meaning of section 3(d)(3) of originating and closing the mortgage PART 203—SINGLE FAMILY Executive Order 12866. MORTGAGE INSURANCE loan, which may be fully financed with the mortgage. The Secretary may Paperwork Reduction Act ■ 16. The authority citation for part 203 establish limitations on the amount of This regulation contains no new continues to read as follows: any such charge. HUD will publish any information collection requirements such limit in the Federal Register at Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1709, 1710, 1715b, subject to review by the Office of 1715z–16, 1715u, and 1717z-21; 42 U.S.C. least 30 days before the limitation takes Management and Budget under the 3535(d). effect. The mortgagor is not permitted to Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. pay any additional origination fee of any ■ chapter 35). 17. Revise § 203.5(e)(3) to read as kind to a mortgage broker or sponsored follows: third-party originator. A mortgage Regulatory Flexibility Act § 203.5 Direct Endorsement process. broker’s fee can be included as part of The Commission certifies under 5 * * * * * the origination fee only if the mortgage U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have (e) * * * broker is engaged independently by the a significant economic impact on a (3) A mortgagee and an appraiser homeowner and there is no financial substantial number of small entities must ensure that an appraisal and interest between the mortgage broker because it does not affect any small related documentation satisfy FHA and the mortgagee. business entities. The regulation affects appraisal requirements, and both bear * * * * * only federal agencies, federal responsibility for the quality of the Dated: August 20, 2012. employees, and applicants for federal appraisal in satisfying such Carol J. Galante, employment. For this reason, a requirements. A Direct Endorsement regulatory flexibility analysis is not Acting Assistant Secretary for Housing— Mortgagee that submits, or causes to be Federal Housing Commissioner. required. submitted, an appraisal or related [FR Doc. 2012–20924 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 documentation that does not satisfy FHA requirements is subject to BILLING CODE 4210–67–P This final rule will not result in the administrative sanction by the expenditure by State, local, or tribal Mortgagee Review Board pursuant to governments, in the aggregate, or by the parts 25 and 30 of this title. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY private sector, of $100 million or more ■ 18. Revise § 203.255(b)(11) to read as COMMISSION in any one year, and it will not follows: significantly or uniquely affect small 29 CFR Part 1614 governments. Therefore, no actions were § 203.255 Insurance of mortgage. RIN 3046–ZA00 deemed necessary under the provisions * * * * * of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (b) * * * Change of Address for Merit Systems of 1995. (11) A mortgage certification on a Protection Board form prescribed by the Secretary, stating Congressional Review Act that the authorized representative of the AGENCY: Equal Employment This action pertains to the mortgagee who is making the Opportunity Commission. Commission’s management, personnel certification has personally reviewed ACTION: Final rule. and organization and does not the mortgage documents and the substantially affect the rights or application for insurance endorsement, SUMMARY: This final rule revises an obligations of non-agency parties and, and certifying that the mortgage existing EEOC regulation to correct the accordingly, is not a ‘‘rule’’ as that term complies with the requirements of address of the Merit Systems Protection is used by the Congressional Review Act paragraph (b) of this section. The Board. (Subtitle E of the Small Business certification shall incorporate each of DATES: Effective August 24, 2012. Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of the mortgagee certification items that FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1996 (SBREFA)). Therefore, the apply to the mortgage loan submitted for Thomas J. Schlageter, Assistant Legal reporting requirement of 5 U.S.C. 801 endorsement, as set forth in the Counsel, (202) 663–4668, or Danielle J. does not apply.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51470 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 1614 Bridge; the Treasure Island Causeway Bridge; the Pinellas Bayway Structure Administrative practice and Bridge; the Corey Causeway/Pasadena ‘‘C’’ (SR 679) Bridge; and Johns Pass procedure, equal employment Avenue Bridge; the Pinellas Bayway Bridge across Johns Pass, Madeira opportunity, government employees. Structure ‘‘C’’ (SR 679) Bridge; and Beach, Florida. Johns Pass Bridge. These deviations will result in these For the Commission. DATES: These deviations are effective seven bridges remaining in the closed Dated: August 2, 2012. from 3 p.m. on August 26, 2012 through position at certain times during the RNC Jacqueline A. Berrien, 7 p.m. on August 30, 2012. from August 26, 2012, through August Chair. ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in 30, 2012. The temporary deviations will Accordingly, the Equal Employment this preamble as being available in the close these bridges during the following Opportunity Commission amends 29 docket are part of docket USCG–2012– periods: from 3:30 p.m. through 7:30 CFR part 1614 as follows: 0746 and are available online by going p.m. on August 26, 2012; 11 a.m. to 2 to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting p.m. and 3:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. on PART 1614—FEDERAL SECTOR USCG–2012–0746 in the ‘‘Keyword’’ August 27, 2012; 3:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY box and then clicking ‘‘Search’’. They on August 28, 2012; 3:30 p.m. to 6:30 are also available for inspection or p.m. on August 29, 2012; and from 3:30 ■ 1. The authority citation for part 1614 copying at the Docket Management p.m. to 6:30 p.m. on August 30, 2012. continues to read as follows: Facility (M–30), U.S. Department of Tugs and tugs with tows are not exempt Authority: 29 U.S.C. 206(d), 633a, 791 and Transportation, West Building Ground from this deviation. 794a; 42 U.S.C. 2000e–16 and 2000ff–6(e); Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey The details and regular operating E.O. 10577, 3 CFR, 1954–1958 Comp., p. 218; Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, schedule for each bridge are set forth E.O. 11222, 3 CFR 1964–1965 Comp., p. 306; between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday below. 1. Walsingham Road/Indian Rocks E.O. 11478, 3 CFR, 1969 Comp., p. 133; E.O. through Friday, except Federal holidays. 12106, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 263; Reorg. Beach (CR 688) Bridge, mile 128.2. The Plan No. 1 of 1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If normal operating schedule for the 321. you have questions on this rule, call or Walsingham Road/Indian Rocks Beach email Michael Lieberum, Seventh § 1614.303 [Amended] (CR 688) Bridge is set forth in 33 CFR District Bridge Branch, Coast Guard; 117.5. 33 CFR 117.5 requires the bridge ■ 2. In § 1614.303, paragraph (d) is telephone (305) 415–6744, email to open promptly and fully for the amended by removing the text ‘‘Clerk of [email protected]. If you passage of vessels when a request or the MSPB, 1120 Vermont Ave.’’ and have questions on viewing the docket, signal to open is given in accordance adding, in its place, the text ‘‘Clerk of call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, with this subpart. This bascule bridge the Board, MSPB, 1615 M Street’’. Docket Operations, telephone (202) has a vertical clearance of 21 feet in the [FR Doc. 2012–20867 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] 366–9826. closed position. Vessels are permitted to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION BILLING CODE 6570–01–P : Coast transit under this bridge in the closed Guard Sector St Petersburg, FL has position. requested temporary modifications to 2. Park Boulevard (CR 694) Bridge, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND the operating schedules of seven bridges mile 126.0. The normal operating SECURITY in St. Petersburg and Tampa, FL. schedule for the Park Boulevard Bridge Unrestricted vehicle access on these is set forth in 33 CFR 117.5. 33 CFR Coast Guard bridges during peak traffic periods is 117.5 requires the bridge to open necessary to ensure the security and promptly and fully for the passage of 33 CFR Part 117 safety of delegates and officials at the vessels when a request or signal to open RNC. Bridge openings during the listed is given in accordance with this subpart. [Docket No. USCG–2012–0746] times could disrupt or endanger the safe This bascule bridge has a vertical transit of officials and delegates between Drawbridge Operation Regulations; clearance of 20 feet in the closed their hotels and the site of the RNC. Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, St. position. Vessels are permitted to transit Numerous Federal, State, and local Petersburg/Tampa, FL under this bridge in the closed position. agencies, including U.S. Secret Service, 3. Welch/Tom Stuart Causeway/150th AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Avenue Bridge, mile 122.8. The normal ACTION: Notice of temporary deviations Customs and Border Protection, U.S. operating schedule for the Welch/Tom from regulations. Coast Guard, and the Joint Terrorism Stuart Causeway/150th Avenue Bridge Task Force have developed is set forth in 33 CFR 117.287(h). 33 SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued comprehensive security plans to protect CFR 117.287(h) requires the bridge to temporary deviations from the operating participants and the public during the open on signal, except that from 9:30 schedules that govern seven bridges in RNC. As part of the comprehensive a.m. to 6 p.m. on Saturdays, Sundays, St. Petersburg and Tampa, Florida. The effort, these bridge deviations are and Federal holidays, the draw need be deviations are necessary to allow for the necessary for the security and safety of opened only on the hour, 20 minutes safe transportation of officials and delegates, officials, and participants for after the hour and 40 minutes after the participants to the Republican National the 2012 Republican National hour. This bascule bridge has a vertical Convention (RNC). These deviations Convention. clearance of 25 feet in the closed will result in the seven bridges The seven bridges affected by this position. Vessels are permitted to transit remaining in the closed position for the temporary deviation are: the under this bridge in the closed position. time periods listed. This temporary Walsingham Road/Indian Rocks Beach 4. Treasure Island Causeway Bridge, deviation affects the following bridges: (CR 688) Bridge; the Park Boulevard (CR mile 119.0. The normal operating The Walsingham Road/Indian Rocks 694) Bridge; the Welch/Tom Stuart schedule for the Treasure Island Beach (CR 688) Bridge; the Park Causeway/150th Avenue Bridge; the Causeway Bridge is set forth in 33 CFR Boulevard (CR 694) Bridge; the Welch/ Treasure Island Causeway Bridge; the 117.5. 33 CFR 117.5 requires the bridge Tom Stuart Causeway/150th Avenue Corey Causeway/Pasadena Avenue to open promptly and fully for the
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51471
passage of vessels when a request or DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND FR Federal Register signal to open is given in accordance SECURITY NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking with this subpart. This bascule bridge A. Regulatory History and Information has a vertical clearance of 21 feet in the Coast Guard closed position. Vessels are permitted to On March, 13 2012, we published a transit under this bridge in the closed 33 CFR Part 165 notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) entitled Safety Zone; Swim Around position. [Docket No. USCG–2012–0137] 5. Corey Causeway/Pasadena Avenue Charleston, Charleston, SC in the Bridge, mile 117.7. The normal RIN 1625–AA00 Federal Register (77 FR 14700). We operating schedule for the Corey received no comments on the proposed Causeway/Pasadena Avenue Bridge is Safety Zone; Swim Around Charleston, rule. No public meeting was requested, set forth in 33 CFR 117.287(f). 33 CFR Charleston, SC and none was held. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast 117.287(f) requires the bridge to open on AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. Guard finds that good cause exists for signal, except that from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. ACTION: Temporary final rule. Monday through Friday and 10 a.m. to making this rule effective less than 30 7 p.m. on Saturdays, Sundays, and SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is days after publication in the Federal Federal holidays, the draw need be establishing a temporary moving safety Register. This event will occur before 30 opened only on the hour, 20 minutes zone during the Swim Around days have elapsed after the publication after the hour and 40 minutes after the Charleston, a swimming race occurring of the rule in the Federal Register. hour. This bascule bridge has a vertical on waters of the Wando River, the Insufficient time was available to clearance of 23 feet in the closed Cooper River, Charleston Harbor, and provide both a period for meaningful position. Vessels are permitted to transit the Ashley River, in Charleston, South comment and also a 30 day period after under this bridge in the closed position. Carolina. The Swim Around Charleston publication for the effective date of this 6. Pinellas Bayway Structure ‘‘C’’ (SR is scheduled to take place on Sunday, temporary final rule. 679) Bridge, mile 114.0. The normal September 23, 2012. The temporary B. Basis and Purpose operating schedule for the Pinellas safety zone is necessary for the safety of Bayway Structure ‘‘C’’ (SR 679) Bridge the swimmers, participant vessels, (a) The legal basis for the rule is the is set forth in 33 CFR 117.287(e). 33 CFR spectators, and the general public Coast Guard’s authority to establish 117.287(e) requires the bridge to open during the event. Persons and vessels regulated navigation areas and other on signal, except that from 7 a.m. to 7 are prohibited from entering, transiting limited access areas: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 p.m., the draw need open only on the through, anchoring in, or remaining U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 hour, 20 minutes after the hour and 40 within the safety zone unless authorized U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, minutes after the hour. This bascule by the Captain of the Port Charleston or 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. bridge has a vertical clearance of 25 feet a designated representative. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. in the closed position. Vessels are DATES: This rule is effective from 7 a.m. permitted to transit under this bridge in until 2 p.m. on September 23, 2012. (b) The purpose of the rule is to ensure the safety of the swimmers, the closed position. ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in participant vessels, spectators, and the 7. Johns Pass Bridge, mile 1.0. The this preamble are part of docket USCG– general public during the Swim Around normal operating schedule for the Johns 2012–0137. To view documents Charleston. Pass Bridge is set forth in 33 CFR 117.5. mentioned in this preamble as being 33 CFR 117.5 requires the bridge to available in the docket, go to http:// C. Discussion of Comments, Changes open promptly and fully for the passage www.regulations.gov, type the docket and the Final Rule of vessels when a request or signal to number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click open is given in accordance with this The Coast Guard did not receive any ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket comments to the proposed rule, and no subpart. This bascule bridge has a Folder on the line associated with this vertical clearance of 28 feet in the changes were made to the regulatory rulemaking. You may also visit the text. closed position. Vessels are permitted to Docket Management Facility in Room transit under this bridge in the closed W12–140 on the ground floor of the D. Regulatory Analyses position. Department of Transportation West Any vessel requiring emergency We developed this rule after Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., considering numerous statutes and opening of any of these seven bridges Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. should make a request to the Captain of executive orders related to rulemaking. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, Below we summarize our analyses the Port St. Petersburg by telephone at except Federal holidays. (727) 824–7524. based on 13 of these statutes or In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If executive orders. you have questions on this rule, call or these drawbridges must return to their 1. Regulatory Planning and Review regular operating schedules email Lieutenant Junior Grade John R. immediately at the end of the Santorum, Sector Charleston Office of This rule is not a significant designated time period. These Waterways Management, Coast Guard; regulatory action under section 3(f) of deviations from the operating telephone 843–740–3184, email Executive Order 12866, Regulatory regulations are authorized under 33 CFR [email protected]. If you have Planning and Review, as supplemented 117.35. questions on viewing or submitting by Executive Order 13563, Improving material to the docket, call Renee V. Regulation and Regulatory Review, and Dated: August 15, 2012. Wright, Program Manager, Docket does not require an assessment of B.L. Dragon, Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. potential costs and benefits under Bridge Program Director, Seventh Coast SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 Guard District. or under section 1 of Executive Order [FR Doc. 2012–20829 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Table of Acronyms 13563. The office of Management and BILLING CODE 9110–04–P DHS Department of Homeland Security Budget has not reviewed it under those
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51472 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Orders. The economic impact of this listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION taking implications under Executive rule is not significant for the following CONTACT, above. Order 12630, Governmental Actions and reasons: (1) The safety zone will only be Small businesses may send comments Interference with Constitutionally enforced for a total of seven hours; (2) on the actions of Federal employees Protected Property Rights. the safety zone will move with the who enforce, or otherwise determine 9. Civil Justice Reform participant vessels so that once the compliance with, Federal regulations to swimmers clear a portion of the the Small Business and Agriculture This rule meets applicable standards waterway, the safety zone will no longer Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive be enforced in that portion of the and the Regional Small Business Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to waterway; (3) although persons and Regulatory Fairness Boards. The minimize litigation, eliminate vessels may not enter, transit through, Ombudsman evaluates these actions ambiguity, and reduce burden. anchor in, or remain within the safety annually and rates each agency’s 10. Protection of Children zone without authorization from the responsiveness to small business. If you Captain of the Port Charleston or a wish to comment on actions by We have analyzed this rule under designated representative, they may employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– Executive Order 13045, Protection of operate in the surrounding area during 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The Children from Environmental Health the enforcement period; (4) persons and Coast Guard will not retaliate against Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not vessels may still enter, transit through, small entities that question or complain an economically significant rule and anchor in, or remain within the safety about this rule or any policy or action does not create an environmental risk to zone if authorized by the Captain of the of the Coast Guard. health or risk to safety that may Port Charleston or a designated disproportionately affect children. 4. Collection of Information representative; and (5) the Coast Guard 11. Indian Tribal Governments will provide advance notification of the This rule will not call for a new safety zone to the local maritime collection of information under the This rule does not have tribal community by Local Notice to Mariners Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 implications under Executive Order and Broadcast Notice to Mariners. U.S.C. 3501–3520). 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 2. Impact on Small Entities 5. Federalism because it does not have a substantial The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 A rule has implications for federalism direct effect on one or more Indian (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, under Executive Order 13132, tribes, on the relationship between the requires federal agencies to consider the Federalism, if it has a substantial direct Federal Government and Indian tribes, potential impact of regulations on small effect on States, on the relationship or on the distribution of power and entities during rulemaking. The term between the national government and responsibilities between the Federal ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small the States, or on the distribution of Government and Indian tribes. businesses, not-for-profit organizations power and responsibilities among the 12. Energy Effects that are independently owned and various levels of government. We have operated and are not dominant in their analyzed this rule under that Order and This action is not a ‘‘significant fields, and governmental jurisdictions determined that this rule does not have energy action’’ under Executive Order with populations of less than 50,000. implications for federalism. 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 605(b) that this rule will not have a 6. Protest Activities Distribution, or Use. The Coast Guard respects the First significant economic impact on a 13. Technical Standards substantial number of small entities. Amendment rights of protesters. (1) This rule would affect the Protesters are asked to contact the This rule does not use technical following entities, some of which may person listed in the FOR FURTHER standards. Therefore, we did not be small entities: The owners or INFORMATION CONTACT section to consider the use of voluntary consensus operators of vessels intending to transit coordinate protest activities so that your standards. or anchor in a portion of the Wando message can be received without 14. Environment River, the Cooper River, Charleston jeopardizing the safety or security of Harbor, or the Ashley River in people, places or vessels. We have analyzed this rule under Charleston, South Carolina from 7 a.m. Department of Homeland Security 7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act until 2 p.m. on September 23, 2012. Management Directive 023–01 and (2) For the reasons discussed in the The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, Regulatory Planning and Review section of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires which guide the Coast Guard in above, this rule will not have a Federal agencies to assess the effects of complying with the National significant economic impact on a their discretionary regulatory actions. In Environmental Policy Act of 1969 substantial number of small entities. particular, the Act addresses actions (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and that may result in the expenditure by a have determined that this action is one 3. Assistance for Small Entities State, local, or tribal government, in the of a category of actions that do not Under section 213(a) of the Small aggregate, or by the private sector of individually or cumulatively have a Business Regulatory Enforcement $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or significant effect on the human Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), more in any one year. Though this rule environment. This rule involves a we want to assist small entities in will not result in such an expenditure, temporary moving safety zone on waters understanding this rule. If the rule we do discuss the effects of this rule of the Wando River, the Cooper River, would affect your small business, elsewhere in this preamble. Charleston Harbor, and the Ashley organization, or governmental River, in Charleston, South Carolina jurisdiction and you have questions 8. Taking of Private Property during the Swim Around Charleston concerning its provisions or options for This rule will not cause a taking of event on Sunday, September 23, 2012. compliance, please contact the person private property or otherwise have Persons and vessels are prohibited from
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51473
entering, transiting through, anchoring (2) Persons and vessels desiring to www.regulations.gov, type the docket in, or remaining within the safety zone enter, transit through, anchor in, or number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click unless authorized by the Captain of the remain within the regulated area may ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket Port Charleston or a designated contact the Captain of the Port Folder on the line associated with this representative. This rule is categorically Charleston by telephone at 843–740– rulemaking. You may also visit the excluded from further review under 7050, or a designated representative via Docket Management Facility in Room paragraph (34)(g) of Figure 2–1 of the VHF radio on channel 16, to request W12–140 on the ground floor of the Commandant Instruction. We seek any authorization. If authorization to enter, Department of Transportation West comments or information that may lead transit through, anchor in, or remain Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., to the discovery of a significant within the regulated area is granted by Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. environmental impact from this rule. the Captain of the Port Charleston or a and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, designated representative, all persons except Federal holidays. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 and vessels receiving such authorization FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation must comply with the instructions of you have questions on this rule, call or (water), Reporting and recordkeeping the Captain of the Port Charleston or a email Ensign Kimberly Farnsworth, requirements, Security measures, designated representative. Coast Guard; Telephone (718) 354–4163, Waterways. (3) The Coast Guard will provide email [email protected]. For the reasons discussed in the notice of the regulated area by Local If you have questions on viewing or preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to submitting material to the docket, call CFR part 165 as follows: Mariners, and on-scene designated Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, representatives. Docket Operations, telephone (202) PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION (d) Effective Date. This rule is 366–9826. AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS effective from 7 a.m. until 2 p.m. on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: September 23, 2012. ■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 Table of Acronyms continues to read as follows: Dated: August 11, 2012. M.F. White, DHS Department of Homeland Security Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. FR Federal Register Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Charleston. NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. COTP Captain of the Port 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of [FR Doc. 2012–20830 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. BILLING CODE 9110–04–P A. Regulatory History and Information ■ 2. Add a temporary § 165.T07–0137 to On June 12, 2012, we published a read as follows: notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND entitled Bostock 50th Anniversary § 165.T07–0137 Safety Zone; Swim Around SECURITY Fireworks, Long Island Sound; Charleston, Charleston, SC. Coast Guard Manursing Island, NY in the Federal (a) Regulated Area. The following Register (77 FR 34894). We received no regulated area is a moving safety zone: 33 CFR Part 165 comments on the proposed rule. No All waters within a 75-yard radius public meeting was requested and none around Swim Around Charleston [Docket Number USCG–2012–0385] was held. participant vessels that are officially RIN 1625–AA00 Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast associated with the swim. The Swim Guard finds that good cause exists for Around Charleston swimming race Safety Zone; Bostock 50th Anniversary making this rule effective less than 30 consists of a 10-mile course that starts Fireworks, Long Island Sound; days after publication in the Federal at Remley’s Point on the Wando River Manursing Island, NY Register. This event will occur before 30 in approximate position 32°48′49″ N, days have elapsed after the publication 79°54′27″ W, crosses the main shipping AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. of the rule. The event sponsor is unable channel of Charleston Harbor, and ACTION: Final rule. to postpone this event because the date finishes at the General William B. of this event was chosen based on an SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is Westmoreland Bridge on the Ashley anniversary date. In addition, any establishing a temporary safety zone on River in approximate position 32°50′14″ change to the date of the event would the navigable waters of Long Island N, 80°01′23″ W. All coordinates are cause economic hardship on the marine Sound in the vicinity of Manursing North American Datum 1983. event sponsor and negatively impact Island, NY for a fireworks display. This (b) Definition. The term ‘‘designated other activities being held in temporary safety zone is necessary to representative’’ means Coast Guard conjunction with this event. Patrol Commanders, including Coast protect spectators and vessels from the Guard coxswains, petty officers, and hazards associated with fireworks B. Basis and Purpose other officers operating Coast Guard displays. This rule is intended to restrict The legal basis for this rule is 33 vessels, and Federal, state, and local all vessels from a portion of Long Island U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, officers designated by or assisting the Sound before, during, and immediately 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR Captain of the Port Charleston in the after the fireworks event. 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Public enforcement of the regulated area. DATES: This rule is effective from 9:45 Law 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; (c) Regulations. (1) All persons and p.m. until 10:50 p.m. on September 8, Department of Homeland Security vessels are prohibited from entering, 2012. Delegation No. 0170.1. transiting through, anchoring in, or ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in This temporary safety zone is remaining within the regulated area this preamble are part of docket [USCG– necessary to ensure the safety of unless authorized by the Captain of the 2012–0385]. To view documents spectators and vessels from hazards Port Charleston or a designated mentioned in this preamble as being associated with the fireworks display. representative. available in the docket, go to http:// The safety zone will be enforced for 65
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51474 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
minutes, which includes the launch and the following reasons. This safety zone message can be received without cool down requirements. will be enforced for only 65 minutes. jeopardizing the safety or security of Vessel traffic can pass safely through the people, places or vessels. C. Discussion of Comments, Changes safety zone with permission from the and the Final Rule 7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act COTP or a designated representative. No comments were received. The Before activating the zone, we will The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Coast Guard did not make any changes notify mariners by appropriate means of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires in this final rule that were not published including but not limited to Local Federal agencies to assess the effects of in the NPRM. Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions D. Regulatory Analyses to Mariners. that may result in the expenditure by a We developed this rule after 3. Assistance for Small Entities State, local, or tribal government, in the considering numerous statutes and Under section 213(a) of the Small aggregate, or by the private sector of executive orders related to rulemaking. Business Regulatory Enforcement $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or Below we summarize our analyses Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), more in any one year. Though this rule based on 13 of these statutes or we want to assist small entities in will not result in such an expenditure, executive orders. understanding this rule. If the rule we do discuss the effects of this rule 1. Regulatory Planning and Review would affect your small business, elsewhere in this preamble. organization, or governmental This rule is not a significant jurisdiction and you have questions 8. Taking of Private Property regulatory action under section 3(f) of concerning its provisions or options for This rule will not cause a taking of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory compliance, please contact the person private property or otherwise have Planning and Review, as supplemented listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION taking implications under Executive by Executive Order 13563, Improving CONTACT, above. Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Regulation and Regulatory Review, and Small businesses may send comments Interference with Constitutionally does not require an assessment of on the actions of Federal employees Protected Property Rights. potential costs and benefits under who enforce, or otherwise determine 9. Civil Justice Reform section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 compliance with, Federal regulations to or under section 1 of Executive Order the Small Business and Agriculture This rule meets applicable standards 13563. The Office of Management and Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Budget has not reviewed it under those and the Regional Small Business Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to Orders. Regulatory Fairness Boards. The minimize litigation, eliminate We expect the economic impact of Ombudsman evaluates these actions ambiguity, and reduce burden. this rule to be very minimal. Although annually and rates each agency’s 10. Protection of Children this regulation may have some impact responsiveness to small business. If you on the public, the potential impact will wish to comment on actions by We have analyzed this rule under be minimized for the following reasons. employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– Executive Order 13045, Protection of Vessels will only be restricted from the 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The Children from Environmental Health safety zone for a short duration of time. Coast Guard will not retaliate against Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not Before activating the zone, we will small entities that question or complain an economically significant rule and notify mariners by appropriate means about this rule or any policy or action does not create an environmental risk to including but not limited to Local of the Coast Guard. health or risk to safety that may Notice to Mariners and Broadcast Notice disproportionately affect children. to Mariners. Furthermore, vessels may 4. Collection of Information 11. Indian Tribal Governments be authorized to transit the zones with This rule will not call for a new permission of the COTP New York or collection of information under the This rule does not have tribal designated representative. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination 2. Impact on Small Entities U.S.C. 3501–3520). with Indian Tribal Governments, The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 5. Federalism because it does not have a substantial (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, A rule has implications for federalism direct effect on one or more Indian requires federal agencies to consider the under Executive Order 13132, tribes, on the relationship between the potential impact of regulations on small Federalism, if it has a substantial direct Federal Government and Indian tribes, entities during rulemaking. The Coast effect on the States, on the relationship or on the distribution of power and Guard received no comments from the between the national government and responsibilities between the Federal Small Business Administration on this the States, or on the distribution of Government and Indian tribes. rule. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 power and responsibilities among the 12. Energy Effects U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have various levels of government. We have a significant economic impact on a analyzed this rule under that Order and This action is not a ‘‘significant substantial number of small entities. determined that this rule does not have energy action’’ under Executive Order (1) This rule would affect the implications for federalism. 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations following entities, some of which might That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, be small entities: The owners or 6. Protest Activities Distribution, or Use. operators of vessels intending to transit The Coast Guard respects the First or anchor in a portion of Long Island Amendment rights of protesters. 13. Technical Standards Sound during the effective period. Protesters are asked to contact the This rule does not use technical (2) This safety zone will not have a person listed in the FOR FURTHER standards. Therefore, we did not significant economic impact on a INTFORMATION CONTACT section to consider the use of voluntary consensus substantial number of small entities for coordinate protest activities so that your standards.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51475
14. Environment Port Sector New York (COTP), to act on necessary to protect life and property on We have analyzed this rule under his or her behalf. The designated the navigable waters of the Atlantic Department of Homeland Security representative may be on an official Ocean off the coast of Myrtle Beach, SC. Management Directive 023–01 and patrol vessel or may be on shore and Persons and vessels are prohibited from Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, will communicate with vessels via entering, transiting through, anchoring which guide the Coast Guard in VHF–FM radio or loudhailer. In in, or remaining within the safety zone complying with the National addition, members of the Coast Guard unless authorized by the Captain of the Environmental Policy Act of 1969 Auxiliary may be present to inform Port Charleston or a designated (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and vessel operators of this regulation. representative. have determined that this action is one (2) Official Patrol Vessels. Official DATES: This rule is effective from 9 p.m. of a category of actions that do not patrol vessels may consist of any Coast on September 1, 2012, until 10:15 p.m. individually or cumulatively have a Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, state, or on September 2, 2012. This rule will significant effect on the human local law enforcement vessels assigned only be enforced on September 2, 2012, environment. This rule involves or approved by the COTP. if the event is postponed from establishing a temporary safety zone. (3) Spectators. All persons and vessels September 1, 2012. This rule is categorically excluded from not registered with the event sponsor as ADDRESSES: Documents listed in this further review under paragraph 34(g) of participants or official patrol vessels. preamble are part of docket USCG– Figure 2–1 of the Commandant (d) Regulations. (1) The general 2012–0727. To view documents Instruction. An environmental analysis regulations contained in 33 CFR 165.23, mentioned in this preamble as being checklist supporting this determination as well as the following regulations, available in the docket, go to http:// and a Categorical Exclusion apply. www.regulations.gov, type the docket Determination are available in the (2) No vessels, except for fireworks number in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click docket where indicated under barge and accompanying vessels, will be ‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on the Open Docket allowed to transit the safety zone ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or Folder on the line associated with this information that may lead to the without the permission of the COTP. rulemaking. You may also visit the (3) All persons and vessels shall discovery of a significant environmental Docket Management Facility in Room comply with the instructions of the impact from this rule. W12–140 on the ground floor of the COTP or the designated representative. Department of Transportation West List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Marine safety, Navigation (water), Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. Reporting and recordkeeping light or other means, the operator of a and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, requirements, Waterways. vessel shall proceed as directed. except Federal holidays. (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter For the reasons discussed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 or operate within the regulated area you have questions on this rule, call or CFR part 165 as follows: shall contact the COTP or the email Lieutenant Junior Grade John R. designated representative via VHF Santorum, Sector Charleston Office of PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION channel 16 or 718–354–4353 (Sector Waterways Management, U.S. Coast AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREA New York command center) to obtain Guard; telephone (843) 740–3188, email permission to do so. [email protected]. If you have ■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 Dated: August 14, 2012. questions on viewing or submitting continues to read as follows: G. Loebl, material to the docket, call Renee V. Authority: 33 U.S.C 1231; 46 U.S.C Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Wright, Program Manager, Docket Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; Port New York. Operations, telephone (202) 366–9826. 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of [FR Doc. 2012–20831 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. BILLING CODE 9110–04–P Table of Acronyms ■ 2. Add § 165.T01–0385 to read as follows: DHS Department of Homeland Security DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND FR Federal Register § 165.T01–0385 Safety Zone; Bostock 50th SECURITY NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Anniversary Fireworks, Long Island Sound, Manursing Island, NY. Coast Guard A. Regulatory Information (a) Regulated Area. The following area The Coast Guard is issuing this is a temporary safety zone: All navigable 33 CFR Part 165 temporary final rule without prior waters of the Long Island Sound within [Docket No. USCG–2012–0727] notice and opportunity to comment a 240-yard radius of the fireworks barge pursuant to authority under section 4(a) RIN 1625–AA00 located in approximate position of the Administrative Procedure Act ° ′ ″ ° ′ ″ (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision 40 58 01 N, 073 39 24 W, in the Safety Zone; Apache Pier Labor Day authorizes an agency to issue a rule vicinity of Manursing Island, NY. Fireworks; Myrtle Beach, SC (b) Effective Period. This rule will be without prior notice and opportunity to effective from 9:45 p.m. to 10:50 p.m. on AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. comment when the agency for good September 8, 2012. ACTION: Temporary final rule. cause finds that those procedures are (c) Definitions. The following ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary definitions apply to this section: SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is to the public interest.’’ Under 5 U.S.C. (1) Designated Representative. A establishing a temporary safety zone on 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that ‘‘designated representative’’ is any Coast the waters of the Atlantic Ocean in the good cause exists for not publishing a Guard commissioned, warrant or petty vicinity of Apache Pier in Myrtle Beach, notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) officer of the U.S. Coast Guard who has SC, during the Labor Day fireworks with respect to this rule because the been designated by the Captain of the demonstration. This regulation is Coast Guard did not receive necessary
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51476 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
information regarding the fireworks Captain of the Port Charleston or a wish to comment on actions by displays until July 24, 2012. As a result, designated representative, they may employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– the Coast Guard did not have sufficient operate in the surrounding area during 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The time to publish an NPRM and to receive the enforcement period; (4) persons and Coast Guard will not retaliate against public comments prior to the fireworks vessels may still enter, transit through, small entities that question or complain display. Any delay in the effective date anchor in, or remain within the safety about this rule or any policy or action of this rule would be contrary to the zone if authorized by the Captain of the of the Coast Guard. public interest because immediate Port Charleston or a designated 4. Collection of Information action is needed to minimize potential representative; and (5) the Coast Guard danger to the public during the will provide advance notification of the This rule will not call for a new fireworks displays. safety zone to the local maritime collection of information under the Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast community by Marine Safety Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Guard finds that good cause exists for Information Bulletins, Local Notice to U.S.C. 3501–3520). making this rule effective less than 30 Mariners and Broadcast Notice to days after publication in the Federal Mariners. 5. Federalism Register for the reason stated above. The 2. Impact on Small Entities A rule has implications for federalism Coast Guard will issue a Local Notice to under Executive Order 13132, Mariners and Broadcast Notice to The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 Federalism, if it has a substantial direct Mariners to advise mariners of the (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, effect on the States, on the relationship restriction. requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small between the national government and B. Basis and Purpose entities during rulemaking. The term the States, or on the distribution of The legal basis for the rule is the ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small power and responsibilities among the Coast Guard’s authority to establish businesses, not-for-profit organizations various levels of government. We have regulated navigation areas and other that are independently owned and analyzed this rule under that Order and limited access areas: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 operated and are not dominant in their have determined that it does not have U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 fields, and governmental jurisdictions implications for federalism. U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, with populations of less than 50,000. 6. Protest Activities 6.04–6, 160.5; Public Law 107–295, 116 The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland 605(b) that this rule will not have a The Coast Guard respects the First Security Delegation No. 0170.1. significant economic impact on a Amendment rights of protesters. The purpose of the rule is to protect substantial number of small entities. Protesters are asked to contact the the public from the hazards associated (1) This rule would affect the person listed in the FOR FURTHER with the launching of fireworks over following entities, some of which might INFORMATION CONTACT section to navigable waters of the United States. be small entities: The owners or coordinate protest activities so that your operators of vessels intending to transit message can be received without C. Regulatory Analyses or anchor within the safety zone from 9 jeopardizing the safety or security of We developed this rule after p.m. to 10:15 p.m. on September 1, people, places or vessels. considering numerous statutes and 2012. executive orders related to rulemaking. (2) For the reasons discussed in the 7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Below we summarize our analyses Regulatory Planning and Review section The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act based on 14 of these statutes and above, this rule will not have a of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires executive orders. significant economic impact on a Federal agencies to assess the effects of substantial number of small entities. 1. Regulatory Planning and Review their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions This rule is not a significant 3. Assistance for Small Entities that may result in the expenditure by a regulatory action under section 3(f) of Under section 213(a) of the Small State, local, or tribal government, in the Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Business Regulatory Enforcement aggregate, or by the private sector of Planning and Review, as supplemented Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or by Executive Order 13563, Improving we want to assist small entities in more in any one year. Though this rule Regulation and Regulatory Review, and understanding this rule. If the rule will not result in such an expenditure, does not require an assessment of would affect your small business, we do discuss the effects of this rule potential costs and benefits under organization, or governmental elsewhere in this preamble. section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 jurisdiction and you have questions or under Section 1 of Executive Order concerning its provisions or options for 8. Taking of Private Property 13563. The Office of Management and compliance, please contact the person Budget has not reviewed it under those listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION This rule will not cause a taking of Orders. CONTACT, above. private property or otherwise have The economic impact of this rule is Small businesses may send comments taking implications under Executive not significant for the following reasons: on the actions of Federal employees Order 12630, Governmental Actions and (1) The safety zone will be enforced for who enforce, or otherwise determine Interference with Constitutionally a maximum of 1.25 hours on either compliance with, Federal regulations to Protected Property Rights. September 1 or September 2, 2012; (2) the Small Business and Agriculture 9. Civil Justice Reform vessel traffic in the area is expected to Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman be minimal during the enforcement and the Regional Small Business This rule meets applicable standards period; (3) although persons and vessels Regulatory Fairness Boards. The in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive will not be able to enter, transit through, Ombudsman evaluates these actions Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to anchor in, or remain within the safety annually and rates each agency’s minimize litigation, eliminate zone without authorization from the responsiveness to small business. If you ambiguity, and reduce burden.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51477
10. Protection of Children requirements, Security measures, 2012. This rule will only be enforced on Waterways. September 2, 2012, if the event is We have analyzed this rule under postponed from September 1, 2012. Executive Order 13045, Protection of For the reasons discussed in the Children from Environmental Health preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 Dated: August 12, 2012. Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not CFR part 165 as follows: M.F. White, an economically significant rule and PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Charleston. does not create an environmental risk to AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS health or risk to safety that may [FR Doc. 2012–20832 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] disproportionately affect children. ■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 11. Indian Tribal Governments continues to read as follows: This rule does not have tribal Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION implications under Executive Order 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, 160.5; Pub. L. AGENCY 13175, Consultation and Coordination 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of with Indian Tribal Governments, Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 40 CFR Part 98 because it does not have a substantial ■ 2. Add a temporary § 165.T07–0727 to direct effect on one or more Indian [EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0147; FRL–9714–3] read as follows: tribes, on the relationship between the RIN 2060–AR53 Federal Government and Indian tribes, § 165.T07–0727 Safety Zone; Apache Pier, or on the distribution of power and Myrtle Beach, SC. 2012 Technical Corrections, Clarifying responsibilities between the Federal (a) Regulated Area. The Coast Guard and Other Amendments to the Government and Indian tribes. is establishing a temporary safety zone Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule, and Confidentiality Determinations for 12. Energy Effects with a 1000 foot radius around Apache Pier, Myrtle Beach, SC in approximate Certain Data Elements of the This action is not a ‘‘significant position 33°45′41.26″ N, 078°46′47.52″ Fluorinated Gas Source Category energy action’’ under Executive Order W. All coordinates are North American AGENCY: Environmental Protection 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations Datum 1983. Agency (EPA). That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, (b) Definition. The term ‘‘designated Distribution, or Use. representative’’ means Coast Guard ACTION: Final rule. 13. Technical Standards Patrol Commanders, including Coast SUMMARY: The EPA is amending specific Guard coxswains, petty officers, and provisions of the Greenhouse Gas This rule does not use technical other officers operating Coast Guard Reporting Rule to provide greater clarity standards. Therefore, we did not vessels, and Federal, state, and local and flexibility to facilities subject to consider the use of voluntary consensus officers designated by or assisting the reporting emissions from the industrial standards. Captain of the Port Charleston in the waste landfill, petroleum and natural 14. Environment enforcement of the regulated areas. gas systems, fluorinated gas production, (c) Regulations. (1) All persons and and electronics manufacturing source We have analyzed this rule under vessels are prohibited from entering, Department of Homeland Security categories. These source categories will transiting through, anchoring in, or report greenhouse gas data for the first Management Directive 023–01 and remaining within the regulated area Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, time in September 2012. The changes do unless authorized by the Captain of the not significantly change the overall which guide the Coast Guard in Port Charleston or a designated complying with the National calculation and monitoring representative. requirements of the Greenhouse Gas Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (2) Persons and vessels desiring to Reporting Rule or add additional (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and enter, transit through, anchor in, or requirements for reporters. The EPA is have determined that this action is one remain within the regulated area may also making confidentiality of a category of actions that do not contact the Captain of the Charleston by determinations for four new data individually or cumulatively have a telephone at 843–740–7050, or a elements for the fluorinated gas significant effect on the human designated representative via VHF radio production source category of the environment. This rule involves on channel 16, to request authorization. Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule. Lastly, establishing a temporary safety zone If authorization to enter, transit through, we are finalizing an amendment to the that will be enforced for no more than anchor in, or remain within the general provisions to defer the reporting 1.25 hours. This rule is categorically regulated area is granted by the Captain deadline for a data element used as an excluded from further review under of the Port Charleston or a designated input to an emission equation in the paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the representative, all persons and vessels fluorinated gas production source Commandant Instruction. An receiving such authorization must category until 2015. environmental analysis checklist comply with the instructions of the supporting this determination and a Captain of the Port Charleston or a DATES: This final rule is effective on Categorical Exclusion Determination are designated representative. August 24, 2012, except for the available in the docket where indicated (3) The Coast Guard will provide amendments to 40 CFR 98.3(c)(4) and under ADDRESSES. We seek any notice of the regulated area by Marine the confidentiality determinations for comments or information that may lead Safety Information Bulletins, Local subpart L described in section II.D of the to the discovery of a significant Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to Supplementary Information, which are environmental impact from this rule. Mariners, and on-scene designated effective on September 24, 2012. representatives. ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 (d) Effective Date. This rule is docket for this action under Docket ID Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation effective from 9 p.m. on September 1, No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0147. All (water), Reporting and recordkeeping 2012, until 10:15 p.m. on September 2, documents in the docket are listed in
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51478 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
the http://www.regulations.gov index. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Following the Administrator’s signature, Although listed in the index, some Carole Cook, Climate Change Division, a copy of this action will be posted on information is not publicly available, Office of Atmospheric Programs (MC– the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting e.g., CBI or other information whose 6207J), Environmental Protection Program Web site at http:// disclosure is restricted by statute. Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ Certain other material, such as Washington, DC 20460; telephone ghgrulemaking.html. copyrighted material, is not placed on number: (202) 343–9263; fax number: the Internet and is publicly available (202) 343–2342; email address: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: only in hard copy. Publicly available [email protected]. For Regulated Entities. The Administrator docket materials are available either technical information and determined that this action is subject to electronically in http:// implementation materials, please go to the provisions of Clean Air Act (CAA) www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule section 307(d). See CAA section the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West Program Web site at http:// 307(d)(1)(V) (the provisions of section Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ Ave. NW., Washington, DC. This Docket ghgrulemaking.html. To submit a 307(d) apply to ‘‘such other actions as Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 question, select Rule Help Center, the Administrator may determine’’). p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding followed by ‘‘Contact Us.’’ These amended regulations could affect legal holidays. The telephone number Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition owners or operators of direct emitters of for the Public Reading Room is (202) to being available in the docket, an GHGs. Regulated categories and affected 566–1744, and the telephone number for electronic copy of this final rule will entities may include those listed in the Air Docket is (202) 566–1742. also be available through the WWW. Table 1 of this preamble:
TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF AFFECTED ENTITIES BY CATEGORY
Category NAICS Examples of affected facilities
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems ...... 486210 Pipeline transportation of natural gas. 221210 Natural gas distribution facilities. 211 Extractors of crude petroleum and natural gas. 211112 Natural gas liquid extraction facilities. Electronics Manufacturing ...... 334111 Microcomputers manufacturing facilities. 334413 Semiconductor, photovoltaic (solid-state) device manufacturing facilities. 334419 LCD unit screens manufacturing facilities. 334419 MEMS manufacturing facilities. Fluorinated Gas Production ...... 325120 Industrial gases manufacturing facilities. Industrial Waste Landfills ...... 562212 Solid waste landfills. 322110 Pulp mills. 322121 Paper mills. 322122 Newsprint mills. 322130 Paperboard mills. 311611 Meat processing facilities. 311411 Frozen fruit, juice, and vegetable manufacturing facilities. 311421 Fruit and vegetable canning facilities. 221320 Sewage treatment facilities.
Table 1 of this preamble is not subpart L, which are effective on except for the amendments to 40 CFR intended to be exhaustive, but rather September 24, 2012. Section 553(d) of 98.3(c)(4) (the subpart A amendments lists the types of facilities that the EPA the Administrative Procedure Act that affect subpart I) and the subpart L is now aware could be potentially (APA), 5 U.S.C. Chapter 5, generally confidentiality determinations, affected by the reporting requirements. provides that rules may not take effect temporarily requires less detailed Other types of facilities not listed in the earlier than 30 days after they are reporting under subpart L than would table could also be affected. To published in the Federal Register. EPA otherwise have been required by the determine whether you are affected by is issuing this final rule under section November 2010 Subpart L final rule (75 this action, you should carefully 307(d)(1) of the Clean Air Act, which FR 74774), defers the deadline for examine the applicability criteria found states: ‘‘The provisions of section 553 reporting a data element used as an in 40 CFR part 98, subpart A or the through 557 * * * of Title 5 shall not, input to emission equations under relevant criteria in the sections related except as expressly provided in this subpart L, removes a data reporting to direct emitters of GHGs. If you have section, apply to actions to which this requirement and otherwise provides questions regarding the applicability of subsection applies.’’ Thus, section flexibilities under subpart W, and this action to a particular facility, 553(d) of the APA does not apply to this removes the requirement for some consult the person listed in the rule. EPA is nevertheless acting facilities to report under subpart TT. A preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION consistently with the purposes shorter effective date in such CONTACT section. underlying APA section 553(d) in circumstances is consistent with the What is the effective date? This final making the final rule provisions, except purposes of APA section 553(d), which rule is effective on August 24, 2012, for the amendments to 40 CFR 98.3(c)(4) provides an exception for any action except for the amendments to 40 CFR (the subpart A amendments that affect that grants or recognizes an exemption 98.3(c)(4) (the subpart A amendments subpart I) and the subpart L or relieves a restriction. that affect subpart I) and the confidentiality determinations, effective Judicial Review. Under section confidentiality determinations for on August 24, 2012. This final rule, 307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial review of
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51479
this final rule is available only by filing UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of Confidentiality Determinations for a petition for review in the U.S. Court 1995 Certain Data Elements of the of Appeals for the District of Columbia Organization of This Document. The Fluorinated Gas Source Category— Circuit (the Court) by October 23, 2012. following outline is provided to aid in Responses to Public Comment’’ in the Under CAA section 307(d)(7)(B), only locating information in this preamble. docket to this rulemaking. an objection to this final rule that was I. Background The third section of this preamble raised with reasonable specificity A. Organization of This Preamble discusses the various statutory and during the period for public comment B. Background on the Final Rule executive order requirements applicable can be raised during judicial review. C. Legal Authority to this rulemaking. Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA also D. How do these amendments apply to provides a mechanism for the EPA to 2012 reports? B. Background on the Final Rule convene a proceeding for E. How do these amendments affect confidentiality determinations? This action finalizes amendments to reconsideration, ‘‘[i]f the person raising provisions in 40 CFR part 98, subparts an objection can demonstrate to EPA II. Final Amendments and Responses to Public Comments A, TT, W, and L. The 2009 final GHG that it was impracticable to raise such A. Subpart A—General Provisions Reporting Rule was published in the objection within [the period for public B. Subpart TT—Industrial Waste Landfills Federal Register on October 30, 2009 comment] or if the grounds for such C. Subpart W—Petroleum and Natural Gas (74 FR 56260, hereafter referred to as the objection arose after the period for Systems ‘‘2009 final rule’’ or ‘‘Part 98’’). The public comment (but within the time D. Subpart L—Fluorinated Gas Production 2009 final rule, which finalized specified for judicial review) and if such III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory reporting requirements for 30 source objection is of central relevance to the categories, did not include subparts TT, outcome of the rule.’’ Any person Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and W, and L. Subsequent notices were seeking to make such a demonstration to Regulatory Review published in 2010 finalizing the us should submit a Petition for B. Paperwork Reduction Act requirements for subpart TT (75 FR Reconsideration to the Office of the C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 39736, July 12, 2010), subpart W (75 FR Administrator, Environmental D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 74458, November 30, 2010), and subpart Protection Agency, Room 3000, Ariel (UMRA) L (75 FR 74774, December 1, 2010). Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation Following the promulgation of these NW., Washington, DC 20460, with a subparts, the EPA finalized four copy to the person listed in the and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments technical corrections and clarifying FOR FURTHER INFORMATION preceding G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of amendments to these and other subparts CONTACT section, and the Associate Children From Environmental Health under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting General Counsel for the Air and Risks and Safety Risks Program (GHGRP).1 Radiation Law Office, Office of General H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That In a separate recent action, the EPA Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Distribution, or Use proposed corrections, clarifying, and Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, I. National Technology Transfer and other amendments to subparts A, TT, W, DC 20004. Note, under CAA section Advancement Act and L on May 21, 2012 (77 FR 29935), 307(b)(2), the requirements established J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions hereinafter ‘‘2012 Technical Corrections To Address Environmental Justice in Proposal.’’ In that action, the EPA by this final rule may not be challenged Minority Populations and Low-Income separately in any civil or criminal proposed several amendments to Populations specific provisions in these subparts to proceedings brought by the EPA to K. Congressional Review Act enforce these requirements. provide greater clarity and flexibility to Acronyms and Abbreviations. The I. Background facilities subject to reporting in 2012. The EPA also proposed an amendment following acronyms and abbreviations A. Organization of This Preamble are used in this document. to Table A–7 of subpart A to add a This preamble consists of three subpart L data element that was CAA Clean Air Act sections. The first section provides inadvertently omitted in the final CBI confidential business information background on 40 CFR part 98 and deferral rule 2 to defer its reporting CFR Code of Federal Regulations describes the purpose and legal CH methane deadline until 2015. In this action, the 4 authority for this action. CO2 carbon dioxide EPA is finalizing amendments to DOC degradable organic carbon The second section of this preamble provisions in subparts A, TT, W, and L. EF emission factor summarizes the revisions made to the On January 10, 2012 (77 FR 1434), the EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency specific requirements for the general EPA proposed confidentiality FR Federal Register provisions (subpart A), industrial waste GHG greenhouse gas determinations for data elements landfills (subpart TT), petroleum and (excluding those used as inputs to GHGRP Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program natural gas systems (subpart W) and 3 emission equations) in eight subparts of kg/ft kilograms per cubic foot fluorinated gas production (subpart L) of CO e carbon dioxide equivalent Part 98, including subpart L. In the 2012 2 40 CFR part 98. It also describes the N2O nitrous oxide Technical Corrections Proposal, the EPA NAICS North American Industry major changes made to these source proposed, among other things, four new Classification System categories since proposal and provides a data elements for subpart L and NTTAA National Technology Transfer and brief summary of significant public confidentiality status for those four new Advancement Act comments and EPA’s responses on OMB Office of Management and Budget subpart L data elements. In this action, issues specific to each source category. the EPA is finalizing the addition of four psia pounds per square inch absolute Additional responses to significant QSARs quantitative structure activity comments can be found in the relationships 1 75 FR 66434, October 28, 2010; 75 FR 79092, RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act document ‘‘2012 Technical Corrections, December 17, 2010; 76 FR 73866, November 29, SF6 sulfur hexafluoride Clarifying and Other Amendments to 2011; 76 FR 80554, December 23, 2011. U.S. United States the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule, and 2 76 FR 53057, August 25, 2011.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51480 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
new data elements to subpart L and The revisions that apply to the reporting ‘‘December 2011 technical corrections their confidentiality determinations. for 2011 are primarily technical final rule’’), where EPA incorrectly corrections, and provide clarification revised several of the emission factors in C. Legal Authority regarding the existing regulatory this table. This final rule corrects this The EPA is promulgating these rule requirements or reduce the amount of error but does not materially affect the amendments under its existing CAA information that is required to be actions a facility must undertake to authority, specifically authorities reported. comply with subpart W. provided in CAA section 114. As stated In the case of 40 CFR part 98, subpart In the case of 40 CFR part 98, subpart in the preamble to the 2009 final rule A, the amendment is merely a L, facilities subject to subpart L will (74 FR 56260, October 30, 2009) and the harmonizing change to a technical report greenhouse gas emissions in a Response to Comments on the April 10, correction finalized in February 2012 for more aggregated manner in 2012 and 2009 initial proposed rule,3 Volume 9, subpart I (see 77 FR 10373). This change 2013. This amendment is temporary Legal Issues, CAA section 114 provides is effective for reporting year 2012 and (i.e., for 2012 and 2013 only) to allow the EPA broad authority to require the does not affect reporting year 2011. The the EPA time to fully evaluate concerns information proposed to be gathered by February 2012 subpart I technical recently raised by stakeholders this rule because such data would correction required reporters to regarding reporting, and subsequent inform and are relevant to the EPA’s calculate emissions of certain additional EPA release, of certain emission data. carrying out a wide variety of CAA fluorinated heat transfer fluids under provisions. As discussed in the subpart I; however, the February 2012 As explained above, we have preamble to the initial proposed rule (74 correction inadvertently omitted an concluded that it is appropriate to have FR 16448, April 10, 2009), CAA section amendment to a corresponding these amendments to subpart A, Table 114(a)(1) authorizes the Administrator requirement in subpart A to include A–7 and subparts TT and W apply to to require emissions sources, persons those calculated emissions in the annual the 2011 reporting year, for which subject to the CAA, manufacturers of GHG report. This action corrects this reporting occurs on September 28, 2012. control or process equipment, or omission by requiring that reporters For additional background information persons who the Administrator believes include these emissions from heat regarding some of these amendments, may have necessary information to transfer fluids in their facility level please refer to the Technical Support monitor and report emissions and totals reported to the EPA in the annual Document for the 2012 Technical provide such other information the GHG report. Additionally, as proposed, Corrections, Clarifying and Other Administrator requests for the purposes this rule adds one data element to Table Amendments to Certain Provisions of of carrying out any provision of the A–7 to Subpart A (Table A–7 lists data the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule CAA. For further information about the elements whose reporting deadline is proposal, available in the docket for this EPA’s legal authority, see the preambles deferred until 2015). This element was rulemaking (EPA–HQ–OAR–2011– to the 2009 proposed and final rules and inadvertently omitted in the final 0147–0041). deferral rule defers the reporting of one EPA’s Response to Comments, Volume E. How do these amendments affect additional input until 2015. Because 9. confidentiality determinations? In addition, the EPA is making this reduces the reporting requirements, confidentiality determinations for four the EPA has determined that it is The amendments in this action do not data elements in subpart L, under its feasible for this amendment to apply to affect the confidentiality determinations authorities provided in sections 114, the reporting year 2011; therefore this for subpart A data elements finalized in 301, and 307 of the CAA. As mentioned data element would not need to be the ‘‘Confidentiality Determinations for above, CAA section 114 provides the reported until 2015. Data Required Under the Mandatory EPA authority to obtain the information In the case of 40 CFR part 98, subpart Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule and in Part 98, including the four new data TT, this final rule excludes some Amendments to Special Rules elements we have added to subpart L. facilities from the reporting Governing Certain Information Obtained Section 114(c) requires that the EPA requirements and reduces the burden by Under the Clean Air Act,’’ 4 (hereinafter make information obtained under making it easier for facilities to referred to as the ‘‘2011 Final CBI rule’’) section 114 publicly available, except determine applicability of subpart TT or the proposed determinations for where information qualifies for under the GHG Reporting Rule. The subparts W,5 L,6 and TT.7 In this notice, confidential treatment. Section 114(c) excluded facilities are not expected to we are also finalizing confidentiality excludes emission data from qualifying emit GHGs since they receive only inert determinations for the four new subpart wastes that do not generate methane. for confidential treatment. The L data elements also added in this rule. In the case of 40 CFR part 98, subpart Administrator has determined that this The confidentiality determinations for W, the amendments include technical action (amendment and confidentiality these new data elements together with determination) is subject to the corrections that, while important to allow reporters to calculate emissions provisions of section 307(d) of the CAA. 4 accurately, do not materially affect the See 75 FR 30782, May 26, 2011. D. How do these amendments apply to 5 See 77 FR 11039, February 24, 2012. actions facilities must take to comply 6 2012 reports? See 77 FR 1434, January 10, 2012. with the rule. For example, in this 7 See 75 FR 30782, May 26, 2011 for final As explained in the preamble to the action the EPA has corrected the confidentiality determination for subpart TT. See 77 2012 Technical Corrections Proposal, emission factors in Table W–1A of FR 1434, January 10, 2012 for proposed subpart W for the onshore petroleum confidentiality determinations for new subpart TT our response to comments, and this data elements added by the December 2011 notice, we believe that it is feasible for and natural gas production segment, technical corrections final rule subsequent to the reporters to implement the changes for due to an error in the December 23, final confidentiality determinations made in 75 FR the 2011 reporting year, for which 2011 Technical Revisions to the 30782. For the final determinations for the new Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems subpart TT data elements, see the recently signed reports are due by September 28, 2012. action titled Final Confidentiality Determinations Category of the Greenhouse Gas For Nine Subparts and Amendments to Subparts A 3 See http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ Reporting Rule (76 FR 80554, December and I Under the Mandatory Reporting of emissions/responses.html. 23, 2011, referred to hereinafter as the Greenhouse Gases Rule.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51481
our rationale are discussed in Section proposed in the 2012 Technical subpart. As discussed in the preamble to II.D.1 of this preamble. Corrections Proposal, it is being added the proposed rule (77 FR 29935, May 21, This rule does not include as a clarifying change to the regulatory 2012), this amendment ensures that confidentiality determinations for language. EPA has determined that this landfills that are not expected to emit subparts A, W, and TT. For the subpart additional edit does not substantively GHGs are excluded from reporting A amendments, we are not making any change the amendments that were under this subpart. Specifically, we are confidentiality determinations because proposed and is administrative in adding, as proposed, a degradable the data element being added is a subset nature. The amendment to subpart A organic content (DOC) value exclusion of another data element in subpart I for that was proposed in the 2012 Technical (provided in weight percent on a wet which we have already proposed a CBI Corrections proposal specifies that basis) as 40 CFR 98.460(c)(2)(xiii). determination. Additionally, we are not facilities subject to subpart I must 2. Summary of Comments and making any confidentiality include all fluorinated HTFs listed in Responses determination at this time for the Table A–1 of subpart A in the subpart L data element added to Table computation of CO2e that is required by We received two comments on the A–7 of subpart A to defer the deadline 40 CFR 98.3(c)(4)(i). Specifically, proposed amendment to subpart TT. for reporting until 2015. For subpart W, facilities must report each fluorinated Both comments supported EPA’s in addition to deleting an existing data HTF that is also a fluorinated GHG proposed amendments. element, the amendments in this action under 40 CFR 98.3(c)(4)(iii)(E) and each This section contains a brief summary make only minor clarifications to the fluorinated HTF that is not a fluorinated of one of the comments received on the existing reporting requirements in that GHG in the new data element, 40 CFR proposed changes to subpart TT and our subpart, which do not change the type 98.3(c)(4)(iii)(F). This change, effective response. Additional comments and of data to be reported. Therefore, there for reporting year 2012, conforms with responses thereto can be found in the is no change to the proposed the amendments to reporting document, ‘‘Response to Comments: confidentiality determinations for the requirements for heat transfer fluids 2012 Technical Corrections, Clarifying data elements in that subpart. There are (fluorinated HTFs) that were published and Other Amendments of the no amendments to the reporting on February 22, 2012 (77 FR 10373). Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse requirements for subpart TT. This change simplifies reporting for Gases Rule, and Confidentiality facilities and reduces burden by II. Final Amendments and Responses to Determinations for Certain Data amending subpart A to be consistent Public Comments Elements of the Fluorinated Gas Source with the requirements in subpart I. Category’’ (see EPA–HQ–OAR–2011– In this action, the EPA is amending Given that facilities are already required 0147). several provisions in subparts A, TT, W, to calculate emissions of fluorinated Comment: One commenter requested and L of 40 CFR part 98 to provide HTFs under subpart I, reporters already clarification on the number of test greater clarity and flexibility. The have the necessary data to comply with results from the use of the anaerobic amendments are listed in this section by the final rule amendments. biodegradation test that are required to subpart, followed by a more detailed As proposed in the 2012 Technical determine whether or not a facility summary of the final amendments to the Corrections Proposal, we are also meets the definition of the source various provisions and the EPA’s amending Table A–7 to subpart A to add category under this subpart. responses to major comments submitted a subpart L data element used as an Response: One representative sample on those amendments. We indicate input to an emission equation (Equation must be taken and tested using an where an amendment is being finalized L–6) that was inadvertently omitted in anaerobic biodegradation test in order to as proposed and where an amendment the final deferral rule. Table A–7 to determine if a waste stream is inert and differs from that which was proposed in subpart A lists the inputs to emission therefore the landfill is exempted from the 2012 Technical Corrections equations whose reporting deadlines reporting under 40 CFR Proposal. For additional comments and have been deferred until March 31, 98.460(c)(2)(xiii). This is consistent with EPA’s response to those comments 2015. Table A–7 to subpart A is the number of samples required for please see the comment response amended to include the data element, determining an exemption using the document available in Docket ID No. ‘‘the mass of each fluorine-containing volatile solids concentration under 40 EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0147. product produced by the process’’ (40 CFR 98.460(c)(2)(xii). The EPA agrees A. Subpart A—General Provisions CFR 98.126(b)(7)); as is already the case that a clarification is needed because with all other subpart L data elements Part 98 currently does not specify the 1. Summary of Final Amendments assigned to the inputs to equations data number of samples necessary to As proposed, this action amends the category, this change defers the determine whether the exemption general reporting requirements of 40 reporting deadline for this data element applies. Therefore, we have added text CFR 98.3(c)(4) of subpart A, which until March 31, 2015. to 40 CFR 98.464(b) to provide this specifies the types of data and format for 2. Summary of Comments and clarification. The EPA notes that while reporting emissions in the annual GHG Responses only one representative sample must be reports (e.g., annual emissions from taken from each waste stream to be each source category by GHG). In We received no comments on the tested, the anaerobic biodegradation test addition to the proposed amendments to proposed amendments to subpart A. must be performed according to the 98.3(c)(4), EPA has included one B. Subpart TT—Industrial Waste steps described in 40 CFR 98.464(b)(i), additional edit to 40 CFR 98.3(c)(4) that Landfills which requires multiple waste samples did not appear in the proposal. This to be tested. Therefore, if only one additional amendment adds the text 1. Summary of Final Amendments representative sample is taken from a ‘‘and each fluorinated heat transfer fluid As proposed, we are amending waste stream, the sample taken must be (as defined in § 98.98)’’ to the subpart TT to exempt industrial waste of sufficient size to be subdivided and introductory sentence of 40 CFR landfills that receive only inert tested according to the requirements in 98.3(c)(4). Although this edit was not materials from reporting under this 40 CFR 98.464(b)(i).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51482 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
C. Subpart W—Petroleum and Natural (Adding the terms ‘‘open’’ and ‘‘the with ‘‘metric tons of CO2e for each gas’’ to Gas Systems restriction.’’) align the units of this data reporting element • Providing reporters with the option to to those of the general provisions of Part 98, 1. Summary of Final Amendments take and use more than the prescribed 40 CFR 98.3(c)(4)(i), which require reporting The EPA is finalizing several number of sample measurements per sub- of annual emissions in units of mass in technical corrections and amendments basin and well type (horizontal or vertical). metric tons of CO2e. • Amending Equation W–13 to clarify that • Updating the incorrect reference to to subpart W as proposed in the 2012 the output is a sum of emissions from all ‘‘Equation W–30’’ in 40 CFR Technical Corrections Proposal to completions and workovers without 98.236(c)(15)(i)(B) to read ‘‘Equation W– correct equations and otherwise clarify hydraulic fracturing within a sub-basin. 30A,’’ updating the incorrect reference to provisions in the rule to ensure • Revising parameter ‘‘Es,n’’ in the ‘‘Equation W–30’’ in 40 CFR consistency across the calculation, parameter description to match the letter case 98.236(c)(15)(i)(C) to read ‘‘Equation W– monitoring, and reporting requirements of the term in Equation W–14B, revising the 30A,’’ and deleting the unnecessary reference in subpart W and thereby facilitate term ‘‘Ta’’ to ‘‘Ta,p’’ in Equation W–14B, and to ‘‘parameter GHGi’’ in 40 CFR reporting. The EPA is finalizing the clarifying that the temperature is for each 98.236(c)(15)(i)(C). blowdown ‘‘p.’’ • following technical corrections and Removing the text references to ‘‘(a)(4)’’ • Revising 40 CFR 98.233(j)(5) to clarify and ‘‘W–3’’ in 40 CFR 98.236(c)(15)(ii)(A) by amendments as proposed: that the term ‘‘throughput’’ refers to ‘‘average deleting the unnecessary references to • Removing a factor of 1,000 from the daily throughput of oil.’’ ‘‘(a)(8).’’ denominator of Equation W–6 in 40 CFR • Revising the definition of ‘‘Count’’ in • Deleting ‘‘and CH4’’ from the reporting 98.233(e)(5) so that the emissions are Equation W–15 of 40 CFR 98.233(j)(5) to requirements for EOR injection pumps in 40 calculated in standard cubic feet rather than clarify that the reporters are to count only the CFR 98.236(c)(17)(v) to make the data thousand standard cubic feet. separators or wells that feed oil directly to reporting requirements consistent with the • Providing reporters with the option to the storage tank. calculation procedures in Equation W–37. take and use more than the prescribed • Revising the parameter definition of • Revising the incorrect title of Table W– number of sample measurements per unique ‘‘1000’’ to accurately describe the conversion 1A of subpart W by deleting ‘‘Table A–1A’’ well tubing diameter and pressure group occurring through this parameter. and correcting it to ‘‘Table W–1A.’’ combination per sub-basin. • Revising the definition of ‘‘PR’’ in • Correcting the emission factors in Table • Changing the parameter ‘‘FRp’’ to ‘‘FR’’ Equation W–17B of 40 CFR 98.233(l)(3) to W–1A of subpart W as proposed. in Equation W–7 in 40 CFR 98.233(f)(1) to clarify that the production rate is in actual • Amending Table W–5 of subpart W to avoid confusion. and not standard conditions. provide the cross-reference for footnote 2, by • Amending the parameter ‘‘Tp’’ and its • Removing and reserving 40 CFR adding a reference associated with footnote 2 definition in Equation W–7 to clarify that it 98.233(n)(7) to harmonize the language with to Vapor Recovery Compressor. refers to the cumulative amount of time in the reporting requirements in 40 CFR 98.236. hours of venting for each well as opposed to • Providing the proper notation for the In addition to finalizing the the time for the measured well(s). summations in Equations W–23, W–24, W– amendments proposed in the 2012 • Revising the definition of parameter 27, and W–28 so that owners and operators Technical Corrections Proposal, the EPA ‘‘SPp’’ in Equation W–8 in 40 CFR may correctly calculate GHG emissions from is finalizing several additional 98.233(f)(2) to clarify that the reporter must centrifugal and reciprocating compressors. corrections to address areas where take a ratio of casing to tubing pressure. • Amending 40 CFR 98.233(o)(7) to further clarifications to the subpart W • Updating Equation W–8 and also remove the word ‘‘thousand’’ in parameter were considered appropriate based on Equation W–9 in 40 CFR 98.233(f)(2) and ‘‘EFi’’ in Equation W–25. comments received on the 2012 (f)(3) by replacing the subscript ‘‘q’’ with ‘‘p’’ • Revising the definition of parameter EFi in parameter ‘‘SFR’’ to match the definition in Equation W–25 in 40 CFR 98.233(o)(7) by Technical Corrections Proposal: of parameter ‘‘SFRp.’’ deleting the term ‘‘thousand.’’ • Removing the factors 365 days and ‘‘T’’ • Clarifying that the terms ‘‘Vp’’ and • Amending an incorrect reference in 40 from Equation W–6 of subpart W and adding ‘‘HRp,q’’ in Equations W–8 and W–9 are to CFR 98.233(r)(2) to ‘‘Table W–1A’’ instead of a new factor ‘‘N’’ for the number of be monitored per unloading event. ‘‘Table 1–A.’’ dehydrator openings in the calendar year. • Clarifying that Calculation Methodology • Revising the phrase ‘‘meter or regulator’’ • Correcting the definition of parameter 3 applies to well venting, not ‘‘each’’ well in 40 CFR 98.233(r)(6)(ii) and replacing it ‘‘SPp’’ in Equations W–8 to state that casing venting and that parameter ‘‘W’’ in Equation with ‘‘meter/regulator.’’ pressure is to be measured for wells with no W–9 is the total number of wells with • Revising 40 CFR 98.233(t) to clarify that packer, as opposed to taking the shut-in plunger lift assist. reporters do not need to alter their pressure or surface pressure measurement for • Revising the term ‘‘backflow’’ to read calculation results to standard conditions if wells with no packers. ‘‘flowback’’ in 40 CFR 98.233(g) and (g)(1). the results already reflect standard • Correcting the definition of the term • Adding subscript ‘‘s’’ to several conditions. ‘‘PRs,p’’ in Equation W–10A to remove the parameters in Equations W–10A and W–10B • Revising the definition of parameter ‘‘ri’’ phrase ‘‘under actual conditions, converted to clarify that these parameters are at in Equation W–36 to amend the density value to standard conditions.’’ standard conditions. of CH4 to be 0.0192 kg/ft3. Replacing the • Correcting the definition of the terms • Clarifying that the flow volume variable parameter ‘‘ECO2’’ with ‘‘Ea,CO2’’ in the ‘‘SGs,p’’ and ‘‘EnFs,p’’ in Equation W–10A to ‘‘FVs,p’’ in Equation W–10B is at standard parameter definition for Equation W–39A in include omitted subscripts in the parameter cubic feet. 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2)(iii) to match the references. • Clarifying that the outputs of Equations parameters in the equation. • Correcting the definition of the term ‘‘W’’ W–11A and W–11B are at actual conditions • Revising the definition of ‘‘HHV’’ in in Equation W–12 by replacing the word by inserting the word ‘‘actual’’ in the Equation W–40 in 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2)(vi) to ‘‘formation’’ with ‘‘combination.’’ definition of flow rate, ‘‘FR,’’ and also adding reflect the ‘‘higher’’ heating value • Amending 40 CFR 98.233(o)(5), (o)(6), a subscript ‘‘a’’ to denote inputs at actual represented by the acronym. (o)(7), (p)(7), and (p)(7)(i) to clarify that the conditions. • Amending 40 CFR 98.236(c)(5)(ii)(D) to annual emissions must be estimated for each • Adding a reference to Equation W–12 in clarify that the average internal casing compressor for each mode-source 40 CFR 98.233(g)(1)(iii) in the parameter diameter of all wells, as opposed to each combination measured in the reporting year. definition ‘‘FRs,p’’ to convert ‘‘FRa’’ to well, must be reported. • Correcting the definitions of the terms standard conditions. • Amending 40 CFR 98.236(c)(9) to remove ‘‘Es,n’’ and ‘‘Ea,n’’ in Equation W–33 by • In Equations W–11A and W–11B, reference to the optical gas imaging deleting the parentheses around the terms clarifying the definition of orifice cross instrument. ‘‘FRs,p’’ and ‘‘FRa,p’’, respectively. sectional area, ‘‘A’’ to state ‘‘Cross sectional • Amending 40 CFR 98.236(c)(13)(iii)(C) to • Amending 40 CFR 98.236(c)(6), open area of the restriction orifice (m2).’’ replace the units of ‘‘cubic feet per hour’’ (c)(13)(i)(G), (c)(13)(ii)(C), (c)(13)(iii)(C),
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51483
(c)(13)(iv), (c)(13)(v)(B), (c)(14)(i)(C), these comments including possible 23, W–24, W–27 and W–28, the (c)(14)(ii)(C), (c)(14)(iii)(C), (c)(14)(iv), and future rulemakings or development of equations for calculating emissions from (c)(14)(v)(B) to clarify emission reporting materials to post on EPA’s subpart W centrifugal compressors (Equations W– requirements for compressors. Web site. 23 and W–24) and reciprocating Since the amendments to subpart W Comment: One commenter compressors (Equations W–27 and W– finalized in this action do not change recommended that Equation W–6 be 28) were still incomplete because either the type of information that must be amended to account for situations the parameters or the definitions of collected, the methods used to collect where desiccant dehydrator molecular those parameters did not fully align the data, or materially affect how the sieves are used. The commenter further with the proposed technical emissions are calculated, we are stated that this change was necessary amendments. Commenters requiring reporters to implement the because natural gas processors recommended either revising the amendments finalized in this action for commonly use desiccant dehydrator parameter definition for ‘‘Es,i’’ or the September 28, 2012 reporting molecular sieves which typically only including a definition for the operator deadline. require the dehydrator to be opened to ‘‘m’’ in the equation definitions for the atmosphere once every 3 or 4 years 2. Summary of Comments and Equation W–23 and W–27. Commenters when the molecular sieves are replaced. Responses also recommended including a The commenter noted that the proposed definition for the parameter ‘‘MTm,p’’ in This section contains a brief summary Equation W–6 accounts for the number Equation W–24 and W–28. of comments on the proposed changes of dehydrator vessel openings by Response: In the 2012 Technical to subpart W and responses. Additional dividing 365 days per year by the Corrections Proposal, the EPA proposed comments and responses thereto can be number of days ‘‘T’’ between refilling. to make corrections, though few, to found in the document, ‘‘Response to The commenter recommended revising Equations W–23, W–24, W–27 and W– Comments: 2012 Technical Corrections, Equation W–6 by removing both the 365 28 so that owners and operators would Clarifying and Other Amendments of day factor in the numerator and the correctly calculate GHG emissions using the Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse variable ‘‘T’’ in the denominator and those equations. In this action, the EPA Gases Rule, and Confidentiality adding a new term ‘‘N’’ (number of is finalizing the amendments to both the Determinations for Certain Data dehydrator change-outs per year) to the centrifugal compressor and Elements of the Fluorinated Gas Source numerator. Category’’ (see EPA–HQ–OAR–2011– Response: The EPA has reviewed the reciprocating compressor emission 0147). commenter’s suggested change to sources as proposed in the 2012 The EPA received several comments Equation W–6 to account for situations Technical Corrections Proposal. In on the 2012 Technical Corrections where desiccant dehydrator molecular response to those comments, the EPA is Proposal that the EPA has determined to sieves are used in desiccant dehydrators finalizing a limited set of additional be out of the scope of this rulemaking. such that the equation will accurately corrections for both the centrifugal and These comments were diverse in nature, adjust for the number of times the reciprocating compressor emission and covered several provisions within dehydrator vessel is opened to the sources. Specifically, in Equations W– subpart W. Some of the comments were atmosphere when it may occur less 23 and W–27, the EPA has finalized a more technical in nature, for example, frequently than once per year. While the correction to the definition for one comment included a revised revision that EPA proposed in the 2012 parameter ‘‘Es,i’’ such that the proposed definition of parameter ‘‘Tp’’ of Technical Corrections Proposal amendments in the 2012 Technical Equation W–7 to allow for reporters to included a proposed amendment to Corrections Rule would correctly align use alternative methods such as Equation W–6 separate from what the with the proposed amendment to engineering estimates based on best commenter suggested, we agree that remove the erroneous summation sign available data to determine the Equation W–6 can be amended as noted from these equations. EPA has reviewed cumulative amount of time in hours of by the commenter to adjust for the comments submitted, and in this venting for specific wells. Other dehydrator vessels that are opened once action is revising the definition for comments included more substantive over a multiple year time period. In parameter ‘‘Es,i’’ in Equations W–23 and revisions and clarifications to the final these cases where vessels are opened W–27, by adding the subscript ‘‘m’’ so provisions, for example several less frequently than once per year, using the parameter now reads ‘‘Es,i,m’’. EPA comments were submitted on the Equation W–6 as written in the final has also revised the parameter monitoring provisions for both subpart W rule would result in an definition to clarify that the annual centrifugal and reciprocating inaccurate estimate of emissions. volumetric GHG emissions are to be compressors and included revisions to Therefore, we have amended Equation calculated for each centrifugal equation parameters and definitions and W–6 of subpart W as recommended by compressor (for Equation W–23) and for address concerns previously raised by the commenter. EPA believes that each reciprocating compressor reporters. Also, by way of a third finalizing this technical correction does (Equation W–27) for each of the mode- example, some of the comments not change the type of information source combination in cubic feet. submitted were requests for clarification collected by reporters who would use Similarly, for Equations W–24 and W– on the final provisions, for example, one this equation, and that it is feasible to 28 the EPA has revised the definition for comment included a request for implement this correction for the 2011 parameters ‘‘MTm,p’’ and ‘‘m’’ in clarification on the requirement in 40 reporting year. response to comments received on the CFR 98.236 for reporting of ‘‘annual Comment: Two commenters 2012 Technical Corrections proposed throughput as determined by expressed support for EPA’s proposed rule. The definition for parameter engineering estimate based on best technical corrections to Equations W– ‘‘MTm,p’’ has been clarified to state that available data.’’ The EPA has reviewed 23, W–24, W–27, and W–28. However, this parameter refers to the flow these comments, and although these two commenters further noted that even measurement from all compressor comments are out of the scope of the though the 2012 Technical Corrections sources in each mode-source 2012 Technical Corrections proposal, Proposal correctly proposed removing combination in standard cubic feet per the EPA is considering ways to address the summation terms in Equations W– hour, and the definition for parameter
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51484 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
‘‘m’’ has been clarified to state that this data reporting elements, 40 CFR remaining in the unique physical parameter refers to each compressor 98.236(c)(13)(i)(G), 98.236(c)(13)(ii)(C), volume after the blowdown is complete mode-source combination. 98.236(c)(13)(iii)(C), 98.236(c)(14)(i)(C), without purging is at actual conditions. Comment: One commenter agreed 98.236(c)(14)(ii)(C), 98.236(c)(14)(iii)(C), However, after a blowdown, ‘‘actual with the proposed change to 40 CFR and 98.236(c)(14)(iv). conditions’’ are essentially equivalent to 98.236(c)(13)(iii)(C) to correct the units Comment: One commenter questioned atmospheric conditions, or standard for the centrifugal compressor emission the proposed amendments to the conditions (as a simplifying assumption source to be reported in units of mass population emission factors in Table W– explained further below). as opposed to units of cubic feet per 1A of subpart W. This commenter Equation W–14A calculates the hour. This same commenter further specifically questioned why the EPA volume of natural gas emitted from noted that EPA should also apply a increased the emission factors for blowdowns. When equipment is correction to the data reporting valves, flanges, connectors, open-ended depressurized, the gas contained in the requirements for other provisions in 40 lines, and ‘‘other’’ components as listed unique volume expands as it goes from CFR 98.236(c)(13) and (c)(14) such that in Table W–1A to Subpart W. The actual conditions (process pressure and data from these two emissions sources, commenter further noted that the values temperature) to standard conditions centrifugal compressors and previously included in Table W–1A (i.e., atmospheric pressure and reciprocating compressors would be were close to the commenter’s estimates temperature). Equation W–14A accounts reported consistently on a mass unit when rounded up. Finally, the for this physical change. After basis. The commenter also noted that commenter recommended EPA not expansion (i.e., venting), some gas will the references to the equations in 40 revise the Table W–1A emission factors remain in the equipment or unique CFR 98.233 that are cited in the data for valves, flanges, connectors, open- physical volume if the equipment is not reporting requirements for 40 CFR ended lines, and ‘‘other’’ components. purged. This unvented gas should be 98.236(c)(13) and (14) should be Response: The EPA disagrees with the subtracted from the volume of expanded removed. commenter that the Table W–1A gas. If the remaining gas in the Response: In the 2012 Technical population emission factors should not equipment is purged, then the purge Corrections Proposal, the EPA proposed be revised. In the December 2011 factor in Equation W–14A equals zero a correction to the reporting units for technical corrections final rule (76 FR and nothing will be subtracted from the centrifugal compressors such that the 80592), the emission factors were emissions calculated earlier in the data would be reported in mass units for converted from a standard temperature equation as all of the expanded gas carbon dioxide equivalent instead of of 68 °F to a standard temperature of ° volume has been emitted to the units of cubic feet per minute. EPA 60 F. In the December 2011 Final Rule, atmosphere. If the remaining gas is not agrees with the commenters and has the EPA inadvertently used an incorrect purged, then the purge factor equals one corrected the units for the applicable intermediary version of Table W–1A to and the unique physical volume will be provisions in 40 CFR 98.236(c)(13) and convert the emission factors, including subtracted as it was not vented and (14) such that the data will be reported the emission factors for the components released to the atmosphere. There are consistently on a mass basis. The EPA noted by the commenter. The emission several simplifying assumptions in the recognizes that corrections to the units factors proposed in the 2012 Technical equation to facilitate its use. It is to the data reporting requirements in 40 Corrections for Table W–1A show the assumed that the process temperature CFR 98.236(c)(13) and (14) were not emission factors correctly adjusted to a ° and/or pressure are significantly proposed in the 2012 Technical standard temperature of 60 F. In this different than standard conditions. It is Corrections Proposal; however, the EPA action, EPA is finalizing the emission also assumed that the equipment is fully believes that applying the correction factors in Table W–1A as proposed in vented to the atmosphere, resulting in proposed in the 2012 Technical the 2012 Technical Corrections the final condition of the gas being at Corrections Proposal throughout the Proposal. atmospheric temperature and pressure. data reporting requirements for these Comment: One commenter stated that It is also assumed that the atmospheric emission sources would be logical, and Equation W–14A contains an error in temperature and pressure are not would also assist reporters in submitting the purge factor that causes the equation significantly different than standard the data. Subpart W reporters are to yield erroneous results. The conditions. These simplifying required to submit their data to the EPA commenter further stated that because assumptions are true in a majority, if not by September 28, 2012 for data collected the volume being purged is converted in 2011. Because these reports are being from actual cubic feet to standard cubic all cases. submitted for the first time, the EPA feet, inconsistent units were being D. Subpart L—Fluorinated Gas considers this amendment necessary to subtracted, (i.e. standard cubic feet Production ensure that the units for these data purged and actual cubic feet ‘‘purge reporting requirements are consistent. factor’’) in Equation W–14A. The 1. Summary of Final Amendments and Further, the EPA believes that this commenter also stated that the Confidentiality Determinations change is a technical correction that is inconsistency would result in a negative Final amendments. As explained in logical in nature to apply to similar number if the volume of the purged item Section I.D of this preamble, the EPA is provisions for these two emission in standard cubic feet was less than that deferring detailed reporting of GHG sources. Further, EPA believes that this of actual cubic feet, (i.e. actual emissions from fluorinated gas change would result in less burden on conditions are hotter or a lower pressure production facilities until 2014 in reporters. Lastly, in line with the than standard conditions). Finally, the today’s final rule. In the meantime, the commenters suggestion to remove the 40 commenter stated that if the item is not EPA is requiring that GHG emissions be CFR 98.233 equation references found being purged, the commenter believes reported in a more aggregated manner within specific data elements in 40 CFR the calculation should not be used, as than previously required for the initial 98.236(c)(13) and (14), EPA has agreed there would be no GHG emissions from two years of reporting under subpart L. with the commenter and in this action the blowdown stack. These changes pertain only to subpart L, has removed the 40 CFR 98.233 Response: The EPA agrees with the and are temporary (i.e., for reporting in equation references from the following commenter that the natural gas 2012 and 2013) to allow the EPA
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51485
sufficient time to fully evaluate included in the facility-wide CO2e As proposed, we are adding four new concerns raised by stakeholders that reported. In this action, we have also data elements to the subpart L reporting reporting, and subsequent EPA release, amended 98.126(a)(5) as proposed to requirements. Facilities that use one or of certain emissions would reveal trade require facilities to report the methods more default or best-estimate GWPs are secrets. used to determine emissions at a facility required to report the amounts of CO2e For reporting in 2012 and 2013, we level rather than linking each method to emissions that were calculated using are requiring owners and operators of a particular process. each of the two default values as well facilities producing fluorinated gases to The EPA requires that facilities use as using best-estimate GWPs. This report annual total facility-wide Equation A–1 of subpart A to calculate enables the EPA to understand the fluorinated GHG emissions from 2011 CO2e from the mass of fluorinated GHG potential impact of the default or best- 8 and 2012 respectively in tons of CO2e. emissions. For fluorinated GHGs that do estimate GWPs on the uncertainty of the The facilities are not required to report not have a global warming potential overall estimated emissions of the process level emissions or individual (GWP) listed in Table A–1, facilities are facility. (Default and best-estimate required to use either a default GWP or fluorinated GHGs in 2012 and 2013. GWPs are likely to have higher their best estimate of the GWP, based on These amendments do not change any uncertainties than GWPs from Table A– the information described in 40 CFR other requirements of Part 98 or affect 1.) Also as proposed, facilities using 98.123(c)(1)(vi)(A)(3).9 As discussed the deferral of the reporting deadline for default or best-estimate GWPs for subpart L data elements used as inputs further in Section II.D.2 of this preamble, we have clarified that use of fluorinated GHGs without GWPs in to emission equations until March 31, Table A–1 of subpart A are required to 2015 (76 FR 53057, August 25, 2011). quantitative structure activity relationships (QSARs), which are based keep records of the GWP they used for These amendments do not change the each GHG. As proposed, facilities using requirement that these subpart L data on the chemical structure of the best-estimate GWPs are also required to elements in today’s final rule be compound, is an acceptable method for keep records of the data and analysis retained as records in a form that is estimating the GWP in situations where that were used to develop the GWPs, in suitable for expeditious inspection and neither pure standards of the compound a form that is suitable for expeditious review (required for all Part 98 records nor fourier transform infrared inspection and review (required for all by 40 CFR 98.3(g)). spectroscopy (FTIR) spectra for the As proposed, this final rule provides chemicals mixed with the compound Part 98 records by 40 CFR 98.3(g)). As that owners and operators of facilities (i.e., impurities) are available. discussed further in Section II.D.2 of producing fluorinated gases are not As proposed, the default GWP used this preamble, we are updating the required to submit the data elements depends on the type of fluorinated GHG. proposed recordkeeping requirement to listed below until March 31, 2014: For fully fluorinated GHGs, the default specify that where QSARs are used to • 40 CFR 98.3(c)(4)(iii) GWP is 10,000, which is based on the estimate GWPs, facilities must retain • 40 CFR 98.126 (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4), average GWP of the fully fluorinated information related to the reliability of (a)(6), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h). GHGs in Table A–1 of subpart A. For the GWPs based on the QSARs. Fluorinated gas producers subject to purposes of subpart L, the EPA is Final Confidentiality Determinations. subpart L are required to report only the finalizing as proposed the addition of We are finalizing the confidentiality the definition of ‘‘fully fluorinated data elements in 40 CFR 98.126(a)(5) determinations for the four new subpart GHGs’’ to 40 CFR 98.128: ‘‘Fluorinated (the methods used) and in paragraph 40 L data elements (listed in Table 2 of this GHGs that contain only single bonds CFR 98.126(j) (facility-level CO2e preamble) as proposed. In the proposal, and in which all available valence emissions) for reporting of 2011 and we assigned these four data elements to locations are filled by fluorine atoms. 2012 emissions in 2012 and 2013. the ‘‘Emissions’’ data category because Consistent with 40 CFR 98.126(e), a This includes, but is not limited to saturated perfluorocarbons, SF , NF , they describe emissions exhausted to facility must include any excess 6 3 the atmosphere, and apply to these data emissions, converted to CO e, that result SF5CF3, fully fluorinated linear, 2 branched and cyclic alkanes, fully elements the categorical confidentiality from malfunctions of the destruction determination the EPA made in the device when reporting total facility fluorinated ethers, fully fluorinated tertiary amines, fully fluorinated 2011 Final CBI rule for that data CO2e under 40 CFR 98.126(j). However, category, i.e., the data elements in this as noted in 40 CFR 98.126(j), these aminoethers, and perfluoropolyethers.’’ As proposed, for other fluorinated data category are ‘‘emission data’’ under excess emissions do not need to be CAA section 114(c) and 40 CFR reported separately, but must be GHGs, the default GWP is 2,000, which is based on the average GWP of the 2.301(a)(2)(i). We received no comments other fluorinated GHGs on Table A–1 of on our proposed category assignment 8 This includes emissions from all fluorinated gas and confidentiality determination production processes, all fluorinated gas subpart A. transformation processes that are not part of a described above. We are therefore fluorinated gas production process, all fluorinated 9 This is part of the provision of subpart L that finalizing the determination that these gas destruction processes that are not part of a allows facilities to request to use provisional GWPs data elements are ‘‘emission data,’’ fluorinated gas production process or a fluorinated to calculate whether they must use stack testing to which are not eligible for confidential gas transformation process, and venting of residual establish an emission factor for a vent. Note that fluorinated GHGs from containers returned from the EPA is not requiring approval of best-estimate treatment under section 114(c) of the field. GWPs in this action. CAA.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51486 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2—REPORTING DATA ELEMENTS AND CONFIDENTIALITY DETERMINATIONS
Citation Data element Data category (finalized CBI determination 10)
1 ...... 98.126(j)(3) ...... You must report the total fluorinated GHG Emissions (Emission Data: Made available to emissions of the facility, expressed in tons the public). of CO2e. 2 ...... 98.126(j)(3)(ii) ...... Provide the total annual emissions across Emissions (Emission Data: Made available to fluorinated GHGs for the entire facility, in the public). metric tons of CO2e, that were calculated using the default GWP of 2000. 3 ...... 98.126(j)(3)(iii) ...... Provide the total annual emissions across Emissions (Emission Data: Made available to fluorinated GHGs for the entire facility, in the public). metric tons of CO2e, that were calculated using the default GWP of 10,000. 4 ...... 98.126(j)(3)(iv) ...... Provide the total annual emissions across Emissions (Emission Data: Made available to fluorinated GHGs for the entire facility, in the public). metric tons of CO2e, that were calculated using your best estimate of the GWP.
2. Summary of Comments and described in 40 CFR which is what the provisions described Responses 98.123(c)(1)(vi)(A)(3). The commenter at 40 CFR 98.123(c)(1)(vi)(A)(3) are This section contains a brief summary also stated that comparisons between intended to ensure. of comments on the proposed changes measured and QSAR-derived GWPs As requested by the commenter, we to subpart L and responses. have shown that the uncertainty have revised 40 CFR 98.126(j) to specify Additional comments and responses associated with QSAR-derived estimates that the use of QSARs for determining thereto can be found in the document, of radiative forcing is between 18 to 23 GWPs is an acceptable method for ‘‘Response to Comments: 2012 percent and that the uncertainty situations where the infrared spectrum Technical Corrections, Clarifying and associated with QSAR-derived estimates of a fluorinated GHG cannot be Other Amendments of the Mandatory of the atmospheric lifetime is 30 percent measured because neither pure Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Rule, on average for a given class of standards of the ‘‘target’’ fluorinated and Confidentiality Determinations for compounds. The commenter stated that GHG nor FTIR spectra for the impurities Certain Data Elements of the the overall uncertainty of QSAR-derived are available. In addition, we have Fluorinated Gas Source Category’’ (see GWPs is a combination of these two revised the proposed recordkeeping EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0147). uncertainties, but that use of a QSAR- requirements at 40 CFR 98.127 to Comment: One commenter based GWP is still more accurate than require retention of information related recommended that 40 CFR 98.126(j) be the default GWPs of 2,000 or 10,000 to the reliability of GWPs based on revised to clarify that comparable provided in the rule. QSARs. This includes information on methods for best-estimate GWPs based how the structure of the ‘‘target’’ on use of professional judgment are Response: The EPA agrees with the fluorinated GHG is similar to the acceptable if they result in accuracy that commenter that for purposes of this structures of the fluorinated GHGs used is comparable to the accuracy associated rule, use of QSARs is an acceptable to model the radiative forcing and/or with the methods described in 40 CFR alternative method for estimating GWPs reaction rate of the ‘‘target’’ fluorinated 98.123(c)(1)(vi)(A)(3). This commenter of fluorinated GHGs that do not have a GHG, the quality and quantity of the stated that measurement of the low- GWP listed in Table A–1 of subpart A. measurements of the radiative forcings pressure gas phase infrared absorption QSARs are based on statistical analysis and/or reaction rates of the fluorinated spectrum for a particular fluorinated correlating the chemical or biological GHGs used to model these parameters GHG is not possible where neither pure activity of compounds (including, e.g., for the ‘‘target’’ fluorinated GHG, any standards of the ‘‘target’’ fluorinated radiative forcing and reaction rates) estimated uncertainties of the modeled GHG nor FTIR spectra for the impurities with their molecular structure and/or forcings and/or reaction rates, and are available. In such circumstances, the properties. The activity of one or more descriptions and results of any efforts to commenter recommended the EPA compounds is estimated (modeled) validate the QSAR model(s). allow reporters to use quantitative based on the activity of compounds Although we find the use of QSARs structure activity relationships (QSARs) with similar structures. The accuracy of to be acceptable in this situation, we that mathematically relate the radiative QSAR-derived estimates depends on the disagree with the commenter’s forcing and/or atmospheric lifetime (i.e., structural similarity between the recommendation that the rule be revised reaction rate) of a compound to the ‘‘target’’ compound and the group of to state that any comparable methods chemical’s structure (i.e., type of compounds (often called ‘‘analogs’’) based on use of professional judgment compound, number of carbon-halogen used to model it and on the quantity are acceptable if they result in accuracy bonds, etc.). The commenter believes and quality of the measurements of the that is comparable to the accuracy that QSARs are a valid approach for activity of the analogs, among other associated with the methods described obtaining a ‘‘best estimate’’ of GWP in factors. We are finding use of QSARs in 40 CFR 98.123(c)(1)(vi)(A)(3). Since situations where infrared spectroscopy acceptable for purposes of this rule the commenter provided no description cannot be used and that this approach because they can provide reasonable of any other alternative methods, we are is consistent with the methods that are estimates of the likely radiative unable to assess whether other methods forcing 11 and lifetime of the compound, based on professional judgment would 10 The CBI determinations of these data categories were finalized in the 2011 Final CBI Rule (May 26, 11 Note that the actual radiative forcing also the gas is sufficiently long-lived to become well- 2011, 76 FR 30782). depends on other variables, such as whether or not mixed in the atmosphere.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51487
provide an acceptable level of accuracy. November 30, 2010, subpart TT Specifically, the EPA determined Thus, we are not including a blanket promulgated on July 12, 2010 under 40 appropriate thresholds that reduced the provision permitting use of comparable CFR part 98 under the provisions of the number of small businesses reporting. In methods based on professional Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. addition, the EPA conducted several judgment. 3501 et seq., and has assigned OMB meetings with industry associations to control numbers 2060–0629; 2060–0650; discuss regulatory options and the III. Statutory and Executive Order and 2060–0647; and 2060–0649 corresponding burden on industry, such Reviews respectively. The OMB control numbers as recordkeeping and reporting. Finally, A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory for the EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are the EPA continues to conduct Planning and Review and Executive listed in 40 CFR part 9. Further significant outreach on the GHG Order 13563: Improving Regulation and information on the EPA’s assessment on reporting program and maintains an Regulatory Review the impact on burden can be found in ‘‘open door’’ policy for stakeholders to the 2012 Technical Corrections and This final rule, which finalizes several help inform the EPA’s understanding of Amendments Cost Memo in docket corrections to specific provisions in key issues for the industries. number EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0147. subparts A, TT, W, and L to provide D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act greater clarity and flexibility to facilities C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (UMRA) subject to reporting in 2012 and The RFA generally requires an agency finalizes confidentiality determinations This final rule does not contain a to prepare a regulatory flexibility Federal mandate that may result in for amended subpart L reporting analysis of any rule subject to notice expenditures of $100 million or more requirements, is not a ‘‘significant and comment rulemaking requirements for state, local, and tribal governments, regulatory action’’ under the terms of under the Administrative Procedure Act in the aggregate, or the private sector in Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, or any other statute unless the agency any one year. Thus, the final rule October 4, 1993) and is therefore not certifies that the rule will not have a amendments and confidentiality subject to review under Executive significant economic impact on a determinations for are not subject to the Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, substantial number of small entities. requirements of section 202 and 205 of January 21, 2011). Small entities include small businesses, the UMRA. This rule is also not subject small organizations, and small B. Paperwork Reduction Act to the requirements of section 203 of governmental jurisdictions. These final rule amendments and For purposes of assessing the impacts UMRA because it contains no regulatory confidentiality determinations do not of this final rule on small entities, a requirements that might significantly or increase the recordkeeping and small entity is defined as: (1) A small uniquely affect small governments. The reporting burden associated with Part business as defined by the Small final amendments will not impose any 98. The amendments to subpart L result Business Administration’s regulations at new requirements that are not currently in a net decrease in burden since they 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small required for 40 CFR part 98, and the result in less detailed reporting under governmental jurisdiction that is a final rule amendments will not unfairly subpart L than would otherwise have government of a city, county, town, apply to small governments. Therefore, been required by the December 2010 school district or special district with a this action is not subject to the subpart L final rule. Although we have population of less than 50,000; and (3) requirements of section 203 of the added new recordkeeping provisions to a small organization that is any not-for- UMRA. subpart L, these apply only to those profit enterprise which is independently E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism facilities electing to use the optional owned and operated and is not QSAR approach to determining GWPs dominant in its field. The final rule amendments and instead of the default factors provided After considering the economic confidential determinations to part 98 in the rule. Additionally, the subpart L impacts of these final rule amendments do not have federalism implications. confidentiality determinations do not on small entities, I certify that this They will not have substantial direct impose any additional burden. The action will not have a significant effects on the states, on the relationship subpart A amendment is merely a economic impact on a substantial between the national government and harmonizing change to a technical number of small entities. These rule the states, or on the distribution of correction finalized in February 2012 for amendments and confidentiality power and responsibilities among the subpart I that clarifies the existing determinations will not impose any various levels of government, as reporting requirements. The subpart TT additional burden on small entities specified in Executive Order 13132. amendment excludes some facilities beyond that currently required by 40 These amendments and confidentiality from the reporting requirements and CFR part 98, subpart A promulgated on determinations apply directly to reduces the burden by making it easier October 30, 2009; subpart TT facilities that supply certain products for facilities to determine applicability promulgated on July 12, 2010; subpart that would result in GHGs when of subpart TT under the GHG Reporting W promulgated on November 30, 2010, released, combusted or oxidized and Rule. Finally, the subpart W or subpart L promulgated on December facilities that directly emit greenhouse amendments are technical corrections 1, 2010. The EPA is promulgating the gases. They do not apply to and clarifications that help clarify GHG amendments in this action to provide governmental entities unless the calculations and reporting and do not clarity, add flexibility, to address government entity owns a facility that materially affect the actions facilities ambiguity in the rule provisions, and to directly emits GHGs above threshold must take to comply with the rule or make corrections where necessary to levels, so relatively few government add any additional reporting assist reporters in implementation of facilities would be affected. This requirements. The OMB has previously these subparts. regulation also does not limit the power approved the information collection Further, the EPA took several steps to of states or localities to collect GHG data requirements for subparts A on October reduce the impact of 40 CFR part 98 on and/or regulate GHG emissions. Thus, 30, 2009, subpart L on December 1, small entities when developing the final Executive Order 13132 does not apply 2010, subpart W promulgated on GHG reporting rules in 2009 and 2010. to this action.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51488 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Although section 6 of Executive Order consensus standards are technical (the subpart A amendments that affect 13132 does not apply to this action, the standards (e.g., materials specifications, subpart I) and the confidentiality EPA did consult with state and local test methods, sampling procedures, and determinations for subpart L, which are officials or representatives of state and business practices) that are developed or effective on September 24, 2012. local governments in developing adopted by voluntary consensus List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 98 subparts A on October 30, 2009; subpart standards bodies. NTTAA directs the TT promulgated on July 12, 2010; EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, Environmental protection, subpart W promulgated on November explanations when the EPA decides not Administrative practice and procedure, 30, 2010; and subpart L promulgated on to use available and applicable Greenhouse gases, Suppliers, Reporting December 1, 2010. A summary of the voluntary consensus standards. The and recordkeeping requirements. EPA’s consultations with state and local final rule amendments do not involve Dated: August 3, 2012. governments is provided in Section technical standards. Therefore, the EPA Lisa P. Jackson, did not consider the use of any VIII.E of the preamble to the 2009 final Administrator. rule. voluntary consensus standards. For the reasons stated in the F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation J. Executive Order 12898: Federal preamble, title 40, chapter I, of the Code and Coordination With Indian Tribal Actions to Address Environmental of Federal Regulations is amended as Governments Justice in Minority Populations and follows: Low-Income Populations This action does not have tribal PART 98—[AMENDED] implications, as specified in Executive Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes federal Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, ■ 1. The authority citation for part 98 executive policy on environmental 2000). This final rule, which finalizes continues to read as follows: several corrections to specific justice. Its main provision directs provisions in subparts A, TT, W, and L federal agencies, to the greatest extent Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. practicable and permitted by law, to to provide greater clarity and flexibility Subpart A—[Amended] to facilities subject to reporting in 2012 make environmental justice part of their and finalizes confidentiality mission by identifying and addressing, ■ 2. Amend § 98.3 by: determinations for amended subpart L as appropriate, disproportionately high ■ a. Revising paragraphs (c)(4) reporting requirements, will not and adverse human health or introductory text, (c)(4)(i), and increase the burden associated with the environmental effects of their programs, (c)(4)(iii)(E); current requirements of 40 CFR part 98. policies, and activities on minority ■ b. Adding paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(F); and Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not populations and low-income ■ c. Revising paragraph (c)(4)(vi). apply to this action. populations in the United States. ■ The additions and revisions read as The EPA has determined that the final follows: G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of rule amendments and confidentiality Children From Environmental Health determinations will not have § 98.3 What are the general monitoring, Risks and Safety Risks disproportionately high and adverse reporting, recordkeeping and verification requirements of this part? The EPA interprets Executive Order human health or environmental effects 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as on minority or low-income populations * * * * * applying only to those regulatory because it does not affect the level of (c) * * * actions that concern health or safety protection provided to human health or (4) For facilities, except as otherwise risks, such that the analysis required the environment because it is a rule provided in paragraph (c)(12) of this under section 5–501 of the Executive addressing information collection and section, report annual emissions of CO2, Order has the potential to influence the reporting procedures. CH4, N2O, each fluorinated GHG (as defined in § 98.6), and each fluorinated regulation. This action is not subject to K. Congressional Review Act Executive Order 13045 because it does heat transfer fluid (as defined in § 98.98) not establish an environmental standard The Congressional Review Act, 5 as follows. intended to mitigate health or safety U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small (i) Annual emissions (excluding risks. Business Regulatory Enforcement biogenic CO2) aggregated for all GHG Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), from all applicable source categories, H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That generally provides that before a rule expressed in metric tons of CO2e Significantly Affect Energy Supply, may take effect, the agency calculated using Equation A–1 of this Distribution, or Use promulgating the rule must submit a subpart. For electronics manufacturing This action is not subject to Executive rule report, which includes a copy of (as defined in § 98.90), starting in Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, the rule, to each House of the Congress reporting year 2012 the CO2e calculation 2001), because it is not a significant and to the Comptroller General of the must include each fluorinated heat regulatory action under Executive Order United States. The EPA will submit a transfer fluid (as defined in § 98.98) 12866. report containing this rule and other whether or not it is also a fluorinated required information to the U.S. Senate, GHG. I. National Technology Transfer and the U.S. House of Representatives, and * * * * * Advancement Act the Comptroller General of the United (iii) * * * Section 12(d) of the National States prior to publication in the (E) Each fluorinated GHG (as defined Technology Transfer and Advancement Federal Register. A major rule cannot in § 98.6), including those not listed in Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– take effect until 60 days after it is Table A–1 of this subpart. 113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs the EPA published in the Federal Register. This (F) For electronics manufacturing (as to use voluntary consensus standards in action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined defined in § 98.90), each fluorinated its regulatory activities unless to do so by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This final rule is heat transfer fluid (as defined in § 98.98) would be inconsistent with applicable effective on August 24, 2012, except for that is not also a fluorinated GHG as law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary the amendments to 40 CFR 98.3(c)(4) specified under (c)(4)(iii)(E) of this
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51489
section. This requirement applies calculate and report CO2e for only those ■ 3. Amend Table A–7 to subpart A of beginning in reporting year 2012. fluorinated GHGs and fluorinated heat part 98 by revising the entries for * * * * * transfer fluids listed in Table A–1 of this subpart L to read as follows: (vi) When applying paragraph (c)(4)(i) subpart. of this section to fluorinated GHGs and * * * * * fluorinated heat transfer fluids,
TABLE A–7 TO SUBPART A OF PART 98—DATA ELEMENTS THAT ARE INPUTS TO EMISSION EQUATIONS AND FOR WHICH THE REPORTING DEADLINE IS MARCH 31, 2015
Specific data elements for which reporting date is March 31, 2015 Subpart Rule citation (40 CFR part 98) (‘‘All’’ means all data elements in the cited paragraph are not required to be reported until March 31, 2015)
******* L ...... 98.126(b)(1) ...... Only data used in calculating the absolute errors and data used in calculating the relative errors. L ...... 98.126(b)(2) ...... All. L ...... 98.126(b)(6) ...... Only mass of each fluorine-containing reactant fed into the process. L ...... 98.126(b)(7) ...... Only mass of each fluorine-containing product pro- duced by the process. L ...... 98.126(b)(8)(i) ...... Only mass of each fluorine-containing product that is removed from the process and fed into the destruc- tion device. L ...... 98.126(b)(8)(ii) ...... Only mass of each fluorine-containing by-product that is removed from the process and fed into the de- struction device. L ...... 98.126(b)(8)(iii) ...... Only mass of each fluorine-containing reactant that is removed from the process and fed into the destruc- tion device. L ...... 98.126(b)(8)(iv) ...... Only mass of each fluorine-containing by-product that is removed from the process and recaptured. L ...... 98.126(b)(8)(v) ...... All. L ...... 98.126(b)(9)(i) ...... All. L ...... 98.126(b)(9)(ii) ...... All. L ...... 98.126(b)(9)(iii) ...... All. L ...... 98.126(b)(10) ...... All. L ...... 98.126(b)(11) ...... All. L ...... 98.126(b)(12) ...... All. L ...... 98.126(c)(1) ...... Only quantity of the process activity used to estimate emissions. L ...... 98.126(c)(2) ...... All. L ...... 98.126(d) ...... Only estimate of missing data. L ...... 98.126(f)(1) ...... All. L ...... 98.126(g)(1) ...... All. L ...... 98.126(h)(2) ...... All.
*******
Subpart L—[Amended] this section or in § 98.3(c)(4)(vii) and paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2), and (j)(3) of this Table A–7 of Subpart A of this part. section. ■ 4. Amend § 98.126 by: * * * * * (1) Timing. The owner or operator of ■ a. Revising paragraphs (a) (5) The methods used to determine a facility is not required to report the data elements at § 98.3(c)(4)(iii) and introductory text and (a)(5); and the mass emissions of each fluorinated GHG, i.e., mass balance, process-vent- § 98.126(a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(6), (b), ■ b. Adding paragraph (j). specific emission factor, or process- (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) of this section The additions and revisions read as vent-specific emission calculation until the later of March 31, 2014 or the follows: factor, at the facility. If you use the date set forth for that data element at process-vent-specific emission factor or § 98.3(c)(4)(vii) and Table A–7 of § 98.126 Data reporting requirements. process-vent-specific emission Subpart A of this part. (a) All facilities. In addition to the calculation factor method, report the (2) Excess emissions. Excess information required by § 98.3(c), you methods used to estimate emissions emissions of fluorinated GHGs resulting must report the information in from equipment leaks. from destruction device malfunctions paragraphs (a)(2) through (a)(6) of this * * * * * must be reflected in the reported section according to the schedule in (j) Special provisions for reporting facility-wide CO2e emissions but are not paragraph (a)(1) of this section, except years 2011 and 2012 only. For reporting required to be reported separately. as otherwise provided in paragraph (j) of years 2011 and 2012, the owner or (3) Calculation and reporting of CO2e. operator of a facility must comply with You must report the total fluorinated
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51490 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
GHG emissions covered by this subpart, of this part, maintain records of the ‘‘SGp’’, and ‘‘FVp’’, and adding in their expressed in metric tons of CO2e. This GWPs used to calculate facility-wide place respectively the definitions of includes emissions from all fluorinated CO2e emissions under § 98.127(j). ‘‘FRMs’’, ‘‘PRs,p’’, ‘‘EnFs,p’’, ‘‘SGs,p’’, and gas production processes, all fluorinated Where you used your best estimate of ‘‘FVs,p’’; gas transformation processes that are not the GWP, maintain records of the data ■ g. Revising paragraph (g)(1) part of a fluorinated gas production and analysis used to develop that GWP, introductory text; process, all fluorinated gas destruction including the data elements at ■ h. In paragraph (g)(1)(ii), revising processes that are not part of a § 98.123(c)(1)(vi)(A)(1)through (3). If Equations W–11A and W–11B, and the fluorinated gas production process or a you have used QSARs to estimate the definitions of parameter ‘‘A’’ in both fluorinated gas transformation process, GWP, include information documenting Equations W–11A and W–11B, and and venting of residual fluorinated the level of accuracy of the QSAR- removing the definitions of parameter GHGs from containers returned from the derived GWP, including information on ‘‘FR’’ in both Equations W–11A and W– field. To convert fluorinated GHG how the structure of the ‘‘target’’ 11B,, and adding in their place emissions to CO2e for reporting under fluorinated GHG is similar to the respectively the definitions of parameter this section, use Equation A–1 of § 98.2. structures of the fluorinated GHGs used ‘‘FRa’’; ■ For fluorinated GHGs whose GWPs are to model the radiative forcing and/or i. In paragraph (g)(1)(iii), revising not listed in Table A–1 of Subpart A of reaction rate of the ‘‘target’’ fluorinated Equation W–12, and all of its this part, use either the default GWP GHG, the quality and quantity of the definitions; ■ j. Revising paragraph (g)(3)(i); specified below or your best estimate of measurements of the radiative forcings ■ k. In paragraph (h), revising the the GWP based on the information and/or reaction rates of the fluorinated definition of parameter ‘‘Es,n’’ in described in § 98.123(c)(1)(vi)(A)(3). Use GHGs used to model these parameters Equation W–13; of quantitative structure activity for the ‘‘target’’ fluorinated GHG, any ■ l. In paragraph (i)(3), revising the relationships (QSARs) is an acceptable estimated uncertainties of the modeled definition of parameter ‘‘ES,N’’ in method for determining GWPs in forcings and/or reaction rates, and Equation W–14A, revising Equation W– situations where pure standards of the descriptions and results of any efforts to 14B, removing the definition of ‘‘target’’ fluorinated GHG are not validate the QSAR model(s). parameter ‘‘Ta’’ in Equation W–14B, and available, the ‘‘target’’ fluorinated GHG ■ 6. Amend § 98.128 by adding the adding in its place the definition of cannot be isolated from gas streams, and definition of ‘‘Fully fluorinated GHGs’’ parameter ‘‘Ta,p’’; FTIR spectra for the impurities are not in alphabetical order to read as follows: ■ m. Revising paragraph (j)(5) available. introductory text and the definition of § 98.128 Definitions. (i) If you choose to use a default GWP parameters ‘‘Count’’ and ‘‘1,000’’ in rather than your best estimate of the * * * * * Equation W–15; GWP for fluorinated GHGs whose GWPs Fully fluorinated GHGs means ■ n. In paragraph (l)(3) introductory text are not listed in Table A–1 to this fluorinated GHGs that contain only revising the definition of parameter subpart, use a default GWP of 10,000 for single bonds and in which all available ‘‘PR’’ in Equation W–17B; fluorinated GHGs that are fully valence locations are filled by fluorine ■ o. Removing and reserving paragraph fluorinated GHGs and use a default atoms. This includes but is not limited (n)(7); GWP of 2000 for other fluorinated to saturated perfluorocarbons, SF6, NF3, ■ p. In paragraph (o)(5) introductory GHGs. SF5CF3, fully fluorinated linear, text, revising Equation W–23, removing (ii) Provide the total annual emissions branched and cyclic alkanes, fully the definition of parameter ‘‘Es,i’’, and across fluorinated GHGs for the entire fluorinated ethers, fully fluorinated adding in its place the definition of facility, in metric tons of CO2e, that tertiary amines, fully fluorinated parameter ‘‘Es,i,m’’ . were calculated using the default GWP aminoethers, and perfluoropolyethers. ■ q. In paragraph (o)(6), revising of 2000. * * * * * Equation W–24 and the definition of (iii) Provide the total annual parameter ‘‘m’’, and removing the emissions across fluorinated GHGs for Subpart W—[Amended] definition of parameter ‘‘MTm’’, and the entire facility, in metric tons of adding in its place the definition of ■ 7. Amend § 98.233 by: CO2e, that were calculated using the parameter ‘‘MTm,p’’; ■ a. In paragraph (e)(5), revising ■ default GWP of 10,000. r. In paragraph (o)(7), revising the Equation W–6 and all of its definitions; (iv) Provide the total annual definition of ‘‘EFi’’ in Equation W–25; ■ b. Revising paragraph (f)(1) ■ emissions across fluorinated GHGs for s. In paragraph (p)(7) introductory introductory text, Equation W–7, and the entire facility, in metric tons of text, revising Equation W–27, removing the definition of parameter ‘‘T ’’ in CO p the definition of parameter ‘‘Es,i’’ in 2e, that were calculated using your Equation W–7, removing the definition best estimate of the GWP. Equation W–27, and adding in its place of parameter ‘‘FRp’’, and adding in its the definition of parameter ‘‘Es,i,m’’; ■ 5. Amend § 98.127 by: place the definition of parameter ‘‘FR’’; ■ t. In paragraph (p)(7)(i) introductory ■ a. Revising the introductory text. ■ c. Revising paragraphs (f)(1)(i) text, revising Equation W–28 and the ■ b. Adding paragraph (k). introductory text and (f)(1)(i)(A). definition of parameter ‘‘m’’, and The addition and revisions read as ■ d. In paragraph (f)(2), revising removing the definition of parameter follows: Equation W–8 and the definitions of ‘‘MTm’’, and adding in its place the parameters ‘‘SP ’’, ‘‘V ’’, and ‘‘HR ’’ in § 98.127 Records that must be retained. p p p,q definition of parameter ‘‘MTm,p’’; Equation W–8; ■ u. Revising paragraph (r)(2) In addition to the records required by ■ e. Revising paragraph (f)(3) introductory text; § 98.3(g), you must retain the dated introductory text, Equation W–9, and ■ v. Revising paragraph (r)(6)(ii) records specified in paragraphs (a) the definitions of parameters ‘‘W’’, ‘‘Vp’’, introductory text; through (k) of this section, as applicable. and ‘‘HRp,q’’ in Equation W–9; ■ w. Revising paragraph (t) introductory * * * * * ■ f. In paragraph (g), revising Equations text, paragraph (t)(1) introductory text, (k) For fluorinated GHGs whose GWPs W–10A and W–10B, removing the and the definition of parameters ‘‘Es,n’’ are not listed in Table A–1 to subpart A definitions of ‘‘FRM’’, ‘‘PRp’’, ‘‘EnFp’’, and ‘‘Ea,n’’ in Equation W–33;
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51491
■ x. In paragraph (v), revising the ■ z. In paragraph (z)(2)(vi), revising the § 98.233 Calculating GHG emissions. definition of ‘‘ri’’ in Equation W–36; definition of parameter ‘‘HHV’’ in * * * * * ■ y. In paragraph (z)(2)(iii), removing Equation W–40. the definition of ‘‘E ’’ in Equations (e) * * * CO2 The addition and revisions read as W–39A and W–39B, and adding in its (5) * * * follows: place the definition of ‘‘Ea,CO2’’;
Where: gas wells are vented to the atmosphere FR = Average flow rate in cubic feet per hour Es,n = Annual natural gas emissions at to expel liquids accumulated in the for all measured wells venting for the standard conditions in cubic feet. tubing, a recording flow meter shall be duration of the liquids unloading, under H = Height of the dehydrator vessel (ft). installed on the vent line used to vent actual conditions as determined in paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this section. D = Inside diameter of the vessel (ft). gas from the well (e.g., on the vent line P1 = Atmospheric pressure (psia). off the wellhead separator or (i) Determine the well vent average P2 = Pressure of the gas (psia). flow rate as specified under paragraph P = pi (3.14). atmospheric storage tank) according to %G = Percent of packed vessel volume that methods set forth in § 98.234(b). (f)(1)(i) of this section for at least one is gas. Calculate emissions from well venting well in a unique well tubing diameter N = Number of dehydrator openings in the for liquids unloading using Equation group and pressure group combination calendar year. W–7 of this section. in each sub-basin category. 100 = Conversion of %G to fraction. (A) The average flow rate per hour of * * * * * venting is calculated for each unique (f) * * * tubing diameter group and pressure (1) Calculation Methodology 1. For at group combination in each sub-basin least one well of each unique well * * * * * category by dividing the recorded total flow by the recorded time (in hours) for tubing diameter group and pressure Tp = Cumulative amount of time in hours of group combination in each sub-basin venting for each well, p, of the same all measured liquid unloading events category (see § 98.238 for the definitions tubing diameter group and pressure with venting to the atmosphere. of tubing diameter group, pressure group combination in a sub-basin during * * * * * group, and sub-basin category), where the year. (2) * * *
* * * * * well, p, in the sub-basin, in pounds per (3) Calculation Methodology 3. SPp = For each well, p, shut-in pressure or square inch absolute (psia). Calculate emissions from well venting surface pressure for wells with tubing Vp = Number of unloading events per year to the atmosphere for liquids unloading per well, p. production or casing pressure for each with plunger lift assist using Equation well with no packers in pounds per * * * * * W–9 of this section. square inch absolute (psia); or casing-to- HRp,q = Hours that each well, p, was left open tubing pressure ratio of one well with no to the atmosphere during each unloading packer from the same sub-basin event, q. multiplied by the tubing pressure of each * * * * *
* * * * * Vp = Number of unloading events per year for HRp,q = Hours that each well, p, was left open W = Total number of wells with plunger lift each well, p. to the atmosphere during each unloading assist and well venting for liquids * * * * * event, q. unloading for each sub-basin. * * * * * * * * * * (g) * * *
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with ER24AU12.003 ER24AU12.004 ER24AU12.005 ER24AU12.006 51492 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
* * * * * parameter includes any natural gas that measurements or calculations shall be FRMs = Ratio of flowback during well is injected into the well for clean-up. If determined per sub-basin and well type completions and workovers from no gas was recovered, SGs,p is 0. (horizontal or vertical) as follows: at FV = Flow volume of each well (p) in hydraulic fracturing to 30-day s,p least one measurement or calculation for production rate from Equation W–12. standard cubic feet measured using a less than or equal to 25 completions or PRs,p = First 30-day average production flow recording flow meter (digital or analog) rate in standard cubic feet per hour of on the vent line to measure flowback workovers; at least two measurements or each well p, as required in paragraph during the completion or workover calculations for 26 to 50 completions or (g)(1) of this section. according to methods set forth in workovers; at least three measurements § 98.234(b). EnFs,p = Volume of CO2 or N2 injected gas in or calculations for 51 to 100 cubic feet at standard conditions that (1) The average flow rate for flowback completions or workovers; at least four was injected into the reservoir during an during well completions and workovers energized fracture job for each well p. If measurements or calculations for 101 to from hydraulic fracturing shall be 250 completions or workovers; and at the fracture process did not inject gas determined using measurement(s) for into the reservoir, then EnF is 0. If least five measurements or calculations s,p Calculation Methodology 1 or injected gas is CO2 then EnFs,p is 0. for greater than 250 completions or calculation(s) for Calculation SGs,p = Volume of natural gas in cubic feet workovers. at standard conditions that was Methodology 2 described in this recovered into a flow-line for well p as paragraph (g)(1) of this section. If * * * * * per paragraph (g)(3) of this section. This Equation W–10A is used, the number of (ii) * * *
Where: FRa = Average flow rate in cubic feet per A = Cross sectional open area of the hour, under actual subsonic flow restriction orifice (m2). conditions. * * * * *
Where: Methodology 2 described in paragraph emissions estimated in paragraphs (g)(1) FRa = Average flow rate in cubic feet per (g)(1)(ii) of this section in standard cubic through (g)(4) of this section by the hour, under actual sonic flow conditions. feet per hour for well(s) p for each sub- magnitude of emissions captured using A = Cross sectional open area of the basin and well type (horizontal or purpose designed equipment that restriction orifice (m2). vertical) combination. Measured and calculated FR values shall be converted separates saleable gas from the flowback * * * * * a as determined by engineering estimate (iii) * * * from actual conditions (FRa) to standard conditions (FRs,p) for each well p using based on best available data. Equation W–33 in paragraph (t) of this * * * * * section. You may not use flow volume as (h) * * * used in Equation W–10B converted to a flow rate for this parameter. * * * * * Es,n = Annual natural gas emissions in PRs,p = First 30-day production rate in standard cubic feet per hour for each standard cubic feet from gas well venting well p that was measured in the sub- during well completions and workovers basin and well type combination. without hydraulic fracturing. Where: N = Number of measured or calculated well * * * * * FRMs = Ratio of flowback rate during well completions or workovers using (i) * * * completions and workovers from hydraulic fracturing in a sub-basin and (3) * * * hydraulic fracturing to 30-day well type combination. production rate. * * * * * * * * * * Es,n = Annual natural gas venting emissions FRs,p = Measured flowback rate from Calculation Methodology 1 described in (3) * * * at standard conditions from blowdowns paragraph (g)(1)(i) of this section or (i) Use the factor SGs,P in Equation W– in cubic feet. calculated flow rate from Calculation 10A of this section, to adjust the * * * * *
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with ER24AU12.007 ER24AU12.008 ER24AU12.009 ER24AU12.010 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51493
* * * * * oil less than 10 barrels per day use (l) * * * Ta,p = Temperature at actual conditions in the Equation W–15 of this section: ° (3) * * * unique physical volume ( F) for each * * * * * blowdown ‘‘p’’. * * * * * Count = Total number of separators or wells PR = Average annual production rate in * * * * * with annual average daily throughput (j) * * * less than 10 barrels per day. Count only actual cubic feet per day for the gas (5) Calculation Methodology 5. For separators or wells that feed oil directly well(s) being tested. well pad gas-liquid separators and for to the storage tank. * * * * * 1,000 = Conversion from thousand standard wells flowing off a well pad without (o) * * * passing through a gas-liquid separator cubic feet to standard cubic feet. with annual average daily throughput of * * * * * (5) * * *
* * * * * each centrifugal compressor for mode- (6) * * * Es,i,m = Annual total volumetric GHG source combination m, in cubic feet. emissions at standard conditions from * * * * *
× 5 * * * * * m = Compressor mode-source combination as compressor for CH4 and 5.30 10 MTm,p = Flow measurements from all listed in paragraphs (o)(1)(i) through standard cubic feet per year per centrifugal compressor sources in each (o)(1)(iii). compressor for CO2 at 60 °F and 14.7 mode-source combination, m, for each * * * * * psia. measured compressor, p, in standard (7) * * * * * * * * cubic feet per hour. Where: (p) * * * 7 EFi = Emission factor for GHGi. Use 1.2 × 10 standard cubic feet per year per (7) * * *
* * * * * each reciprocating compressor for mode- Es,i,m = Annual total volumetric GHG source combination m, in cubic feet. emissions at standard conditions from (i) * * *
* * * * * (2) Onshore petroleum and natural gas subpart and major natural gas MTm,p = Flow measurements from all production facilities shall use the equipment in reference to Table W–1B reciprocating compressor sources in each appropriate default population emission of this subpart. Major equipment and mode-source combination, m, for each factors listed in Table W–1A of this components associated with crude oil measured compressor, p, in standard subpart for equipment leaks from wells are considered crude service cubic feet per hour. valves, connectors, open ended lines, components in reference to Table W–1A m = Compressor mode-source combination as pressure relief valves, pump, flanges, of this subpart and major crude oil listed in (p)(1) through (p)(3). and other. Major equipment and equipment in reference to Table W–1C * * * * * components associated with gas wells of this subpart. Where facilities conduct are considered gas service components EOR operations the emissions factor (r) * * * in reference to Table W–1A of this listed in Table W–1A of this subpart
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with ER24AU12.011 ER24AU12.012 ER24AU12.013 ER24AU12.014 ER24AU12.015 51494 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
shall be used to estimate all streams of calculating either subsonic or sonic depressurized mode in metric tons of gases, including recycle CO2 stream. flowrates under 98.233(g). CO2e for each gas. The component count can be * * * * * (iv) Report total annual compressor determined using either of the (v) * * * emissions from all modes of operation methodologies described in this in metric tons of CO e for each gas. paragraph (r)(2). The same methodology * * * * * 2 3 must be used for the entire calendar Pi = Density of GHGi. Use 0.0526 kg/ft for (v) * * * 3 year. CO2 and N2O, and 0.0192 kg/ft for CH4 (B) Report annual emissions in metric at 60°F and 14.7 psia. * * * * * tons of CO2e for each gas (refer to * * * * * (6) * * * Equation W–25 of § 98.233) collectively. (z) * * * (ii) Emissions from all above grade (14) * * * (2) * * * metering-regulating stations (including (i) * * * (iii) * * * above grade TD transfer stations) shall * * * * * (C) Report rod packing emissions for be calculated by applying the emission compressors measured and for factor calculated in Equation W–32 and Ea,CO2 = Contribution of annual CO2 compressors not measured in metric the total count of meter/regulator runs at emissions from portable or stationary tons of CO e for each gas. all above grade metering-regulating fuel combustion sources in cubic feet, 2 stations (inclusive of TD transfer under actual conditions. (ii) * * * stations) to Equation W–31. The facility * * * * * (C) Report blowdown vent emissions wide emission factor in Equation W–32 (vi) * * * when in operating and standby will be calculated by using the total * * * * * pressurized modes in metric tons of volumetric GHG emissions at standard CO2e for each gas. conditions for all equipment leak HHV = For the higher heating value for field × ¥3 sources calculated in Equation W–30B gas or process vent gas, use 1.235 10 (iii) * * * in paragraph (q)(8) of this section and mmBtu/scf for HHV. (C) Report isolation valve leakage the count of meter/regulator runs * * * * * emissions in not operating, located at above grade transmission- ■ 8. Section 98.236 is amended by: depressurized mode in metric tons of distribution transfer stations that were ■ a. Revising paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(D). CO2e for each gas. monitored over the years that constitute ■ b. Revising paragraph (c)(9) (iv) Report total annual compressor one complete cycle as per paragraph introductory text. emissions from all modes of operation (q)(8)(i) of this section. A meter on a ■ c. Revising paragraphs (c)(13)(i)(G), in metric tons of CO e for each gas. regulator run is considered one meter/ 2 (c)(13)(ii)(C), (c)(13)(iii)(C), (c)(13)(iv), (v) * * * regulator run. Reporters that do not have and (c)(13)(v)(B). above grade T–D transfer stations shall ■ d. Revising paragraphs (c)(14)(i)(C), (B) Report annual emissions in metric report a count of above grade metering- (c)(14)(ii)(C), (c)(14)(iii)(C), (c)(14)(iv), tons of CO2e for each gas collectively regulating stations only and do not have and (c)(14)(v)(B). (refer to Equation W–29 of § 98.233). to comply with § 98.236(c)(16)(xix). ■ e. Revising paragraphs (c)(15)(i)(B), (15) * * * * * * * * (c)(15)(i)(C), and (c)(15)(ii)(A). (i) * * * (t) Volumetric emissions. If equation ■ f. Revising paragraph (c)(17)(v). The parameters in § 98.233 are already at revisions read as follows: (B) For onshore natural gas processing, range of concentrations of standard conditions, which results in § 98.236 Data reporting requirements. volumetric emissions at standard CH4 and CO2 (refer to Equation W–30A conditions, then this paragraph does not * * * * * of § 98.233). apply. Calculate volumetric emissions at (c) * * * (C) Annual CO and CH emissions in (5) * * * 2 4 standard conditions as specified in metric tons CO e for each gas (refer to (ii) * * * 2 paragraphs (t)(1) or (2) of this section, Equation W–30A of § 98.233), by (D) Average internal casing diameter, with actual pressure and temperature component type. determined by engineering estimates in inches, for all wells, where (ii) * * * based on best available data unless applicable. otherwise specified. * * * * * (A) For source categories (9) For transmission tank emissions (1) Calculate natural gas volumetric § 98.230(a)(5), (a)(6), and (a)(7), total identified in § 98.233(k) from scrubber emissions at standard conditions using count for each component type in dump valves report the following: actual natural gas emission temperature Tables W–4, W–5, and W–6 of this and pressure, and Equation W–33 of this * * * * * subpart for which there is a population section for conversions of Ea,n or (13) * * * emission factor, listed by major heading (i) * * * conversions of FRa (whether sub-sonic and component type. or sonic). (G) Report seal oil degassing vent * * * * * emissions for compressors measured * * * * * and for compressors not measured in (17) * * * Es,n = Natural gas volumetric emissions at metric tons of CO2e for each gas. (v) For each EOR pump, report annual standard temperature and pressure (STP) (ii) * * * CO2 emissions, expressed in metric tons conditions in cubic feet, except Es,n (C) Report blowdown vent emissions CO2e for each gas. equals FRs,p for each well p when calculating either subsonic or sonic when in operating mode in metric tons * * * * * flowrates under 98.233(g). of CO2e for each gas. ■ 9. Revise Table A–1A of Subpart W of Ea,n = Natural gas volumetric emissions at (iii) * * * actual conditions in cubic feet, except (C) Report the isolation valve leakage part 98 to read as follows: Ea,n equals FRa,p for each well p when emissions in not operating,
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51495
TABLE A–1A OF SUBPART W—DE- TABLE A–1A OF SUBPART W—DE- TABLE W–5 OF SUBPART W—DEFAULT FAULT WHOLE GAS EMISSION FAC- FAULT WHOLE GAS EMISSION FAC- METHANE EMISSION FACTORS FOR TORS FOR ONSHORE PETROLEUM TORS FOR ONSHORE PETROLEUM LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS (LNG) AND NATURAL GAS PRODUCTION AND NATURAL GAS PRODUCTION— STORAGE—Continued Continued Onshore petroleum and Emission factor Emission factor natural gas production (scf/hour/ Emission factor LNG Storage (scf/hour/ component) Onshore petroleum and (scf/hour/ component) natural gas production component) Eastern U.S. Population Emission Factors—All ***** Population Emission Factors—All Components, Light Crude Service 4 Components, Gas Service 1 2 Emission Factor is in units of ‘‘scf/hour/ device.’’ Valve ...... 0.05 Valve ...... 0.027 Flange ...... 0 .003 * * * * * Connector ...... 0.003 Connector (other) ...... 0.007 Open-ended Line ...... 0 .061 Open-ended Line ...... 0 .05 Subpart TT—[Amended] Pressure Relief Valve ...... 0 .040 Pump ...... 0 .01 Low Continuous Bleed Other 5 ...... 0.30 Pneumatic Device Vents 2 1.39 ■ 11. Amend § 98.460 by adding High Continuous Bleed Population Emission Factors—All paragraph (c)(2)(xiii) to read as follows: Pneumatic Device Vents 2 37 .3 Components, Heavy Crude Service 6 Intermittent Bleed Pneu- § 98.460 Definition of source category. matic Device Vents 2 ...... 13 .5 Valve ...... 0.0005 * * * * * Pneumatic Pumps 3 ...... 13 .3 Flange ...... 0 .0009 Connector (other) ...... 0.0003 (c) * * * Population Emission Factors—All Open-ended Line ...... 0 .006 (2) * * * Components, Light Crude Service 4 Other 5 ...... 0.003 (xiii) Other waste material that has a Valve ...... 0.05 1 For multi-phase flow that includes gas, use DOC value of 0.3 weight percent (on a Flange ...... 0 .003 the gas service emissions factors. 2 wet basis) or less. DOC value must be Connector ...... 0.007 Emission Factor is in units of ‘‘scf/hour/de- determined using a 60-day anaerobic Open-ended Line ...... 0 .05 vice.’’ 3 biodegradation test procedure identified Pump ...... 0 .01 Emission Factor is in units of ‘‘scf/hour/ 5 pump.’’ in § 98.464(b)(4)(i)(A). Other ...... 0.30 4 Hydrocarbon liquids greater than or equal to 20°API are considered ‘‘light crude.’’ * * * * * Population Emission Factors—All 5 ‘‘Others’’ category includes instruments, ■ Components, Heavy Crude Service 6 loading arms, pressure relief valves, stuffing 12. Section 98.464(b) is revised to boxes, compressor seals, dump lever arms, read as follows: Valve ...... 0.0005 and vents. Flange ...... 0 .0009 6 Hydrocarbon liquids less than 20°API are § 98.464 Monitoring and QA/QVC Connector (other) ...... 0.0003 considered ‘‘heavy crude.’’ requirements. Open-ended Line ...... 0 .006 ■ * * * * * Other 5 ...... 0.003 10. Amend Table W–5 of Subpart W of part 98 by revising the entry for (b) For each waste stream placed in Western U.S. ‘‘Vapor Recovery Compressor’’ to read the landfill during the reporting year for as follows: which you choose to determine volatile Population Emission Factors—All solids concentration for the purposes of 1 Components, Gas Service TABLE W–5 OF SUBPART W—DEFAULT § 98.460(c)(2)(xii) or choose to Valve ...... 0.121 METHANE EMISSION FACTORS FOR determine a landfill-specific DOCx for Connector ...... 0.017 LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS (LNG) use in Equation TT–1 of this subpart or Open-ended Line ...... 0 .031 STORAGE for the purposes of § 98.460(c)(2)(xiii) of Pressure Relief Valve ...... 0 .193 this subpart, you must collect and test Low Continuous Bleed Emission factor a representative sample of that waste Pneumatic Device Vents 2 1.39 LNG Storage (scf/hour/ stream using the methods specified in High Continuous Bleed component) paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(4) of this 2 Pneumatic Device Vents 37 .3 section. Intermittent Bleed Pneu- matic Device Vents 2 ...... 13 .5 ***** * * * * * Pneumatic Pumps 3 ...... 13 .3 Vapor Recovery Com- [FR Doc. 2012–19957 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] pressor 2 ...... 4.17 BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:09 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUR1.SGM 24AUR1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51496
Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 77, No. 165
Friday, August 24, 2012
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER The public comment period for these via the Federal eRulemaking portal by contains notices to the public of the proposed regulations expired on August 16, 2012. searching for ‘‘FAR Case 2011–020.’’ issuance of rules and regulations. The The notice of proposed rulemaking and Select the link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ purpose of these notices is to give interested notice of public hearing instructed those that corresponds with ‘‘FAR Case 2011– persons an opportunity to participate in the interested in testifying at the public 020.’’ Follow the instructions provided rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules. hearing to submit a request to speak and at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen. an outline of the topics to be addressed. Please include your name, company The public hearing scheduled for name (if any), and ‘‘FAR Case 2011– DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY August 24, 2012, is cancelled. 020’’ on your attached document. • Fax: 202–501–4067. LaNita VanDyke, Internal Revenue Service • Mail: General Services Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief 26 CFR Part 1 Counsel, (Procedure and Administration). (MVCB), ATTN: Hada Flowers, 1275 First Street NE., 7th Floor, Washington, [FR Doc. 2012–20995 Filed 8–22–12; 4:15 pm] [REG–113738–12] DC 20417. BILLING CODE 4830–01–P RIN 1545–BK94 Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite FAR Case 2011–020, in all Amendment of Prohibited Payment correspondence related to this case. All Option Under Single-Employer Defined DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE comments received will be posted Benefit Plan of Plan Sponsor in GENERAL SERVICES without change to http:// Bankruptcy; Hearing Cancellation ADMINISTRATION www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), information provided. Treasury. NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. ACTION: Cancellation of notice of public Patricia Corrigan, Procurement Analyst, hearing on proposed rulemaking. 48 CFR Parts 4, 7, 12, 42, and 52 at 202–208–1963, for clarification of SUMMARY: This document cancels a content. For information pertaining to [FAR Case 2011–020; Docket 2011–0020; status or publication schedules, contact public hearing on proposed regulations Sequence 1] under section 411(d)(6) of the Internal the Regulatory Secretariat at 202–501– Revenue Code. The proposed RIN 9000–AM19 4755. Please cite FAR Case 2011–020. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: regulations provide guidance under the Federal Acquisition Regulation; Basic anti-cutback rules of section 411(d)(6) of Safeguarding of Contractor I. Background the Internal Revenue Code, which Information Systems generally prohibit plan amendments The FAR presently does not eliminating or reducing accrued AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD), specifically address the safeguarding of benefits, early retirement benefits, General Services Administration (GSA), contractor information systems that retirement-type subsidies, and optional and National Aeronautics and Space contain or process information provided forms of benefit under qualified Administration (NASA). by or generated for the Government retirement plans. ACTION: Proposed rule. (other than public information). DoD published an Advance Notice of DATES: The public hearing, originally SUMMARY: DoD, GSA, and NASA are Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) and scheduled for August 24, 2012 at 10 proposing to amend the Federal notice of public meeting in the Federal a.m. is cancelled. Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to add a Register at 75 FR 9563 on March 3, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: new subpart and contract clause for the 2010, under Defense Federal Oluwafunmilayo Taylor of the basic safeguarding of contractor Acquisition Regulation Supplement Publications and Regulations Branch, information systems that contain (DFARS) Case 2008–D028, Safeguarding Legal Processing Division, Associate information provided by or generated Unclassified Information. The ANPR Chief Counsel (Procedure and for the Government (other than public addressed basic and enhanced Administration) at (202) 622–7180 (not information) that will be resident on or safeguarding procedures for the a toll-free number). transiting through contractor protection of DoD unclassified SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A notice information systems. information. Basic protection measures of proposed rulemaking and a notice of DATES: Interested parties should submit are first-level information technology public hearing that appeared in the written comments to the Regulatory security measures used to deter Federal Register on Thursday, June 21, Secretariat at one of the addressees unauthorized disclosure, loss, or 2012 (77 FR 37349) announced that a shown below on or before October 23, compromise. The ANPR also addressed public hearing was scheduled for 2012 to be considered in the formation enhanced information protection August 24, 2012, at 10 a.m. in the IRS of the final rule. measures that included requirements for Auditorium, Internal Revenue Building, ADDRESSES: Submit comments in encryption and network intrusion 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., response to FAR Case 2011–020 by any protection. Washington, DC. The subject of the of the following methods: Resulting public comments of the public hearing was under the sections • Regulations.gov: http:// DFARS rule were considered in drafting 411(d)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code. www.regulations.gov. Submit comments a proposed FAR rule under FAR case
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:10 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules 51497
2009–030, which focused on the basic • A clause at FAR 52.204–XX, Basic necessary, to select regulatory safeguarding of unclassified Safeguarding of Contractor Information approaches that maximize net benefits Government information within Systems, which requires the contractor (including potential economic, contractor information systems. The to provide protective measures to environmental, public health and safety Councils agreed to the draft proposed information provided by or generated effects, distributive impacts, and FAR rule, but it was not published. On for the Government (other than public equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the June 29, 2011, the contents of FAR case information) that will be resident on or importance of quantifying both costs 2009–030 were rolled into FAR case transiting through contractor and benefits, of reducing costs, of 2011–020, which is not limited to a information systems in the following harmonizing rules, and of promoting single category of Government areas: flexibility. This is a significant information, e.g., unclassified. Æ Public computers or Web sites. regulatory action and, therefore, was This proposed FAR rule would add a Æ Transmitting electronic subject to review under section 6(b) of contract clause to address requirements information. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory for the basic safeguarding of contractor Æ Transmitting voice and fax Planning and Review, dated September information systems that contain or information. 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule Æ process information provided by or Physical and electronic barriers. under 5 U.S.C. 804. Æ generated for the Government (other Sanitization. Æ Intrusion protection. III. Regulatory Flexibility Act than public information). DoD, GSA, Æ and NASA concluded that these Transfer limitations. The change may have a significant • Conforming changes were made at requirements are an extension of the economic impact on a substantial FAR subparts 7.1, Acquisition Plans and requirements, under the Federal number of small entities within the 42.3, Contract Administration Office Information Security Management Act meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Functions. (FISMA) of 2002, for Federal agencies to Act 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. The Initial The proposed FAR changes address provide information security for Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) is only basic requirements for the information and information systems summarized as follows: safeguarding of contractor information that support the operations and assets of systems, and may be altered as This action is being implemented to revise the agency, including those managed by the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to necessary to align with any future contractors. 44 U.S.C. 3544(a)(1)(A)(ii) protect against the compromise of contractor direction given in response to ongoing describes Federal agency security computer networks on which information efforts led by the National Archives and responsibilities as including provided by or generated for the Government Records Administration in the (other than public information) that will be ‘‘information systems used or operated implementation of Executive Order resident on or transiting through contractor by an agency or by a contractor of an 13556 of November 4, 2010, ‘‘Controlled information systems. agency or other organization on behalf Unclassified Information,’’ published in The objective of this rule is to improve the of an agency.’’ The safeguarding the Federal Register at 75 FR 68675, on protection of information provided by or measures would not apply to public generated for the Government (other than November 9, 2010. Further, the clause information as defined at 44 U.S.C. public information) that will be resident on prescribed in the proposed rule is not 3502. or transiting through contractor information intended to implement any other, more systems by employing basic security II. Proposed Rule specific safeguarding requirements, or to measures, as identified in the clause to conflict with any contract clauses or appropriately protect information provided The proposed FAR changes would requirements that specifically address by or generated for the Government (other add a new subpart at 4.17, Basic the safeguarding of information or than public information) that will be resident Safeguarding of Contractor Information information systems. If any restrictions on or transiting through contractor Systems. The other FAR changes information systems from unauthorized or authorizations in this clause are include the following: disclosure, loss, or compromise. inconsistent with a requirement of any • Definitions at FAR 4.1701, for This proposed rule applies to all Federal other clause in a contract, the ‘‘information’’ derived from the contractors and appropriate subcontractors requirement of the other clause shall regardless of size or business ownership. The Committee on National Security take precedence over the requirement of resultant cost impact is considered not Systems Instruction 4009, April 26, the clause at FAR 52.204–XX. significant, since the first-level protective 2010, and ‘‘information system’’ and There are other pending rules that are measures (i.e., updated virus protection, the ‘‘public information’’ from 44 U.S.C. related to this rule, but this rule does latest security software patches, etc.) are 3502; not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with typically employed as part of the routine • course of doing business. It is recognized that Applicability at FAR 4.1702, which the other rules. The other FAR rules are applies the rule to commercial items the cost of not using basic information as follows: technology system protection measures and commercial-off-the-shelf items • FAR Case 2011–001, Organizational when a contractor’s information system would be a significant detriment to Conflict of Interest and Contractor contractor and Government business, contains information provided by or Access to Nonpublic Information; and resulting in reduced system performance and generated for the Government (other • FAR Case 2011–010, Sharing Cyber the potential loss of valuable information. It than public information) that will be Threat Information. is also recognized that prudent business resident on or transiting through The status of DFARS and FAR cases practices designed to protect an information contractor information systems. It also can be tracked at http:// technology system are typically a common may be applied under the simplified www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/ part of everyday operations. As a result, the acquisition threshold when the case_status.html. benefit of securely receiving and processing contracting officer determines that information provided by or generated for the inclusion of the clause is appropriate. II. Executive Order 12866 and 13563 Government (other than public information) • that will be resident on or transiting through Applicability added to FAR 12.301, Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and contractor information systems offers Solicitation provisions and contract 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs substantial value to contractors and the clauses for the acquisition of and benefits of available regulatory Government by reducing vulnerabilities to commercial items; alternatives and, if regulation is contractor systems by keeping information
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:10 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51498 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules
provided by or generated for the Government Subpart 4.17—Basic Safeguarding of 7.105 Contents of written acquisition (other than public information) that will be Contractor Information Systems plans. resident on or transiting through contractor * * * * * information systems safe. 4.1700 Scope of subpart. (b) * * * There are no known significant alternatives (18) Security considerations. to the rule that would further minimize any This subpart prescribes policies and economic impact of the rule on small procedures for safeguarding information (i) For acquisitions dealing with entities. provided by or generated for the classified matters, discuss how adequate Government (other than public security will be established, maintained, The Regulatory Secretariat will be information) that will be resident on or and monitored (see subpart 4.4). submitting a copy of the Initial transiting through contractor (ii) For information technology Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) information systems. acquisitions, discuss how agency to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the information security requirements will Small Business Administration. A copy 4.1701 Definitions. be met. of the IRFA may be obtained from the As used in this subpart— (iii) For acquisitions requiring routine Regulatory Secretariat. The Councils Information means any contractor physical access to a invite comments from small business communication or representation of Federally-controlled facility and/or concerns and other interested parties on knowledge such as facts, data, or routine access to a Federally controlled the expected impact of this rule on opinions in any medium or form, information system, discuss how agency small entities. including textual, numerical, graphic, requirements for personal identity DoD, GSA, and NASA will also cartographic, narrative, or audiovisual. verification of contractors will be met consider comments from small entities Information system means a discrete (see subpart 4.13). concerning the existing regulations in set of information resources organized (iv) For acquisitions that may require subparts affected by this rule in for the collection, processing, information provided by or generated accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested maintenance, use, sharing, for the Government (other than public parties must submit such comments dissemination, or disposition of information) to reside on or transit separately and should cite 5 U.S.C. 610 information (44 U.S.C. 3502). through contractor information systems, (FAR Case 2011–020) in discuss how this information will be Public information means any protected (see subpart 4.17). correspondence. information, regardless of form or * * * * * IV. Paperwork Reduction Act format, that an agency discloses, disseminates, or makes available to the PART 12—ACQUISITION OF The proposed rule does not contain public (44 U.S.C. 3502). COMMERCIAL ITEMS any information collection requirements Safeguarding means measures or that require the approval of the Office of controls that are prescribed to protect 4. Amend section 12.301 by Management and Budget under the information. redesignating paragraph (d)(2) as Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. paragraph (d)(4), and adding a new chapter 35). 4.1702 Applicability. paragraph (d)(2) to read as follows: List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 4, 7, 12, This subpart applies to all 12.301 Solicitation provisions and 42, and 52 solicitations, contracts (including orders contract clauses for the acquisition of and those for commercial items and commercial items. Government procurement. commercially available off-the-shelf * * * * * Dated: August 17, 2012. items), when a contractor’s information (d) * * * system may contain information Laura Auletta, (2) Insert the clause at 52.204–XX, provided by or generated for the Basic Safeguarding of Contractor Director, Office of Governmentwide Government (other than public Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Information Systems, in solicitations Policy, Office of Governmentwide Policy. information). and contracts, as prescribed in 4.1703. 4.1703 Solicitation provision and contract * * * * * Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA clause. propose amending 48 CFR parts 4, 7, 12, PART 42—CONTRACT MANAGEMENT 42, and 52 as set forth below: Use the clause at 52.204–XX, Basic Safeguarding of Contractor Information 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 5. Amend section 42.302 by Systems, in solicitations and contracts redesignating paragraphs (a)(21) through parts 4, 7, 12, 42, and 52 are revised to above the simplified acquisition read as follows: (a)(71) as paragraphs (a)(22) through threshold when the contractor or a (a)(72); and adding a new paragraph Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. subcontractor at any tier may have (a)(21) to read as follows. chapter 137; and 51 U.S.C. 20113. information residing in or transiting through its information system, where 42.302 Contract administration functions. PART 4—ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS such information is provided by or (a) * * * generated for the Government (other (21) Ensure that the contractor has 2. Add Subpart 4.17 to read as than public information). The clause protective measures in place, consistent follows. may also be used in contracts below the with the requirements of the clause at Subpart 4.17—Basic Safeguarding of simplified acquisition threshold when 52.204–XX. Contractor Information Systems the contracting officer determines that * * * * * Sec. inclusion of the clause is appropriate. 4.1700 Scope of subpart. PART 52—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS 4.1701 Definitions. PART 7—ACQUISITION PLANNING AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 4.1702 Applicability. 4.1703 Solicitation provision and contract 3. Amend section 7.105 by revising 6. Add section 52.204–XX to read as clause. paragraph (b)(18) to read as follows. follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:10 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules 51499
52.204–XX Basic Safeguarding of Web sites that are publicly available or have authorizations in this clause are inconsistent Contractor Information Systems. access limited only by domain/Internet with a requirement of any other such clause As prescribed in 4.1703, use the Protocol restriction. Such information may be in this contract, the requirement of the other following clause: posted to web pages that control access by clause shall take precedence over the user ID/password, user certificates, or other requirement of this clause. Basic Safeguarding of Contractor technical means, and that provide protection [FR Doc. 2012–20881 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Information Systems (Date) via use of security technologies. Access BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P (a) Definitions. As used in this clause— control may be provided by the intranet Clearing means removal of data from an (versus the Web site itself or the application information system, its storage devices, and it hosts). (2) Transmitting electronic information. other peripheral devices with storage DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION capacity, in such a way that the data may not Transmit email, text messages, blogs, and similar communications that contain be reconstructed using common system National Highway Traffic Safety capabilities (i.e., through the keyboard); information provided by or generated for the however, the data may be reconstructed Government (other than public information), Administration using laboratory methods. using technology and processes that provide Compromise means disclosure of the best level of security and privacy 49 CFR Part 535 information to unauthorized persons, or a available, given facilities, conditions, and violation of the security policy of a system environment. [NHTSA 2012–0126] in which unauthorized intentional or (3) Transmitting voice and fax information. Transmit information provided by or unintentional disclosure, modification, RIN 2127–AK74 destruction, or loss of an object may have generated for the Government (other than public information), via voice and fax only occurred. This includes copying the data Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards through covert network channels or the when the sender has a reasonable assurance copying of data to unauthorized media. that access is limited to authorized and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Data means a subset of information in an recipients. Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and electronic format that allows it to be retrieved (4) Physical and electronic barriers. Protect Vehicles or transmitted. information provided by or generated for the Information means any communication or Government (other than public information), AGENCY: National Highway Traffic representation of knowledge such as facts, by at least one physical and one electronic Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. data, or opinions, in any medium or form, barrier (e.g., locked container or room, login ACTION: Denial of petition for including textual, numerical, graphic, and password) when not under direct rulemaking. cartographic, narrative, or audiovisual. individual control. Information system means a discrete set of (5) Sanitization. At a minimum, clear SUMMARY: The National Highway Traffic information resources organized for the information on media that have been used to Administration (NHTSA) is denying the process information provided by or generated collection, processing, maintenance, use, petition of Plant Oil Powered Diesel sharing, dissemination, or disposition of for the Government (other than public information (44 U.S.C. 3502). information), before external release or Fuel Systems, Inc. (‘‘POP Diesel’’) to Intrusion means an unauthorized act of disposal. Overwriting is an acceptable means amend the final rules establishing fuel bypassing the security mechanisms of a of clearing media in accordance with efficiency standards for medium- and system. National Institute of Standards and heavy-duty vehicles. NHTSA does not Media means physical devices or writing Technology 800–88, Guidelines for Media believe that POP Diesel has set forth a surfaces including but not limited to Sanitization, at http://csrc.nist.gov/ basis for rulemaking. The agency magnetic tapes, optical disks, magnetic disks, publications/nistpubs/800-88/NISTSP800- _ disagrees with the petitioner’s assertion large scale integration memory chips, and 88 rev1.pdf. that a failure to specifically consider printouts (but not including display media, (6) Intrusion protection. Provide at a e.g., a computer monitor, cathode ray tube minimum the following protections against pure vegetable oil, and technology to (CRT) or other (transient) visual output) onto computer intrusions and data compromise: enable its usage, as a feasible technology which information is recorded, stored, or (i) Current and regularly updated malware in heavy-duty vehicles, led to the printed within an information system. protection services, e.g., anti-virus, anti- adoption of less stringent standards. Public information means any information, spyware. NHTSA also disagrees with POP’s regardless of form or format, that an agency (ii) Prompt application of security-relevant assertion that the agency failed to discloses, disseminates, or makes available to software upgrades, e.g., patches, service- adequately consider the rebound effect the public (44 U.S.C. 3502). packs, and hot fixes. in setting the standards. Safeguarding means measures or controls (7) Transfer limitations. Transfer that are prescribed to protect information. information provided by or generated for the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Voice means all oral information regardless Government (other than public information), For Non-Legal Issues: James Tamm, of transmission protocol. only to those subcontractors that both require Office of Rulemaking, National Highway (b) Safeguarding requirements and the information for purposes of contract Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New procedures. The Contractor shall apply the performance and provide at least the same Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20590, following basic safeguarding requirements to level of security as specified in this clause. Telephone (202) 493–0515. protect information provided by or generated (c) Subcontracts. The Contractor shall for the Government (other than public include the substance of this clause, For Legal Issues: Lily Smith, Office of information) which resides on or transits including this paragraph (c), in all Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic through its information systems from subcontracts under this contract that may Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey unauthorized access and disclosure: have information residing in or transiting Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20590, (1) Protecting information on public through its information system, where such Telephone: (202) 366–2992. computers or Web sites: Do not process is provided by or generated for the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: information provided by or generated for the Government (other than public information). Government (other than public information) (d) Other contractual requirements I. Background on public computers (e.g., those available for regarding the safeguarding of information. use by the general public in kiosks, hotel This clause addresses basic requirements, On September 15, 2011, NHTSA business centers) or computers that do not and is subordinate to any other contract issued a final rule creating fuel have access control. Information provided by clauses or requirements that specifically efficiency standards for medium- and or generated for the Government (other than address the safeguarding of information or heavy-duty vehicles (‘‘heavy-duty rule’’) public information) shall not be posted on information systems. If any restrictions or (76 FR 57106).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:10 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51500 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules
II. The Petition ‘‘manufacturer GHG emissions average, standards’’ throughout its petition.4 NHTSA received two petitions from like the corporate average fuel economy NHTSA has no authority to, and did standards in place for light duty not, set GHG standards. Accordingly, POP Diesel. The first petition was dated 2 November 15, 2011, and was received vehicles.’’ POP Diesel’s petition is denied. In the 3. The standards do not accomplish by the agency shortly thereafter. The alternative, assuming that POP Diesel their purpose of reducing greenhouse second petition was dated February 12, intended to petition NHTSA for a gas (GHG) emissions because the GHG 2012, and was received by the agency revision of the agency’s fuel standards fundamentally regulate fuel on February 27, 2012. Both petitions consumption standards, POP Diesel’s efficiency, and increasing fuel efficiency from POP Diesel were styled as petitions petition is denied for the reasons creates a ‘‘rebound effect,’’ which the discussed below. for reconsideration of the heavy-duty agencies did not adequately consider as rule. Under 49 CFR part 553, a petition part of their final rule analysis. III. Discussion and Analysis for reconsideration must be received To address these concerns, POP The following section will consider within 45 days of the publication of a Diesel specifically requested that the POP Diesel’s requests, to the extent that final rule; a petition received after that agency revise the final standards by they appeared to be directed at NHTSA, date is considered to be a petition for doing the following: in turn. issuance, amendment or revocation of a A. ‘‘De-couple fuel efficiency policy A. Decouple Fuel Efficiency Policy From rule under 49 CFR part 552, i.e., as a from GHG emissions policy;’’ petition for rulemaking. As both B. ‘‘Impose a corporate fleet average GHG Emissions Policy petitions were received more than 45 for GHG emissions on all classes of If POP Diesel meant to argue that the days after the final rule was published, manufacturers of engines and vehicles agencies should have chosen to regulate they were considered by the agency as as the most effective way to ramp down GHG emissions from a life-cycle petitions for rulemaking under part 552. such emissions across the medium- and perspective, or one that included Based on the agency’s review of the heavy-duty market.’’ 3 consideration of plant-based fuels like February 27 petition, the agency C. Re-evaluate ‘‘the weight the the one utilized by POP Diesel’s concluded that it contained sufficient Agencies give to various alternative technology, rather than setting original material to fully supplant (as technologies and fuels according to a harmonized, performance-based fuel opposed to simply amend) the [life-cycle] approach;’’ efficiency standards (NHTSA) and November 15 petition. Therefore, this D. Revise its analysis of the impact of tailpipe GHG emissions standards document responds to the February 27 the standards, in terms of GHG (EPA), then the request is primarily petition (‘‘POP Diesel Petition’’) emissions, due to the ‘‘rebound effect,’’ directed at EPA, but NHTSA notes the according to the process prescribed in given information presented by POP following in response. 49 CFR part 552. Diesel; As discussed throughout the final In its petition, POP Diesel argued that E. ‘‘Recognize 100 percent plant oil as rule, close coordination in this first NHTSA did not specifically consider a viable renewable diesel engine fuel heavy-duty rule enabled EPA and pure vegetable oil, and POP Diesel’s eligible to receive Renewable NHTSA to promulgate complementary proprietary technology to enable its Identification Number (‘RIN’) credits standards that allow manufacturers to usage, as a feasible technology in under the Renewable Fuels 2 standard;’’ build one set of vehicles to comply with medium- and heavy-duty vehicles. POP F. ‘‘Grant POP Diesel’s application for both agencies’ regulations, as Diesel claimed that this, as well as a a RIN pathway for 100 percent plant oil envisioned by the President. This failure to consider the rebound effect,1 derived from jatropha oil feedstock;’’ coordination was widely supported by led to the adoption of significantly less The remainder of POP Diesel’s stakeholders and provided benefits for stringent standards and could encourage petition contained background industry, government, and taxpayers by more fossil fuel consumption. information on challenges that POP increasing regulatory efficiency and POP Diesel made the following Diesel says pure vegetable oil has faced reducing compliance burdens. The specific arguments in support of its in the marketplace, regarding which the harmonized structure of the final rule is request for amending the standards: petitioner is involved in litigation. also consistent with Executive Order 1. The standards should have NHTSA does not believe that these 13563.5 considered GHG emissions on a life- portions of the petition necessitate a Second, as stated above, NHTSA’s cycle basis, rather than focusing on response, as they do not directly relate statutory obligation is to create and tailpipe GHG emissions only. If the to or support POP Diesel’s petition for administer a fuel efficiency agencies had considered life-cycle GHG rulemaking. improvement program—the agency does Additionally, POP Diesel’s requests emissions, they would have apportioned not have the option of not regulating regarding obtaining a Renewable credits to certain technologies and fuels fuel efficiency. See 49 U.S.C. Identification Number for plant oil differently. 32902(k)(2). Insofar as NHTSA regulates (Requests E and F above) cannot be 2. The standards did not take into fuel efficiency and EPA regulates GHG directed at NHTSA, given that they account technology which POP Diesel emissions, it makes sense for the pertain to EPA’s regulations designs, engineers, manufacturers, and agencies to harmonize their standards to implementing the Renewable Fuel sells, which would enable a diesel the greatest extent possible—CO2 Standard. represents the majority of GHG engine to operate on pure vegetable oil NHTSA notes that POP Diesel has fuel, and if they had, the agencies could requested the agency to revise the ‘‘GHG 4 have considered an alternative See POP Diesel Petition, passim. 5 EO 13563 states that an agency shall ‘‘tailor its regulatory approach of imposing a 2 NHTSA notes that the engine and vehicle regulations to impose the least burden on society, standards are entirely separate in the heavy-duty consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives, 1 The ‘‘rebound effect’’ refers to the fraction of rule. Aside from the class 2b–3 pickups and van taking into account, among other things, and to the fuel savings expected to result from an increase in standards, which are based on a full vehicle test, extent practicable, the costs of cumulative fuel efficiency that is offset by additional vehicle no vehicle standard would take into account the regulations,’’ and ‘‘promote such coordination, use. If truck shipping costs decrease as a result of performance measurement of the fuel that the simplification, and harmonization’’ as will reduce lower fuel costs, an increase in truck miles traveled vehicle would ultimately operate on. redundancy, inconsistency, and costs of multiple may occur. See 76 FR 57326 (Sept. 15, 2011). 3 See POP Diesel Petition at 2–3. regulatory requirements.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:10 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules 51501
emissions from motor vehicles, and is engines or vehicles to perform a certain interaction between the RFS program the natural by-product of carbon-based amount of work (carry or haul weight) and the heavy-duty fuel efficiency fuel consumption, so the same over a particular distance. This is a very standards. As explained in the final technologies that increase fuel different measurement than fuel rule, NHTSA determined that the efficiency (by reducing fuel economy, which is simply based on the performance measurement of alternative consumption for a unit of work amount of fuel consumed over a certain fuels provides sufficient incentives for performed) reduce CO2 emissions at the distance. their use. While the agencies noted that same time. Moreover, NHTSA has long As discussed above, for this first incentives in the RFS pointed to a lack maintained that a fundamental aspect of regulatory phase of the medium- and of a need for further incentives, the the country’s need to conserve energy, heavy-duty vehicle fuel efficiency rule’s treatment of alternative fuels was which prompted the fuel efficiency improvement program, NHTSA has not premised on each alternative fuel standards, is to reduce GHG emissions adopted a fuel-neutral approach based being covered by the RFS Standard.9 associated with climate change in on measurement of fuel consumption Indeed, other alternative fuels are addition to securing energy through measurement of tailpipe CO2 similarly not covered by the RFS independence through reduction of oil emissions. NHTSA does not agree that standard, such as liquefied natural gas, imports. Thus, NHTSA believes it is expressly including POP Diesel’s compressed natural gas, propane, neither feasible nor desirable to proprietary technology in its rulemaking hydrogen and electricity. ‘‘decouple’’ fuel efficiency policy from analysis would change the agency’s GHG emissions policy, given the extent analysis in any substantive way that C. Re-Evaluate ‘‘the Weight the Agencies to which the two are related. would support an amendment to the Give to Various Alternative And finally, to the extent that POP rulemaking either in terms of the Technologies and Fuels According to a Diesel argued that fuel efficiency and agency’s decision regarding levels of [Life-Cycle] Approach’’ GHG emissions are not related because standard stringency, or in terms of the NHTSA recognizes the potential of the rebound effect, NHTSA disagrees. structure of the standards. 49 U.S.C. benefits of increasing the use of any fuel Even if it somewhat decreases the 32902(k)(2), the statutory provision type that reduces the nation’s degree of the connection, the rebound granting NHTSA authority for the dependence on petroleum. As the effect does not make the connection medium- and heavy-duty fuel efficiency President noted in his March 30, 2011 between improved fuel efficiency and improvement program, requires the ‘‘Blueprint for a Secure Energy reduced GHG emissions any less real. agency to set maximum feasible 10 POP Diesel has not demonstrated standards that are ‘‘appropriate, cost- Future,’’ biofuels are one such fuel otherwise. effective, and technologically feasible.’’ type with the potential to reduce the The agency has neither the obligation to nation’s demand for oil. NHTSA B. ‘‘Impose a Corporate Fleet Average set standards under 49 U.S.C. commends efforts to develop alternative for GHG Emissions on All Classes of 32902(k)(2) based on all potentially fuels for light-, medium- and heavy-duty Manufacturers of Engines and Vehicles feasible motor vehicle technologies, nor vehicles, and POP Diesel’s work to make as the Most Effective Way To Ramp the capacity to do so. The existing pure vegetable oil a more viable Down Such Emissions Across the standards are performance-based, and alternative fuel is in line with this goal. Medium- and Heavy-Duty Market’’ not expressly predicated on the use of POP Diesel’s technology allows the POP Diesel argued that the agency any specific technology. Manufacturers use of fuels that it states are less carbon- should have accounted for the are free to use whatever technologies intensive than other fuels, and POP ‘‘feasibility of equipping engines to they choose to meet the standards, Diesel argued in its petition that by operate on 100 percent untransesterified including POP Diesel’s technology. This considering only tailpipe rather than plant oil,’’ and that if it had, it would allows for innovation. life-cycle GHG emissions of have concluded that it should ‘‘regulate POP Diesel also mentioned EPA’s technologies and fuels, the agencies GHG emissions [by imposing] a Renewable Fuel Standards, and stated arbitrarily favor certain technologies manufacturer GHG emissions average, that because ‘‘pure plant oil is not and fuels and disfavor others. While like the corporate average fuel economy eligible for the RFS,’’ therefore the final reducing GHG emissions is a direct standards in place for light duty rule does ‘‘not provide any incentive for outcome of improving the fuel vehicles * * *.’’ 6 Assuming that POP the use of 100 percent plant oil or an efficiency of the medium- and heavy- Diesel meant to say that NHTSA should engine specially equipped to run on this duty on-road fleet, the task that have imposed average manufacturer fuel fuel.’’ 8 NHTSA presumes that POP Congress gave to NHTSA was efficiency standards, the agency notes Diesel’s argument was that if NHTSA specifically to improve fuel efficiency. that no particular engine or vehicle had considered that the RFS does not Therefore, any consideration that model is subject to its own standard; include specific incentives for pure NHTSA may give to GHG emissions in rather each manufacturer of vehicles or vegetable oil, the agency would have general, and life-cycle GHG emissions in engines must comply with standards for compensated for this by creating particular, is in the context of that 7 each regulatory category. NHTSA also incentives within the heavy-duty rule. directive. The final rule is performance- notes, although it appears that POP As explained above, the final rule was based and does not dictate particular Diesel referred to the corporate average designed to be fuel-neutral. If POP technology. As the agency noted in the fuel economy standards for light-duty Diesel’s technology helps manufacturers final rule,11 alternative fueled vehicles vehicles more for the ‘‘corporate reduce fuel consumption, then it will provide fuel consumption benefits that average’’ element than for the metric, have the same opportunities as any should be, and are, accounted for in the that the medium- and heavy-duty other technology that manufacturers standard. However, the agencies’ standards are based on the ability of will use to meet NHTSA’s standards. approach to fuels does not provide Moreover, NHTSA notes that POP 6 POP Diesel Petition at 2. Diesel has not correctly characterized 9 7 This, along with the rule’s allowance for See 76 FR 57124. averaging, banking, and trading of credits across NHTSA’s consideration of the 10 http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/ ‘‘averaging sets,’’ makes the standards effectively blueprint_secure_energy_future.pdf. corporate averages. 8 POP Diesel Petition at 7. 11 See 76 FR 57124.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:10 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51502 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules
additional incentives for fuels based on D. Revise the Final Rule Analysis of the represents the most reliable basis on their petroleum content. Rebound Effect which to project the increases in As POP Diesel noted, the agency POP Diesel argued that due to the commercial truck use that will occur in calculates the fuel consumption rebound effect, the final standards will response to improvements in their fuel performance of engines and heavy-duty in fact increase total GHG emissions efficiency. pickup trucks and vans by measuring beyond what would have occurred in NHTSA believes that its estimates of tailpipe CO2 emissions and converting the absence of the standards, rather than the increased use of different classes of the measured value to an equivalent fuel trucks that are likely to result from the achieving the agencies’ stated consumption value. This method aligns improvements in their fuel efficiency reductions in CO emissions and fuel with the EPA measurement method that 2 required by the rule are based on sound consumption.14 POP Diesel stated that is used to determine CO emissions data and reliable econometric methods. 2 the agencies only considered the performance, and by aligning, promotes Moreover, the agency is confident that rebound effect in terms of consistency in the national program. these estimates reflect the various improvements in ‘‘fuel economy’’ NHTSA recognized that it could have components of the direct rebound effect leading to increases in vehicle miles selected other methods of measuring that POP Diesel alleges they ignore, traveled (VMT), but should also have fuel consumption, such as deriving fuel because the measures of aggregate considered other direct effects,15 consumption performance based on 16 nationwide truck use from which they gasoline or diesel energy equivalency.12 ‘‘indirect’’ rebound effects, and the are derived fully incorporate historical However, the agency decided that ‘‘frontier’’ rebound effect, whereby shifts of freight shipments from other maintaining consistency with the EPA improvements in energy efficiency transportation modes to trucking, promote the development or spread of measurement of CO2 emissions to continuing reorganization of freight establish an aligned national program new products that increase energy logistics toward increased reliance on was the most appropriate approach for consumption and GHG emissions, such trucking services, and shifts to more this first regulatory action. as when the availability of lower-cost distant sources of supply for raw This approach makes it unnecessary trucking services leads to substitution of materials and longer deliveries of to distinguish among alternative fuel Internet shopping and home delivery finished goods to final markets. The 17 types in setting the standards, and this via truck for conventional retailing. agency’s estimates also incorporate the first phase of NHTSA’s medium- and POP Diesel may have meant to suggest historical response of the use of trucking heavy-duty regulation does not include that an analysis of the rebound effect services to measures of economic reductions in GHG emissions that do that incorporates these aspects would activity that generate demands for not translate directly to fuel have led the agencies to promulgate shipping of raw materials and finished consumption. Even if this were not the different standards, specifically, GHG products, including aggregate economic case, NHTSA believes that POP Diesel’s standards based on fuel CO2 content output, foreign trade, and retailing. As claims regarding the commercial rather than fuel efficiency standards. the agencies acknowledged in their viability of pure vegetable oil and POP NHTSA notes that its statutory analysis, however, research on the Diesel’s proprietary technology to obligation is to create and administer a magnitude of the rebound effect for enable its usage in medium- and heavy- fuel efficiency improvement program— heavy-duty vehicles has been limited; 19 duty vehicles are speculative. the agency does not have the option of for this reason, the agencies will 18 NHTSA recognized in the rule that not regulating fuel efficiency. As for monitor and conduct research on the this uniform approach to fuels may not the question of whether the agency’s subject in an ongoing effort to improve take advantage of potential additional analysis of the rebound effect in the their estimates. energy and national security benefits of final rule should have incorporated the NHTSA also notes that any increases increasing fleet percentages of aspects discussed in the POP Diesel in economy-wide energy consumption alternative-fueled vehicles. More petition, the agency believes that the and GHG emissions resulting from alternative-fueled vehicles on the road agency’s analysis of the rebound effect indirect rebound effects cannot would arguably displace petroleum- reasonably be ascribed to the fueled vehicles, and thereby increase 14 See POP Diesel Petition, at 3–4. requirement that vehicle manufacturers both U.S. energy and national security 15 See POP Diesel Petition, at 4; ‘‘Exhibit 1’’ to achieve higher fuel efficiency levels. If POP Diesel Petition. Examples of direct rebound by reducing the nation’s dependence on effects include shifts of some freight shipments the indirect effects that cause those foreign oil. However, for the reasons from rail, barge, or other transportation modes to increases were included in the discussed above, the agency determined trucking, reorganization of freight shippers’ logistics rulemaking analysis, however, they that the benefits of a harmonized initial operations in ways that substitute increased use of would undoubtedly add significantly to trucking services for warehousing and inventory program outweighed those potential holding, shifts to more distant sources of supply for the economic benefits from the rule. benefits for this first phase of heavy- raw materials and expansion of market areas for Responses to lower-cost trucking duty vehicle and engine standards.13 finished goods, which entail longer trucking services, such as consumers’ use of NHTSA continues to believe that the distances, reorganization of trucking firms’ savings from lower prices of goods that operations to emphasize objectives other than current fuel-neutral performance minimizing fuel consumption, such as use of lower- utilize trucking services for their measurement is the most appropriate cost but less fuel-efficient vehicles for some production and distribution to purchase treatment of alternative fuels for this shipments, less intensive truck maintenance, and other products that embody energy, as first phase of the heavy-duty fuel less careful optimization of vehicle load factors, well as any increases in multi-factor efficiency standards. As stated in the routing, and scheduling. productivity or frontier rebound impacts 16 Id. Examples of indirect rebound effects final rule, the agency intends to revisit include increases in consumption of energy- stemming from reduced truck energy this issue in the future to evaluate intensive products as consumers reallocate savings consumption and lower shipping costs, whether the fuel-neutral approach from lower prices for goods shipped by truck to represent important sources of continues to provide greater benefits purchase other products, and ‘‘multi-factor additional economic benefits from productivity’’ rebound effects, where firms increase than alternative approaches. output levels and substitute increased use of requiring trucks to achieve higher fuel trucking services for other production inputs. efficiency. Therefore, NHTSA does not 12 Id. at 57124–25. 17 Id. 13 Id. 18 See 49 U.S.C. 32902(k)(2). 19 See 76 FR 57327–9.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:10 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules 51503
believe that consideration of POP SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and memorandum (Memorandum for the Diesel’s claims regarding indirect Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Secretary of the Interior, Proposed rebound effects would have led the Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Revised Habitat for the Spotted Owl: agency to promulgate different (collectively referred to as the Minimizing Regulatory Burdens, 77 FR standards. ‘‘Services’’ or ‘‘we’’), propose to revise 12985 (March 5, 2012)). The President’s For purposes of the final standards, our regulations pertaining to impact February 28, 2012, memorandum we believe that the agency’s analysis of analyses conducted for designations of directed the Secretary of the Interior to the rebound effect represents the best critical habitat under the Endangered revise the regulations implementing the available estimate of the increases in Species Act of 1973, as amended (the Endangered Species Act to provide that commercial truck use that may result Act). These changes are being proposed a draft economic analysis be completed from increases in their fuel efficiency, as directed by the President’s February and made available for public comment and the extent to which these increases 28, 2012, memorandum, which directed at the time of publication of a proposed in use will offset the fuel savings (and us to take prompt steps to revise our rule to designate critical habitat. Both thus, CO2 emissions) projected to result regulations to provide that the economic transparency and public comment will from the recently-adopted rules. Thus, analysis be completed and made be improved if the public has access to while NHTSA agrees that the rebound available for public comment at the time both the scientific analysis and the draft effect is present, we believe that it is of publication of a proposed rule to economic analysis at the same time. We adequately accounted for in the final designate critical habitat. are therefore publishing a proposed rule rule. We do not believe that we would DATES: We will accept comments from to achieve that goal and seeking public have promulgated different standards if all interested parties until October 23, comments. Because the Act and its our analysis of the rebound effect had 2012. Please note that if you are using implementing regulations are jointly been done differently, as POP Diesel the Federal eRulemaking Portal (see administered by the Departments of the recommended. ADDRESSES below), the deadline for Interior and Commerce, the Secretary of IV. Conclusion submitting an electronic comment is the Interior consulted with the Secretary of Commerce on the revision of this In consideration of the foregoing, 11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on this date. regulation. The proposed revisions NHTSA is denying the POP Diesel would also address several court ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Petition. In accordance with 49 CFR part decisions and are informed by by one of the following methods: 552, this completes the agency’s review conclusions from a 2008 legal opinion • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// of the petition for rulemaking. by the Solicitor of the Department of the www.regulations.gov. Search for FWS– Interior. Specifically, we propose to Authority: 49 U.S.C. 32902; delegation of R9–ES–2011–0073, which is the docket authority at 49 CFR 1.95. revise 50 CFR 424.19 to clarify the number for this rulemaking. instructions for making information Issued: August 13, 2012. • U.S. mail or hand delivery: Public available to the public, considering the Christopher J. Bonanti, Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R9– impacts of critical habitat designations, Associate Administrator for Rulemaking, ES–2011–0073; Division of Policy and and considering exclusions from critical National Highway Traffic Safety Directives Management; U.S. Fish and habitat. The proposed rule is consistent Administration, Department of Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, with Executive Order 13563, and in Transportation. PDM–2042; Arlington, VA 22203. particular with the requirement of [FR Doc. 2012–20838 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] We will post all comments on retrospective analysis of existing rules, BILLING CODE 4910–59–P http://www.regulations.gov. This designed ‘‘to make the agency’s generally means that we will post any regulatory program more effective or personal information you provide us less burdensome in achieving the DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (see the Request for Information section regulatory objectives. below for more information). Fish and Wildlife Service This rule proposes the following FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: changes: Nicole Alt, U.S. Fish and Wildlife DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE (1) We propose to change the title of Service, Division of Conservation and § 424.19 from ‘‘Final Rules—impact Classification, 4401 N Fairfax Drive, National Oceanic and Atmospheric analysis of critical habitat’’ to ‘‘Impact Suite 420, Arlington, VA 22203, Administration analysis and exclusions from critical telephone 703/358–2171; facsimile 703/ habitat.’’ We propose to remove the 50 CFR Part 424 358–1735; or Marta Nammack, National current reference to ‘‘[f]inal rules’’ to Marine Fisheries Service, Office of allow this section to apply to both [Docket No. FWS–R9–ES–2011–0073; Protected Resources, 1315 East-West proposed and final critical habitat rules. Docket No. NOAA–120606146–2146–01; Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, We propose to add the term 4500030114] telephone 301/713–1401; facsimile 301/ ‘‘exclusions’’ in the title to more fully RIN 1018–AY62; 0648–BC24 713–0376. If you use a describe that this section addresses both telecommunications device for the deaf impact analyses and how they inform Endangered and Threatened Wildlife (TDD), call the Federal Information the exclusion process under section and Plants; Revisions to the Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. 4(b)(2) of the Act for critical habitat. Regulations for Impact Analyses of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (2) We propose to divide current Critical Habitat § 424.19 into three paragraphs. The Executive Summary AGENCIES: Fish and Wildlife Service, division into three paragraphs closely Interior; National Marine Fisheries Why we need to publish a rule. The tracks the requirements of the Act under Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Services have decided to revise our section 4(b)(2) and provides for a clearly Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), regulations to provide the public earlier defined process for considerations of Commerce. access to the draft economic analysis exclusions as required under the Act. supporting critical habitat designations, (3) Proposed paragraph (a) would ACTION: Proposed rule. consistent with the President’s implement the direction of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:10 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51504 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules
President’s February 28, 2012, conservation programs and use their areas from critical habitat designation memorandum by stating that, at the time authorities to further the purposes of the under section 4(b)(2) of the Act (M– of proposing a designation of critical Act. Designating critical habitat also 37016, ‘‘The Secretary’s Authority to habitat, the Secretary will make helps focus the efforts of other Exclude Areas from a Critical Habitat available for public comment the draft conservation partners, such as State and Designation under Section 4(b)(2) of the economic analysis of the designation. local governments, nongovernmental Endangered Species Act’’ (Oct. 3, 2008)) This proposed paragraph also carries organizations, and individuals. (DOI 2008). The Solicitor concluded, over the first half of the first sentence of Furthermore, when designation of among other things, that, while the Act the existing regulation, with critical habitat occurs near the time of requires the Secretary to consider the modifications. listing, it provides early conservation economic impact, the impact on (4) Proposed paragraph (b) would planning guidance to bridge the gap national security, and any other relevant implement the first sentence of section until the Services can complete more impact, the decision whether to make 4(b)(2) of the Act, which directs the thorough recovery planning. exclusions under section 4(b)(2) of the Secretary to consider the economic In addition to serving as a notification Act is at the discretion of the Secretary; impact, the impact on national security, tool, the designation of critical habitat that the Secretary has wide discretion and any other relevant impact of also provides a significant regulatory when weighing the benefits of exclusion specifying any particular area as critical protection—the requirement that against the benefits of inclusion; and habitat. This paragraph states that the Federal agencies consult with the that it is appropriate for the Secretary to impact analysis should focus on the Services under section 7(a)(2) of the Act consider impacts of a critical habitat incremental effects resulting from the to ensure that their actions are not likely designation on an incremental basis. designation of critical habitat. to destroy or adversely modify critical The Services have based this proposed (5) Proposed paragraph (c) would habitat. The Federal Government, rule on the reasoning and conclusions of implement the second sentence of through its role in water management, this opinion and the President’s section 4(b)(2) of the Act, which allows flood control, regulation of resources February 28, 2012, memorandum. the Secretary to exclude areas from the extraction and other industries, Federal Second, the President’s February 28, final critical habitat designation under land management, and funding, 2012 memorandum that directed the certain circumstances. authorization, or conduct of myriad Secretary of the Interior to revise the Background other activities, may propose actions implementing regulations of the Act to that are likely to affect critical habitat. provide that an analysis of the economic The purposes of the Endangered The designation of critical habitat impacts of a proposed critical habitat Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 ensures that the Federal Government designation be completed by the U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (Act), are to provide considers the effects of its actions on Services and made available to the a means to conserve the ecosystems habitat important to species’ public at the time of publication of a upon which listed species depend, to conservation and avoids or modifies proposed rule to designate critical develop a program for the conservation those actions that are likely to destroy habitat. The memo stated: ‘‘Uncertainty of listed species, and to achieve the or adversely modify critical habitat. on the part of the public may be purposes of certain treaties and This benefit should be especially avoided, and public comment conventions. Moreover, the Act states valuable when, for example, species improved, by simultaneous presentation that it is the policy of Congress that the presence or habitats are ephemeral in Federal Government will seek to nature, species presence is difficult to of the best scientific data available and conserve threatened and endangered establish through surveys (e.g., when a the analysis of economic and other species, and use its authorities in species such as a plant’s ‘‘presence’’ impacts.’’ furtherance of the purposes of the Act. may be limited to a seed bank), or Discussion of Proposed Revisions to 50 In passing the Act, Congress viewed protection of unoccupied habitat is CFR 424.19 habitat loss as a significant factor essential for the conservation of the contributing to species endangerment. species. This proposal would revise 50 CFR Habitat destruction and degradation The Secretaries of the Interior and 424.19 to clarify the instructions for have been a contributing factor causing Commerce (the ‘‘Secretaries’’) share making information available to the the decline of a majority of species responsibilities for implementing most public, considering the impacts of listed as threatened or endangered of the provisions of the Act. Generally, critical habitat designations, and under the Act (Wilcove et al. 1998). The marine and anadromous species are considering exclusions from critical present or threatened destruction, under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of habitat. modification, or curtailment of a Commerce and all other species are In proposing the specific changes to species’ habitat or range is included in under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the regulations that follow, and setting the Act as one of the factors on which the Interior, though jurisdiction is out the accompanying clarifying to base a determination that a species shared between the two departments for discussion in this preamble, the may be threatened or endangered. One some species, such as sea turtles and Services are establishing prospective of the tools provided by the Act to Atlantic salmon. Authority to standards only. Nothing in these conserve species is designation of administer the Act has been delegated proposed revised regulations is critical habitat. by the Secretary of the Interior to the intended to require (now or at such time Critical habitat represents the habitat Director of the FWS and by the as these regulations may become final) necessary for the species’ recovery. Secretary of Commerce to the Assistant that any previously completed critical Once designated, critical habitat Administrator for NMFS. habitat designation be reevaluated on provides for the conservation of listed This proposed rule addresses two this basis. Furthermore, if this proposed species in several ways. Specifying the developments related to 50 CFR 424.19. rule is finalized, we will adopt the geographic location of critical habitat First, the Solicitor of the Department of requirements of this regulation after the facilitates implementation of section the Interior issued a legal opinion on effective date. For proposed critical 7(a)(1) of the Act by identifying areas October 3, 2008, regarding the Secretary habitat designations published prior to where Federal agencies can focus their of the Interior’s authority to exclude the effective date of any final regulation,
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:10 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules 51505
the Services will continue to follow An ‘‘incremental analysis’’ is a result in the extinction of the species their current practices. method of determining the probable concerned. impacts of the designation that seeks to Statutory Authority Rationale for the Proposed identify and focus solely on the impacts Paragraph (a) The proposed regulatory changes over and above those caused by existing described below derive from sections protections and is used in the impact We propose to divide current § 424.19 4(b)(2) and 4(b)(8) of the Act. For the analysis, weighing of benefits, and into three paragraphs. The first two convenience of the reader, we are economic analysis. sentences of proposed paragraph (a) are reprinting those sections of the Act here: new and are being added to comply Relationship of the Key Terms with the Presidential Memorandum. (2) The Secretary shall designate critical habitat, and make revisions thereto, under The purpose of the impact analysis is They would read: subsection (a)(3) on the basis of the best to inform the Secretary’s decision about At the time of publication of a scientific data available and after taking into whether and/or how to consider proposed rule to designate critical consideration the economic impact, the excluding any particular area from a habitat, the Secretary will make impact on national security, and any other designation of critical habitat, as available for public comment the draft relevant impact, of specifying any particular economic analysis of the designation. area as critical habitat. The Secretary may authorized by the second sentence of section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Information The draft economic analysis will be exclude any area from critical habitat if he summarized in the Federal Register determines that the benefits of such that is used in the impact analysis can exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying come from a variety of sources, one of notice of the proposed designation of such area as part of the critical habitat, unless which is the draft economic analysis of critical habitat. he determines, based on the best scientific the proposed designation of critical The President’s February 28, 2012 and commercial data available, that the habitat. The Secretary must consider the memorandum directed the Secretary of failure to designate such area as critical probable economic, national security the Interior to take ‘prompt steps’ to habitat will result in the extinction of the revise the regulations. The first sentence species concerned. and other relevant impacts of the designation of critical habitat. This of this proposed change to the * * * * * regulations will comply with the (8) The publication in the Federal Register comparison is done through the method of an incremental analysis; that is, President’s direction. The second of any proposed or final regulation which is sentence specifies that a summary of the necessary or appropriate to carry out the comparing conditions with and without purposes of this Act shall include a summary the designation of critical habitat. The draft economic analysis would be by the Secretary of the data on which such incremental analysis methodology is published in the Federal Register notice regulation is based and shall show the also used in the economic analysis. of the proposed designation of critical relationship of such data to such regulation; habitat. The draft economic analysis and if such regulation designates or revises Proposed Revisions to 50 CFR 424.19 itself would be made available on critical habitat, such summary shall, to the We propose to change the title of this http://www.regulations.gov along with maximum extent practicable, also include a the proposed designation of critical brief description and evaluation of those section from ‘‘Final rules—impact activities (whether public or private) which, analysis of critical habitat’’ to ‘‘Impact habitat or on other Web sites as deemed in the opinion of the Secretary, if undertaken analysis and exclusions from critical appropriate by the Services. may adversely modify such habitat, or may habitat.’’ The current reference to The third sentence of proposed be affected by such designation. ‘‘[f]inal rules’’ would be deleted to allow paragraph (a) would carry over the first half of the first sentence of the existing Definition of Key Terms for the application of this section to both proposed and final critical habitat § 424.19, with modifications. It would Under the first sentence of section rules. We propose to add the term read: 4(b)(2) of the Act, the Services are ‘‘exclusions’’ to the title to more fully The Secretary will, to the maximum extent required to take ‘‘into consideration the describe that this section addresses both practicable, when proposing and finalizing economic impact, the impact on impact analyses and how they inform designation of critical habitat, briefly national security, and any other relevant the exclusion process under section describe and evaluate in the Federal Register impact, of specifying any particular area 4(b)(2) of the Act for critical habitat. notice any significant activities that are as critical habitat.’’ This is referred to as In the following text, we frequently known to have the potential to affect an area the ‘‘impact analysis.’’ Under the second considered for designation as critical habitat refer to the current regulatory language or be likely to be affected by the designation. sentence of section 4(b)(2) of the Act, at 50 CFR 424.19 and then give detailed the Secretary (via delegated authority to information about how we propose to This language implements section the Services) may exclude an area from revise that language. For your 4(b)(8) of the Act. We propose to add ‘‘to critical habitat after identifying and convenience, we set out the current text the maximum extent practicable’’ to weighing the benefits of inclusion and of § 424.19 here: track the statutory language. For the exclusion. This is referred to as the same reason, we would replace ‘‘weighing of benefits’’. The Secretary shall identify any significant ‘‘identify’’ with ‘‘briefly describe and activities that would either affect an area An economic analysis is a tool that considered for designation as critical habitat evaluate.’’ We emphasize, however, the informs both the required impact or be likely to be affected by the designation, statutory term ‘‘brief,’’ i.e., the analysis and the discretionary weighing and shall, after proposing designation of such description and evaluation is not meant of benefits. Additionally, the draft an area, consider the probable economic and to be an exhaustive analysis. The economic analysis informs the other impacts of the designation upon Services cannot predict the outcome of determinations established under other proposed or ongoing activities. The Secretary any potential section 7 consultation. statutes, regulations, or directives that may exclude any portion of such an area Rather, the purpose of this language in are applicable to rulemakings generally, from the critical habitat if the benefits of such section 4(b)(8) is merely to alert the exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying including critical habitat designations. the area as part of the critical habitat. The public generally to the relationship However, the draft economic analysis Secretary shall not exclude any such area if, between the designation of critical only addresses the consideration of the based on the best scientific and commercial habitat and activities on the landscape. potential economic impact of the data available, he determines that the failure We add the phrase ‘‘in the Federal designation of critical habitat. to designate that area as critical habitat will Register notice’’ to make clear that this
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:10 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51506 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules
brief description and evaluation will be Services should not consider Secretary would determine the published in the Federal Register notice improbable or speculative impacts, and appropriate scale based on what would of the designation of critical habitat. clarify that whatever impacts the most meaningfully or sufficiently We would keep the modifier Services consider are merely inform the decision in a particular ‘‘significant’’ with respect to activities, generalized predictions. However, the context. For example, for a wide-ranging which clarifies that the statutory Services do not intend that the term species with many square miles language should not be interpreted to ‘‘probable’’ requires a showing of (kilometers) of potential habitat across apply to all activities, however statistical probability or any specific several States, a relatively coarse-scale insignificant. We propose to replace numeric likelihood. Moreover, the analysis would be sufficiently ‘‘would * * * affect an area’’ with ‘‘are ‘‘activities’’ at issue are only those that informative, while for a narrow endemic known to have the potential to affect an would require consultation under species, with specialized habitat area’’ to make clear that the Services are section 7 of the Act. See DOI 2008 at requirements and relatively few discrete not able to predict with certainty what 10–12. Although impact analyses are occurrences, it might be appropriate to activities to address, but must infer the based on the best scientific data engage in a relatively fine-scale analysis activities from the best available available, any predictions of future for the designation of critical habitat. information. impacts are inherently uncertain and The Secretary may also use this subject to change. Thus, the Services discretion to focus the analysis on areas Rationale for the Proposed should consider the likely general where impacts are more likely, e.g., non- Paragraph (b) impact of the designation and not make Federal lands. See DOI 2008 at 17. Proposed paragraph (b) would specific predictions of the outcome of The second phrase of the second implement the first sentence of section particular section 7 consultations that sentence, ‘‘and will compare the 4(b)(2) of the Act (‘‘The Secretary shall have not in fact been completed. impacts with and without designation,’’ designate critical habitat * * * after We propose to add the phrase would clarify that impact analyses taking into consideration the economic ‘‘national security’’ to reflect statutory evaluate the incremental impacts of the impact, the impact on national security, amendments to section 4(b)(2) of the Act designation. This is sometimes referred and any other relevant impact, of (National Defense Authorization Act for to as an ‘‘incremental analysis’’ or specifying any particular area as critical Fiscal Year 2004, Pub. L. 108–136). ‘‘baseline approach.’’ For the purpose of habitat.’’). The proposed first sentence Also, we propose to add the word the impacts analysis required by the would carry over the second half of the ‘‘relevant’’ to the other impacts that the first sentence of section 4(b)(2) of the first sentence of the existing § 424.19, Services must consider to more closely Act, the incremental impacts are those with modifications, and would thus track the statutory language. probable economic, national security, repeat the basic statutory requirement. The first sentence of proposed and other relevant impacts of the We propose to replace ‘‘after proposing paragraph (b) uses the term ‘‘consider,’’ proposed critical habitat designation on designation of such an area’’ with which reflects the statutory term ongoing or potential Federal actions that ‘‘[p]rior to finalizing the designation of ‘‘consideration’’ in section 4(b)(2) of the would not otherwise occur without the critical habitat’’ to expressly provide for Act. The proposed regulations would designation. Put another way, the more flexibility in the timing of the not further define this term. However, incremental impacts are the probable consideration. The proposed first we agree with the Solicitor’s 2008 impacts on Federal actions for which sentence would read: Opinion that, in the context of section the designation is the ‘‘but for’’ cause. To determine the incremental impacts 4(b)(2) of the Act, to ‘‘consider’’ impacts Prior to finalizing the designation of of designating critical habitat, the the Services must gather available critical habitat, the Secretary will consider Services compare the protections the probable economic, national security, and information about the impacts on provided by the critical habitat other relevant impacts of the designation proposed or ongoing activities that upon proposed or ongoing activities. designation (the world with the would be subject to section 7 particular designation) to the combined The statute itself requires only that consultation, and then must give careful effects of all conservation-related the consideration occur—it does not thought to the relevant information in protections for the species (including specify when in the rulemaking process the context of deciding whether to listing) and its habitat in the absence of it must occur. That being said, we stress proceed with an exclusion analysis. See the designation of critical habitat (the that the Act’s legislative history is clear DOI 2008 at 14–16. world without designation, i.e., the that Congress intended consideration of The second and third sentences of baseline condition). Thus, determining economic impacts to neither affect nor proposed paragraph (b) are additions the incremental impacts requires delay the listing of species. Therefore, that would provide further guidance on identifying at a general level the regardless of the point in the rulemaking how the Services will consider impacts additional protections that a critical process at which consideration of of critical habitat designation. They habitat designation would provide for economic impacts begins, that read: the species; this does not require the consideration must be kept analytically The Secretary will consider impacts at a prejudging of the precise outcomes of distinct from, and have no effect on the scale that the Secretary determines to be hypothetical section 7 consultations. outcome or timing of, listing appropriate, and will compare the impacts Finally, the Services determine what determinations. We also note that an with and without the designation. Impacts probable impacts those incremental draft economic analysis is only one of may be qualitatively or quantitatively protections will have on Federal described. many pieces of information the actions, in terms of economic, national Secretary uses in consideration of The first phrase of the second security, or other relevant impacts (the whether to exclude areas under section sentence, ‘‘[t]he Secretary will consider incremental impacts). See DOI 2008 at 4(b)(2) of the Act. impacts at a scale that the Secretary 11. Potential impacts to Federal actions Also in proposed paragraph (b), we determines to be appropriate,’’ would could occur on private as well as public retained the phrases ‘‘probable’’ and clarify that the Secretary has the lands. ‘‘upon proposed or ongoing activities.’’ discretion to determine the scale at In addition to using an incremental These phrases provide guidance that the which impacts are considered. The analysis in the impacts analysis, the
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:10 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules 51507
Secretary will use an incremental Ass’n v. FWS, 248 F.3d 1277 (10th Cir. particular, the Ninth Circuit recently analysis in the weighing of benefits 2001). The genesis of the court’s concluded that the ‘‘faulty premise’’ that under the second sentence of section conclusion in that case was the led to the invalidation of the 4(b)(2), if the Secretary decides to definitions of ‘‘jeopardize the continued incremental analysis approach in 2001 undertake that optional analysis. In that existence of’’ and ‘‘destruction or no longer applies. Arizona Cattle context, the Secretary will use an adverse modification,’’ which are the Growers Ass’n v. Salazar, 606 F.3d incremental analysis to identify the standards for section 7 consultations in 1160, 1173 (9th Cir. 2010). The court benefits (economic and otherwise) of the Services’ 1986 joint regulations. See held, in light of this change in excluding an area from critical habitat, 50 CFR 402.02. Both phrases were circumstances, that ‘‘the FWS may and will likewise use an incremental defined in a similar manner in that they employ the baseline approach in analysis to identify the benefits of both looked to impacts on both survival analyzing a critical habitat designation.’’ specifying an area as critical habitat. and recovery of the species. Id. In so holding, the court noted that Benefits that may be addressed in the The court in New Mexico Cattle the baseline approach is ‘‘more logical weighing of benefits can result from Growers noted the similarity of the than’’ the coextensive approach. Id.; see additional protections, in the form of definitions, concluding that they were also: project modifications or conservation ‘‘virtually identical’’ and that the • Maddalena v. FWS, No. 08–CV– measures due to consultation under definition of ‘‘destruction or adverse 02292–H (AJB) (S.D. Cal. Aug. 5, 2010); section 7 of the Act; conversely, a modification’’ was in effect subsumed • Otay Mesa Property L.P. v. DOI, 714 benefit of exclusion can be avoiding into the jeopardy standard. 248 F.3d at F. Supp. 2d 73 (D.D.C. 2010); costs associated with those protections. 1283. According to the court, these • Fisher v. Salazar, 656 F. Supp. 2d In addition, benefits (and associated definitions thus led FWS to conclude 1357 (N.D. Fla. 2009); costs) can result if the designation that designation of critical habitat • Home Builders Ass’n of No. Cal. v. triggers compliance with separate usually had no incremental impact USFWS, 2006 U.S. Dist. Lexis 80255 authorities that are exercised in part as beyond the impacts of the listing itself. (E.D. Cal. Nov. 2, 2006), reconsideration a result of the Federal critical habitat Thus, given these definitions, the court granted in part, 2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis designation (e.g., additional reviews, concluded that doing only an 5208 (Jan. 24, 2007), aff’d, 616 F.3d 983 procedures, or protections under State incremental analysis rendered (9th Cir. 2010); or local jurisdictional authorities). See meaningless the requirement of • CBD v. BLM, 422 F. Supp. 2d 1115 DOI 2008 at 22–23. considering the impacts of the (N.D. Cal. 2006); Finally, because its primary purpose designation, as there were no • Cape Hatteras Access Preservation is to facilitate the impact analysis and incremental impacts to consider. Alliance v. DOI, 344 F. Supp. 2d 108 the weighing of benefits, the draft and Although the court noted that the (D.D.C. 2004). final economic analyses should focus on regulatory definitions had previously the incremental economic benefits of been called into question, id. at 1283 n.2 The Solicitor’s opinion also reaches the designation. (citing Sierra Club v. U.S. Fish & this conclusion. See DOI 2008 at 18–22. Use of an incremental analysis in each Wildlife Serv., 245 F.3d 434 (5th Cir. The Services may still, in appropriate of these contexts is the only logical way 2001)), the validity of the regulations circumstances, also analyze the broader to implement the Act. The purpose of had not been challenged in the case impacts of conserving the species at the impact analysis (described in the before it. Instead, to cure this apparent issue to put the incremental impacts of third sentence of proposed paragraph problem, the court held that the FWS the designation in context, or for (a)) is to inform the Secretary’s decision must analyze ‘‘all of the impacts of a complying with the requirements of about whether to engage in the optional critical habitat designation, regardless of other statutes or policies. See: • weighing of benefits under the second whether those impacts are attributable Arizona Cattle Growers’ Ass’n v. sentence of section 4(b)(2) of the Act co-extensively to other causes.’’ Id. at Kempthorne, 534 F. Supp. 2d 1013 (D. (addressed in proposed paragraph (c)). 1285. Ariz. 2008), aff’d, 606 F.3d 1160 (9th To understand the difference that In 2004, the Ninth Circuit (Gifford Cir. 2010); designation of an area makes and, Pinchot Task Force v. USFWS, 378 F.3d • Home Builders Ass’n of No. Cal. v. therefore, the benefits of including an 1059 (9th Cir. 2004)) invalidated the USFWS, 2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis 5208 (E.D. area in the designation or excluding an prior regulatory definition of Cal. Jan. 24, 2007), aff’d, 616 F.3d 983 area from the designation, one must ‘‘destruction or adverse modification.’’ (9th Cir. 2010); compare the hypothetical world with The court held that the definition gave • DOI 2008 at 21. the designation to the hypothetical too little protection to critical habitat by The third sentence of proposed world without the designation. This is not giving weight to Congress’s intent paragraph (b) would clarify that impacts why the Services compare the that designated critical habitat support may be qualitatively or quantitatively protections provided by the designation the recovery of listed species. Since described. In other words, there is no to the protections without the then, the Services have been applying absolute requirement that impacts of designation. This is consistent with the ‘‘destruction or adverse modification’’ any kind be quantified. See Cape general guidance given by the Office of in a way that allows the Services to Hatteras Access Preservation Alliance v. Management and Budget to executive define an incremental effect of DOI, 731 F. Supp. 2d 15 (D.D.C. Aug. branch agencies as to how to conduct designation. This eliminated the 17, 2010). cost-benefit analyses. See Circular A–4 predicate for the Tenth Circuit’s Rationale for the Proposed (available at http:// analysis. Therefore, the Services have Paragraph (c) www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/ concluded that it is appropriate to a004/a-4.pdf ). consider the impacts of designation on Proposed paragraph (c) would Nonetheless, between 2002 and 2008, an incremental basis. implement the second sentence of the Services generally did not conduct Indeed, no court outside of the Tenth section 4(b)(2) of the Act, which allows an incremental analysis; instead they Circuit has followed New Mexico Cattle the Secretary to exclude areas from the conducted a broader analysis of impacts Growers after the Ninth Circuit issued final critical habitat designation under pursuant to New Mexico Cattlegrowers Gifford Pinchot Task Force. In certain circumstances. It would read:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:10 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51508 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules
The Secretary has discretion to exclude • CBD v. Salazar, 2011 U.S. Dist. Required Determinations any particular area from the critical habitat Lexis 26967 (D.D.C. Mar. 16, 2011); Regulatory Planning and Review upon a determination that the benefits of • such exclusion outweigh the benefits of Wyoming State Snowmobile Ass’n (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) specifying the particular area as part of the v. USFWS, 741 F. Supp. 2d 1245 (D. Executive Order 12866 provides that critical habitat. In identifying those benefits, Wyo. 2010); the Office of Management and Budget’s in addition to the impacts considered • DOI 2008 at 24. Office of Information and Regulatory pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section, the Secretary may consider and assign the weight The third sentence of paragraph (c) Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant to any benefits relevant to the designation of essentially repeats the third sentence of rules. The Office of Information and critical habitat. The Secretary, however, will the existing section. This sentence Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rule is significant because it raises not exclude any particular area if, based on incorporates the limitation in the last the best scientific and commercial data novel legal or policy issues. available, the Secretary determines that the clause of section 4(b)(2) of the Act. See Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the failure to designate that area as critical DOI 2008 at 25. principles of E.O. 12866 while calling habitat will result in the extinction of the Request for Information for improvements in the nation’s species concerned. regulatory system to promote The first sentence of proposed Any final regulation based on this predictability, to reduce uncertainty, paragraph (c) would carry over the proposal will consider information and and to use the best, most innovative, second sentence of the existing section, recommendations timely submitted and least burdensome tools for with modifications. The phrase ‘‘the from all interested parties. We, solicit achieving regulatory ends. The Secretary has discretion’’ would be comments, information, and executive order directs agencies to added to emphasize that the exclusion recommendations from governmental consider regulatory approaches that of particular areas under section 4(b)(2) agencies, Native American tribes, the reduce burdens and maintain flexibility of the Act is always optional. See DOI scientific community, industry groups, and freedom of choice for the public 2008 at 6–9, 17. For example, the environmental interest groups, and any where these approaches are relevant, Secretary may choose not to exclude an other interested parties on this proposed feasible, and consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes area even if the impact analysis and regulation. All comments and materials further that regulations must be based subsequent balancing indicates that the received by the date listed in DATES on the best available science and that benefits of exclusion exceed the benefits above will be considered prior to the of inclusion and such exclusion would the rulemaking process must allow for approval of a final document. not result in the extinction of the public participation and an open species. This rulemaking does not modify the exchange of ideas. We have developed Additional minor changes to the first current methods and procedures of this rule in a manner consistent with sentence would make it more closely identifying and evaluating potential these requirements. This proposed rule track the statutory language. incremental impacts of a designation of is consistent with Executive Order The second sentence of paragraph (c) critical habitat. Nonetheless, we will 13563, and in particular with the is new. They would codify aspects of accept comments on the Services’ requirement of retrospective analysis of the legislative history, the case law, and approach to incremental impacts as well existing rules, designed ‘‘to make the the Services’ practices with respect to as on the manner in which particular agency’s regulatory program more exclusions. The second sentence would impacts are considered and weighed. effective or less burdensome in clarify the breadth of the Secretary’s achieving the regulatory objectives.’’ You may submit your information discretion with respect to the types of Regulatory Flexibility Act benefits to consider. See: concerning this proposed rule by one of • CBD v. Norton, 240 F. Supp. 2d the methods listed in ADDRESSES. If you Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 1090 (D. Ariz. 2003); submit information via http:// (as amended by the Small Business • Home Builders Ass’n of No. Cal. v. www.regulations.gov, your entire Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act USFWS, 2006 U.S. Dist. Lexis 80255 submission—including any personal (SBREFA) of 1996; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), (E.D. Cal. Nov. 2, 2006), reconsideration identifying information—will be posted whenever a Federal agency is required granted in part 2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis on the Web site. If your submission is to publish a notice of rulemaking for 5208 (Jan. 24, 2007), aff’d, 616 F.3d 983 made via a hardcopy that includes any proposed or final rule, it must (9th Cir. 2010); personal identifying information, you prepare, and make available for public • DOI 2008 at 25–28. may request at the top of your document comment, a regulatory flexibility For example, the Secretary may that we withhold this personal analysis that describes the effect of the consider effects on tribal sovereignty identifying information from public rule on small entities (i.e., small and the conservation efforts of non- review. However, we cannot guarantee businesses, small organizations, and Federal partners when considering that we will be able to do so. We will small government jurisdictions). excluding specific areas from a post all hardcopy submissions on However, no regulatory flexibility designation of critical habitat. The http://www.regulations.gov. analysis is required if the head of an House Committee report that agency, or his designee, certifies that the accompanied the 1978 amendments that Information and supporting rule will not have a significant added Section 4(b)(2) to the Act stated documentation that we receive in economic impact on a substantial that ‘‘[t]he consideration and weight response to this proposed rule will be number of small entities. SBREFA given to any particular impact is available for you to review at http:// amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act completely within the Secretary’s www.regulations.gov, or by to require Federal agencies to provide a discretion.’’ H.R. Rep. No. 95–1625, at appointment, during normal business statement of the factual basis for 17. Subsequent case law and the hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife certifying that a rule will not have a Solicitor’s Opinion have reflected that Service, Division of Conservation and significant economic impact on a view, as does the rule proposed here. Classification (see FOR FURTHER substantial number of small entities. We See: INFORMATION CONTACT). are certifying that these proposed
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:10 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules 51509
regulations would not have a significant impose no obligations on State, local, or the Secretaries have discretion to economic effect on a substantial number tribal governments. exclude any particular area from the of small entities. The following critical habitat upon a determination Takings (E.O. 12630) discussion explains our rationale. that the benefits of exclusion outweigh The proposed revisions to the In accordance with Executive Order the benefits of specifying the particular regulations revises and clarifies the 12630, these proposed regulations area as part of the critical habitat. In regulations governing how the Services would not have significant takings identifying those benefits, the analyze and communicate the impacts implications. These proposed Secretaries may consider effects on of a possible designation of critical regulations would not pertain to tribal sovereignty. habitat, and how the Services may ‘‘taking’’ of private property interests, exercise the Secretary’s discretion to nor would they directly affect private Paperwork Reduction Act exclude areas from designations. The property. A takings implication This proposed rule does not contain proposed revisions to the regulations assessment is not required because these any new collections of information that apply solely to the Services’ procedures proposed regulations (1) would not require approval by the OMB under the for the timing, scale, and scope of effectively compel a property owner to Paperwork Reduction Act. This impact analyses and considering suffer a physical invasion of property proposed rule would not impose exclusions from critical habitat. The and (2) would not deny all economically recordkeeping or reporting requirements changes included in these proposed beneficial or productive use of the land on State or local governments, regulatory revisions serve to clarify, and or aquatic resources. These proposed individuals, businesses, or do not expand the reach of, potential regulations would substantially advance organizations. An agency may not designations of critical habitat. a legitimate government interest conduct or sponsor, and a person is not NMFS and FWS are the only entities (conservation and recovery of required to respond to, a collection of that are directly affected by this rule endangered and threatened species) and information unless it displays a because we are the only entities that can would not present a barrier to all currently valid OMB control number. designate critical habitat. No external reasonable and expected beneficial use entities, including any small businesses, of private property. National Environmental Policy Act small organizations, or small We are analyzing these proposed governments, will experience any Federalism (E.O. 13132) regulations in accordance with the economic impacts from this rule. In accordance with Executive Order criteria of the National Environmental Therefore, the only effect on any 13132, we have considered whether Policy Act (NEPA), the Department of external entities large or small would these proposed regulations would have the Interior Manual (318 DM 2.2(g) and likely be positive through reducing any significant Federalism effects and have 6.3(D)), and Department of Commerce uncertainty on the part of the public by determined that a Federalism Departmental Administrative Order simultaneous presentation of the best assessment is not required. These 216–6. We will complete our analysis, scientific data available and the proposed regulations pertain only to in compliance with NEPA, before economic analysis of the designation of determinations to designate critical finalizing these proposed regulations. critical habitat. habitat under section 4 of the Act, and would not have substantial direct effects Energy Supply, Distribution or Use Unfunded Mandates Reform Act E.O. 13211) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) on the States, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Executive Order 13211 requires In accordance with the Unfunded the States, or on the distribution of agencies to prepare Statements of Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et power and responsibilities among the Energy Effects when undertaking certain seq.): various levels of government. actions. These proposed regulations, if (a) On the basis of information made final, are not expected to affect Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) contained in the ‘‘Regulatory Flexibility energy supplies, distribution, and use. Act’’ section above, these proposed These proposed regulations do not Therefore, this action is not a significant regulations would not ‘‘significantly or unduly burden the judicial system and energy action, and no Statement of uniquely’’ affect small governments. We meet the applicable standards provided Energy Effects is required. have determined and certify pursuant to in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2 Order 12988. These proposed Clarity of This Proposed Rule U.S.C. 1502, that these regulations regulations would clarify how the We are required by Executive Orders would not impose a cost of $100 million Services will make designations of 12866 and 12988 and by the or more in any given year on local or critical habitat under section 4 of the Presidential Memorandum of June 1, State governments or private entities. A Act. 1998, to write all rules in plain Small Government Agency Plan is not language. This means that each rule or required. As explained above, small Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes policy we publish must: governments would not be affected (a) Be logically organized; because the proposed regulations would In accordance with the President’s (b) Use the active voice to address not place additional requirements on memorandum of April 29, 1994, readers directly; any city, county, or other local ‘‘Government-to-Government Relations (c) Use clear language rather than municipalities. with Native American Tribal jargon; (b) These proposed regulations would Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive (d) Be divided into short sections and not produce a Federal mandate on State, Order 13175, and the Department of the sentences; and local, or tribal governments or the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we (e) Use lists and tables wherever private sector of $100 million or greater readily acknowledge our responsibility possible. in any year; that is, this proposed rule to communicate meaningfully with If you feel that we have not met these is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’’ recognized Federal Tribes on a requirements, send us comments by one under the Unfunded Mandates Reform government-to-government basis. In our of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To Act. These proposed regulations would proposed regulations, we explain that better help us revise the proposed rule,
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:10 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51510 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules
your comments should be as specific as 2. Revise § 424.19, including the designation. Impacts may be possible. For example, you should tell section heading, to read as follows: qualitatively or quantitatively described. us the sections or paragraphs that are (c) The Secretary has discretion to unclearly written, which sections or § 424.19 Impact analysis and exclusions from critical habitat. exclude any particular area from the sentences are too long, the sections critical habitat upon a determination where you feel lists or tables would be (a) At the time of publication of a that the benefits of such exclusion useful, etc. proposed rule to designate critical outweigh the benefits of specifying the habitat, the Secretary will make References Cited particular area as part of the critical available for public comment the draft habitat. In identifying those benefits, in A complete list of all references cited economic analysis of the designation. addition to the impacts considered in this document is available on the The draft economic analysis will be pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section, Internet at http://www.regulations.gov at summarized in the Federal Register the Secretary may consider and assign Docket No. FWS–R9–ES–2011–0073 or notice of the proposed designation of the weight to any benefits relevant to upon request from the U.S. Fish and critical habitat. the designation of critical habitat. The Wildlife Service (see FOR FURTHER The Secretary will, to the maximum Secretary, however, will not exclude INFORMATION CONTACT). extent practicable, when proposing and any particular area if, based on the best Authority finalizing designation of critical habitat, scientific and commercial data briefly describe and evaluate in the available, the Secretary determines that We are taking this action under the the failure to designate that area as authority of the Endangered Species Act Federal Register notice any significant activities that are known to have the critical habitat will result in the of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et extinction of the species concerned. seq.). potential to affect an area considered for designation as critical habitat or be Dated: June 1, 2012. List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 424 likely to be affected by the designation. Eileen Sobeck, Administrative practice and (b) Prior to finalizing the designation Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and procedure, Endangered and threatened of critical habitat, the Secretary will Wildlife and Parks, U.S. Department of the species. consider the probable economic, Interior. Dated: August 13, 2012. Proposed Regulation Promulgation national security, and other relevant impacts of the designation upon Alan D. Risenhoover, PART 424—[AMENDED] proposed or ongoing activities. The Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Secretary will consider impacts at a Regulatory Programs, National Marine 1. The authority citation for part 424 scale that the Secretary determines to be Fisheries Service. is revised to read as follows: appropriate, and will compare the [FR Doc. 2012–20438 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. impacts with and without the BILLING CODE 4310–55–P; 3510–22–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:10 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM 24AUP1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51511
Notices Federal Register Vol. 77, No. 165
Friday, August 24, 2012
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER the collection of information unless it Total Burden Hours: 292. contains documents other than rules or displays a currently valid OMB control Ruth Brown, proposed rules that are applicable to the number. public. Notices of hearings and investigations, Departmental Information Collection committee meetings, agency decisions and Food and Nutrition Service Clearance Officer. rulings, delegations of authority, filing of [FR Doc. 2012–20915 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] petitions and applications and agency Title: National Hunger Clearinghouse BILLING CODE 3410–30–P statements of organization and functions are Database Form. examples of documents appearing in this OMB Control Number: 0584–0474. section. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Summary of Collection: The National Hunger Clearinghouse collects, develops Food Safety and Inspection Service DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE and distributes information and [Docket No. FSIS–2012–0034] resources to help build the capacity of Submission for OMB Review; emergency food providers to address the Comment Request Codex Alimentarius Commission: immediate needs of struggling families Meeting of the Codex Committee on August 21, 2012. and individuals while promoting self- Processed Fruits and Vegetables The Department of Agriculture has reliance and access to healthy food. The AGENCY: submitted the following information Clearinghouse includes the National Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety, USDA. collection requirement(s) to OMB for Hunger Hotline, which refers people in review and clearance under the need anywhere in the U.S. to food ACTION: Notice of public meeting and Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, pantries, soup kitchen, government request for comments. Public Law 104–13. Comments programs and model grassroots SUMMARY: The Office of the Under regarding (a) whether the collection of organizations. Section 26 of the National Secretary for Food Safety, United States information is necessary for the proper School Lunch Act, which was added to Department of Agriculture (USDA), and performance of the functions of the the Act by Section 123 of Public Law the Agricultural Marketing Service agency, including whether the 103–448 on November 2, 1994, (AMS), are sponsoring a public meeting information will have practical utility; mandated that the Food and Nutrition on September 17, 2012. The objective of (b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate Service (FNS) enter into a contract with the public meeting is to provide of burden including the validity of the information and receive public methodology and assumptions used; (c) a non governmental organization to comments on agenda items and draft ways to enhance the quality, utility and develop and maintain a national United States (U.S.) positions that will clarity of the information to be information clearinghouse of grassroots be discussed at the 26th session of the collected; (d) ways to minimize the organizations working on hunger, food, Codex Committee on Processed Fruits burden of the collection of information nutrition, and other agricultural issues, and Vegetables (CCPFV) of the Codex on those who are to respond, including including food recovery, food assistance Alimentarius Commission (Codex), through the use of appropriate and self-help activities to aid which will be held in Montego Bay, automated, electronic, mechanical, or individuals to become self-reliant and other technological collection other activities that empower low- Jamaica from October 15–19, 2012. The Under Secretary for Food Safety and techniques or other forms of information income individuals. FNS will collect AMS recognize the importance of technology should be addressed to: Desk information using FNS–543, National providing interested parties the Officer for Agriculture, Office of Hunger Clearinghouse Database Form. Information and Regulatory Affairs, opportunity to obtain background Need and Use of the Information: FNS Office of Management and Budget information on the 26th Session of the will collect information to provide a (OMB), CCPFV and to address items on the [email protected] or resource for groups that assist low- agenda. fax (202) 395–5806 and to Departmental income individuals or communities DATES: The public meeting is scheduled Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail regarding nutrition assistance program for September 17, 2012, from 1:00 p.m.– Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250– or other assistance. The information 3:00 p.m. 7602. Comments regarding these aids FNS to fight hunger and improve ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be information collections are best assured nutrition by increasing participation in held at USDA, Jamie L. Whitten of having their full effect if received the FNS nutrition programs through the Building, 1400 Independence Avenue within 30 days of this notification. development, coordination, and SW., Room 107–A, Washington, DC Copies of the submission(s) may be evaluation of strategic initiatives, 20250. obtained by calling (202) 720–8958. partnership, and outreach activities. Documents related to the 26th session An agency may not conduct or Description of Respondents: Not-for- of the CCPFV will be accessible via the sponsor a collection of information profit institutions; Business or other for- World Wide Web at the following unless the collection of information profit. address: http:// displays a currently valid OMB control www.codexalimentarius.org/. number and the agency informs Number of Respondents: 1,750. Dorian LaFond, U.S. Delegate to the potential persons who are to respond to Frequency of Responses: Reporting: 26th session of the CCPFV, invites U.S. the collection of information that such Annually. interested parties to submit their persons are not required to respond to comments electronically to the
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51512 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
following email address: • Proposed Draft Sampling Plans subscription service which provides [email protected]. Including Metrological Provisions for automatic and customized access to Call-In Number: Controlling Minimum Drained Weight selected food safety news and If you wish to participate in the of Canned Fruits and Vegetables in information. This service is available at public meeting for the 26th session of Packing Media (Step 4) http://www.fsis.usda.gov/ the CCPFV by conference call, please • Food Additive Provisions for News_&_Events/Email_Subscription/. use the call-in number and participant Processed Fruits and Vegetables: Options range from recalls to export code listed below: Additional Provisions for Inclusion in information to regulations, directives, Call-in Number: 1–888–858–2144 Selected Adopted and Under and notices. Customers can add or Participant code: 6208658 Development Standards delete subscriptions themselves, and For Further Information About the • Matters Related to Selected Codex have the option to password protect 26th Session of the CCPFV Contact: Standards for Processed Fruits and their accounts. Dorian LaFond, AMS, Fruits and Vegetables Vegetables Division, Stop 0235, Room • Discussion Paper on the Possible USDA Nondiscrimination Statement 2086, South Agriculture Building, 1400 Extension of the Territorial Application USDA prohibits discrimination in all Independence Avenue SW., of the Codex Regional Standard for its programs and activities on the basis Washington, DC 20250–0235, Phone: Ginseng Products of race, color, national origin, gender, (202) 690–4944, Fax: (202) 720–0016, • Discussion Paper on the religion, age, disability, political beliefs, Email: [email protected]. Development of a Codex Standard for sexual orientation, and marital or family For Further Information About the Chemically Flavored Water-Based status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to Public Meeting Contact: Jasmine Curtis, Drinks all programs.) Persons with disabilities U.S. Codex Office, 1400 Independence • Status of Work on the Revision of who require alternative means for Avenue SW., Room 4865, Washington, Codex Standards for Processed Fruits communication of program information DC 20250. Phone: (202) 690–1124, Fax: and Vegetables (Braille, large print, or audiotape) (202) 720–3157, Email: Each issue listed will be fully should contact USDA’s Target Center at [email protected]. described in documents distributed, or 202–720–2600 (voice and TTY). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: to be distributed, by the Secretariat prior To file a written complaint of to the meeting. Members of the public discrimination, write USDA, Office of Background may access copies of these documents the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, Codex was established in 1963 by two (see ADDRESSES). 1400 Independence Avenue SW., United Nations organizations, the Food Public Meeting Washington, DC 20250–9410 or call and Agriculture Organization and the 202–720–5964 (voice and TTY). USDA World Health Organization. Through At the September 17, 2012, public is an equal opportunity provider and adoption of food standards, codes of meeting, draft U.S. positions on the employer. practice, and other guidelines agenda items will be described and discussed, and attendees will have the Done at Washington, DC on August 2, developed by its committees, and by 2012. promoting their adoption and opportunity to pose questions and offer comments. Written comments may be Karen Stuck, implementation by governments, Codex U.S. Manager for Codex Alimentarius. seeks to protect the health of consumers offered at the meeting or sent to the U.S. and ensure fair practices in the food Delegate for the 26th session of the [FR Doc. 2012–20814 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] trade. CCPFV, Dorian LaFond (see ADDRESSES). BILLING CODE 3410–DM–P The CCPFV is responsible for: Written comments should state that they Elaborating worldwide standards and relate to activities of the 26th session of DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE related texts for all types of processed the CCPFV. fruits and vegetables including but not Additional Public Notification Forest Service limited to canned, dried and frozen FSIS will announce this notice online products as well as fruit and vegetable Allegheny Resource Advisory through the FSIS Web page located at juices and nectars. Committee The Committee is hosted by the http://www.fsis.usda.gov/ regulations_&_policies/ AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. United States. _ _ Federal Register Notices/index.asp. ACTION: Notice of meeting. Issues To Be Discussed at the Public FSIS will also make copies of this Meeting Federal Register publication available SUMMARY: The Allegheny Resource The following items on the agenda for through the FSIS Constituent Update, Advisory Committee will meet in the 26th session of the CCPFV will be which is used to provide information Warren, Pennsylvania. The committee is discussed during the public meeting: regarding FSIS policies, procedures, authorized under the Secure Rural • Matters Referred to the CCPFV by regulations, Federal Register notices, Schools and Community Self- Codex and Other Codex Committees FSIS public meetings, and other types of Determination Act (Pub. L 112–141) (the • Proposed Draft Codex Standard for information that could affect or would Act) and operates in compliance with Table Olives (Revision of Codex be of interest to constituents and the Federal Advisory Committee Act. Standard 66–1981) (Step 4) stakeholders. The Update is The purpose of the committee is to • Proposed Draft Codex Standard for communicated via Listserv, a free improve collaborative relationships and Certain Canned Fruits (Revision of electronic mail subscription service for to provide advice and recommendations Remaining Individual Standards for industry, trade groups, consumer to the Forest Service concerning projects Canned Fruits) (Step 4) interest groups, health professionals, and funding consistent with the title II • Proposed Draft Codex Standard for and other individuals who have asked of the Act. The meeting is open to the Certain Quick Frozen Vegetables to be included. The Update is also public. The purpose of the meetings is (Revision of Individual Standards for available on the FSIS Web page. In to review and recommend projects Quick Frozen Vegetables) (Step 4) addition, FSIS offers an electronic mail authorized under title II of the Act.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51513
DATES: The meetings will be held CONTACT. All reasonable review and recommend projects for September 12 and 26, 2012, at 10:00 accommodation requests are managed approval. Anyone who would like to a.m. on a case by case basis. bring related matters to the attention of ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at Dated: August 17, 2012. the committee may file written the Allegheny National Forest Kathy Albaugh, statements with the committee staff before or after the meeting. The agenda Supervisor’s Office located at 4 Farm Acting Forest Supervisor. will include time for people to make Colony Drive in Warren, Pennsylvania. [FR Doc. 2012–20848 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Written comments may be submitted oral statements of three minutes or less. as described under Supplementary BILLING CODE 3410–11–P Individuals wishing to make an oral Information. All comments, including statement should request in writing by Friday, September 8, 2012 to be names and addresses when provided, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE are placed in the record and are scheduled on the agenda. Written available for public inspection and Forest Service comments and requests for time for oral copying. The public may inspect comments must be sent to Rhonda comments received at 4 Farm Colony Lawrence County Resource Advisory O’Byrne, District Ranger, 2014 N. Main, Drive, Warren, Pennsylvania. Please call Committee Spearfish, SD 57783, or by email to ahead to Kathy Mohney at (814) 728– [email protected], or via facsimile to 6298 to facilitate entry into the building AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 605–642–4156. A summary of the to view comments. ACTION: Notice of meeting. meeting will be posted at https:// fsplaces.fs.fed.us/fsfiles/unit/wo/ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUMMARY: The Lawrence County secure_rural_schools.nsf/RAC/ Kathy Mohney, RAC Coordinator, Resource Advisory Committee will meet Allegheny National Forest Supervisor’s Lawrence?OpenDocument within 21 in Spearfish, South Dakota. The days of the meeting. Office, 4 Farm Colony Drive in Warren, committee is authorized under the Pennsylvania 16365, phone (814) 728– Meeting Accommodations: If you Secure Rural Schools and Community require sign language interpreting, 6298 or email [email protected]. Self-Determination Act (Pub. L. 112– Individuals who use telecommunication assistive listening devices or other 141) (the Act) and operates in reasonable accommodation for access to devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the compliance with the Federal Advisory Federal Information Relay Service the meeting please request this in Committee Act. The purpose of the advance by contacting the person listed (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 between 8:00 committee is to improve collaborative in the section titled FOR FURTHER a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Eastern Standard relationships and to provide advice and INFORMATION CONTACT. All reasonable Time, Monday through Friday. recommendations to the Forest Service SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The accommodation requests are managed concerning projects and funding on a case by case basis. following business will be conducted: consistent with the title II of the Act. Allegheny Resource Advisory The meeting is open to the public. The Dated: August 17, 2012. Committee members will solicit and purpose of the meeting is to review and Craig Bobzien, consider project proposals for recommend projects authorized under Forest Supervisor. recommendation for funding. Anyone title II of the Act. [FR Doc. 2012–20849 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] who would like to bring related matters DATES: The meeting will be held BILLING CODE 3410–11–P to the attention of the committee may September 11, 2012, at 5:00 p.m. file written statements with the committee staff before the meeting. The ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at agenda will include time for people to the Northern Hills Ranger District Office ARCHITECTURAL AND make oral statements of three minutes or located at 2014 N. Main, Spearfish, SD TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS less. Individuals wishing to make an 57783. COMPLIANCE BOARD Written comments may be submitted oral statement should request in writing Meetings by September 7, 2012, to be scheduled as described under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION on the September 12, 2012, agenda, and . All comments, including AGENCY: Architectural and by September 21, 2012, to be scheduled names and addresses when provided, Transportation Barriers Compliance on the September 26, 2012, agenda. are placed in the record and are Board. available for public inspection and Written comments and requests for time ACTION: Notice of meetings. for oral comments must be sent to 4 copying. The public may inspect Farm Colony Drive, Warren, comments received at the Northern Hills SUMMARY: The Architectural and Pennsylvania 16365, or by email to Ranger District Office. Please call ahead Transportation Barriers Compliance [email protected] or via facsimile to to 605–642–4622 to facilitate entry into Board (Access Board) plans to hold its 814–726–1462. A summary of the the building to view comments. regular committee and Board meetings meeting will be posted at https:// FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: in Washington, DC, Monday through fsplaces.fs.fed.us/fsfiles/unit/wo/ Rhonda O’Byrne, District Ranger, Wednesday, September 10–12, 2012 on secure_rural_schools.nsf/RAC/ Northern Hills Ranger District, 605– the times and location listed below. F9B9F96FDB72CAE28825754A00 642–4622 or [email protected]. DATES: The schedule of events is as 5A4689?OpenDocument within 21 days Individuals who use follows: of the meeting. telecommunication devices for the deaf Meeting Accommodations: If you (TDD) may call the Federal Information Monday, September 10, 2012 require sign language interpreting, Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 10:30 a.m.–5 p.m. Ad Hoc Rulemaking assistive listening devices or other between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Committees: Closed to Public reasonable accommodation please Eastern Standard Time, Monday request this in advance of the meeting through Friday. Tuesday, September 11, 2012 by contacting the person listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 9:30–11 a.m. Ad Hoc Committee on section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION following business will be conducted: Frontier Issues
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51514 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
11–Noon Planning and Evaluation OMB Control Number: 0648–0472. Respondent’s Obligation: Required to Committee Form Number(s): NA. obtain or retain benefits. 1:30–3:30 p.m. Technical Programs Type of Request: Regular submission OMB Desk Officer: Committee (extension of a current information [email protected]. 4–4:30 p.m. Budget Committee collection). Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained by Wednesday, September 12, 2012 Number of Respondents: 250. Average Hours per Response: calling or writing Jennifer Jessup, 9:30 a.m.–Noon Ad Hoc Rulemaking Semiannual reports, 7 hours, six Departmental Paperwork Clearance Committees: Closed to Public minutes; annual reports, 52 minutes. Officer, (202) 482–0336, Department of 1:30–3 p.m. Board Meeting Burden Hours: 4,145. Commerce, Room 6616, 14th and ADDRESSES: Meetings will be held at the Needs and Uses: This request is for a Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, Access Board Conference Room, 1331 F regular submission (extension of a DC 20230 (or via the Internet at Street NW., suite 800, Washington, DC currently approved information [email protected]). Written comments and 20004. collection). recommendations for the proposed FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For NOAA funds habitat restoration information collection should be sent further information regarding the projects including grass-roots, within 30 days of publication of this meetings, please contact David Capozzi, community-based habitat restoration; notice to Executive Director, (202) 272–0010 debris prevention and removal; removal [email protected]. (voice); (202) 272–0054 (TTY). of barriers to migrating fish; and large- SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: At the scale, targeted restoration through Dated: August 21, 2012. Board meeting scheduled on the individual projects and restoration Gwellnar Banks, afternoon of Wednesday, September 12, partnerships. Awards are made as grants Management Analyst, Office of the Chief the Access Board will consider the or cooperative agreements under the Information Officer. following agenda items: authority of the Magnuson-Stevens [FR Doc. 2012–20862 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] • Approval of the draft July 11, 2012 Fishery Conservation and Management BILLING CODE 3510–22–P meeting minutes (vote) Act and the Fish and Wildlife • Planning and Evaluation Committee Coordination Act, 16 U.S.C. 661, as Report amended by the Reorganization Plan DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE • Technical Programs Committee No. 4 of 1970. Report NOAA requires specific information International Trade Administration • Budget Committee Report on habitat restoration projects that are [A–552–812] • Ad Hoc Committee Reports funded, as part of routine progress • Executive Director’s Report reporting. Recipients of NOAA funds Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the • Public Comment, Open Topics submit information such as project Socialist Republic of Vietnam: All meetings are accessible to persons location, restoration techniques used, Preliminary Affirmative Determination with disabilities. An assistive listening species benefited, acres restored, stream of Critical Circumstances in the system, computer assisted real-time miles opened to access for diadromous Antidumping Duty Investigation transcription (CART), and sign language fish, volunteer participation, and other AGENCY: Import Administration, interpreters will be available at the parameters. International Trade Administration, Board meeting and committee meetings. The required information enables Department of Commerce. Persons attending Board meetings are NOAA to track, evaluate and report on DATES: Effective Date: August 24, 2012. requested to refrain from using perfume, coastal and marine habitat restoration FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: cologne, and other fragrances for the and demonstrate accountability for comfort of other participants (see federal funds. This information is used Irene Gorelik at (202) 482–6905, AD/ www.access-board.gov/about/policies/ to populate a database of NOAA-funded CVD Operations, Office 9, Import fragrance.htm for more information). habitat restoration, debris prevention Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of David M. Capozzi, and removal, and barrier removal projects. The database, with its robust Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Executive Director. querying capabilities, is instrumental to Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. [FR Doc. 2012–20807 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] provide accurate and timely responses Background BILLING CODE 8150–01–P to NOAA, Department of Commerce, On August 2, 2012, the Department of Congressional and Constituent Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) inquiries. It also facilitates reporting by DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE published its preliminary determination NOAA on the Government Performance in the antidumping duty investigation of and Results Act ‘‘acres restored’’ Submission for OMB Review; steel wire garment hangers from the performance measure. Grant recipients Comment Request Socialist Republic of Vietnam are required by the NOAA Grants (‘‘Vietnam’’).1 On August 2, 2012, The Department of Commerce will Management Division to submit Petitioners 2 filed a timely critical submit to the Office of Management and periodic performance reports and a final circumstances allegation, pursuant to 19 Budget (OMB) for clearance the report for each award; this collection CFR 351.206(c)(1), alleging that critical following proposal for collection of stipulates the information to be information under the provisions of the provided in these reports. 1 See Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Affected Public: State, local and tribal Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Preliminary Chapter 35). government, not-for-profit institutions, Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Agency: National Oceanic and business or other for-profit Postponement of Final Determination, 77 FR 46044 organizations. (August 2, 2012) (‘‘Preliminary Determination’’). Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2 M&B Metal Products Company, Inc.; Innovative Title: NOAA Restoration Center Frequency: Annually and Fabrication LLC/Indy Hanger; and US Hanger Performance Progress Report. semiannually. Company, LLC.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51515
circumstances exist with respect to increased by at least 15 percent over the provided below, in determining whether imports of the merchandise under imports during an immediately the above statutory criteria have been consideration. On August 2, 2012, the preceding period of comparable satisfied in this case, we have examined: Department issued a letter to the TJ duration, the Secretary will not consider (1) The evidence presented in Group,3 the remaining cooperative the imports massive.’’ 19 CFR 351.206(i) Petitioners’ August 2, 2012, allegation; mandatory respondent, requesting defines ‘‘relatively short period’’ (2) information obtained since the monthly shipment data from August generally as the period starting on the initiation of this investigation; and (3) 2011 through May 2012.4 On August 3, date the proceeding begins (i.e., the date the ITC’s preliminary injury 2012, the TJ Group filed a letter the petition is filed) and ending at least determination. withdrawing its participation from this three months later. This section of the Section 733(e)(1)(A)(i) of the Act: investigation.5 regulations further provides that, if the History of Dumping and Material Injury In accordance with 19 CFR Department ‘‘finds that importers, or 351.206(c)(1), when a critical by Reason of Dumped Imports in the exporters or producers, had reason to United States or Elsewhere of the circumstances allegation is filed 30 days believe, at some time prior to the Subject Merchandise or more before the scheduled date of the beginning of the proceeding, that a final determination, the Department will proceeding was likely,’’ then the In determining whether a history of issue a preliminary finding whether Department may consider a period of dumping and material injury exists, the there is a reasonable basis to believe or not less than three months from that Department generally has considered suspect that critical circumstances exist. earlier time. current or previous antidumping duty Because the critical circumstances orders on subject merchandise from the allegation in this case was submitted Critical Circumstances Allegation country in question in the United States after the preliminary determination was In their allegation, Petitioners contend and current orders in any other published, the Department must issue that, based on the dumping margins country.11 In this case, the current its preliminary findings of critical assigned by the Department in the investigation of the subject merchandise circumstances no later than 30 days Preliminary Determination, importers marks the first instance that the after the allegation was filed.6 knew or should have known that the Department has examined whether the goods are dumped into the United Legal Framework merchandise under consideration was being sold at less than fair value States. As a result, the Department Section 733(e)(1) of the Tariff Act of (‘‘LTFV’’).7 Petitioners also contend previously has not imposed an 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), provides that, based on the preliminary antidumping duty order on the subject that the Department, upon receipt of a determination of injury by the U.S. merchandise. Moreover, the Department timely allegation of critical International Trade Commission is not aware of any antidumping duty circumstances, will determine whether (‘‘ITC’’), there is a reasonable basis to order on subject merchandise from there is a reasonable basis to believe or impute importers’ knowledge that Vietnam in another country. Therefore, suspect that: (A)(i) There is a history of material injury is likely by reason of the Department finds no history of dumping and material injury by reason such imports.8 Finally, as part of their injurious dumping of the subject of dumped imports in the United States allegation and pursuant to 19 CFR merchandise pursuant to section or elsewhere of the subject merchandise, 351.206(h)(2), Petitioners submitted 733(e)(1)(A)(i) of the Act. or (ii) the person by whom, or for whose import statistics for the ‘‘like product’’ Section 733(e)(1)(A)(ii): The Importer account, the merchandise was imported covered by the scope of this Knew or Should Have Known That knew or should have known that the investigation for the period between Exporter Was Selling at Less Than Fair exporter was selling the subject August 2011 and May 2012, as evidence Value and That There Was Likely To Be merchandise at less than its fair value of massive imports of garment hangers Material Injury and that there was likely to be material from Vietnam during a relatively short In determining whether an importer injury by reason of such sales; and (B) period.9 there have been massive imports of the knew or should have known that the subject merchandise over a relatively Analysis exporter was selling subject short period. The Department’s normal practice in merchandise at LTFV and that there was Further, 19 CFR 351.206(h)(1) determining whether critical likely to be material injury by reason of provides that, in determining whether circumstances exist pursuant to the such sales, the Department must rely on imports of the subject merchandise have statutory criteria has been to examine the facts before it at the time the been ‘‘massive,’’ the Department evidence available to the Department, determination is made. The Department normally will examine: (i) The volume such as: (1) The evidence presented in generally bases its decision with respect and value of the imports; (ii) seasonal Petitioners’ critical circumstances to knowledge on the margins calculated trends; and (iii) the share of domestic allegation; (2) import statistics released in the preliminary determination and consumption accounted for by the by the ITC; and (3) shipment the ITC’s preliminary injury imports. In addition, 19 CFR information submitted to the determination. { } The Department normally considers 351.206(h)(2) provides that, ‘‘ i n Department by the respondents selected margins of 25 percent or more for export general, unless the imports during the for individual examination.10 As further ‘relatively short period’ * * * have price sales and 15 percent or more for 7 See Petitioners’ Critical Circumstances constructed export price sales sufficient 3 The TJ Group consists of: the Pre-Supreme Allegation, dated August 2, 2012, at 2–3. to impute importer knowledge of sales Entity, Infinite Industrial Hanger Limited, and TJ 8 See id. at 3–4. Co., Ltd. See, e.g., Preliminary Determination, 77 FR 9 See id. at 4–5, Attachment 1. Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative at 46047–48, 46053 n. 109. 10 See, e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales Determination of Critical Circumstances: Small 4 See Department’s letter to the TJ Group, dated at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Final Diameter Graphite Electrodes from the People’s August 2, 2012, at 1–2. Determination of Critical Circumstances: Circular Republic of China, 74 FR 2049, 2052–53 (January 5 See TJ Group’s Letter of Withdrawal, dated Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People’s 14, 2009) (‘‘SDGE’’). August 3, 2012, at 1–2. Republic of China, 73 FR 31970, 31972–73 (June 5, 11 See Carbon Steel Pipe, 73 FR at 31972–73; 6 See 19 CFR 351.206(c)(2)(ii). 2008) (‘‘Carbon Steel Pipe’’); Final Determination of SDGE, 74 FR 2052–53.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51516 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
at LTFV.12 The Department Section 733(e)(1)(B): Whether There through May 2012, at the time of preliminarily determined a margin of Have Been Massive Imports of the filing.24 135.81 percent for the TJ Group, which Subject Merchandise Over a Relatively The TJ Group was also assigned as the separate rate to Short Period the non-selected separate rate It has been the Department’s practice applicants.13 Additionally, the Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.206(h)(2), the to conduct its massive imports analysis Department preliminarily assigned a Department will not consider imports to based on the experience of investigated margin of 187.51 percent, as adverse be massive unless imports in the companies, using the reported monthly facts available (‘‘AFA’’) to the Vietnam- comparison period have increased by at shipment data for the base and wide entity, which includes one of the least 15 percent over imports in the base comparison periods.25 However, as mandatory respondents, South East Asia period. The Department normally noted above, on August 3, 2012, the TJ Hamico Export Joint Stock Company considers a ‘‘relatively short period’’ as Group withdrew its participation from (‘‘Hamico’’).14 Therefore, because the the period beginning on the date the this investigation, thus it did not preliminary margins are greater than 25 proceeding begins and ending at least respond to the Department’s request for percent for all producers and exporters, three months later.18 For this reason, the monthly shipment data for the base and 26 we preliminarily find, with respect to Department normally compares the comparison periods. Therefore, the all producers and exporters, that there is import volumes of the subject Department preliminarily determines a reasonable basis to believe or suspect merchandise for at least three months that pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A) that importers knew, or should have immediately preceding the filing of the and (C) of the Act, use of the facts known, that exporters were selling the petition (i.e., the ‘‘base period’’) to a otherwise available are necessary in merchandise under consideration at comparable period of at least three reaching the applicable determination LTFV. months following the filing of the under this title with respect to the TJ In determining whether an importer petition (i.e., the ‘‘comparison Group. Furthermore, section 776(b) of the Act knew or should have known that there period’’).19 provides that, if a party has failed to act was likely to be material injury caused In their August 2, 2012, allegation, to the best of its ability, the Department by reason of such imports, the Petitioners maintained that importers, may apply an adverse inference. The TJ Department normally will look to the exporters, or foreign producers gained Group withdrew its participation from preliminary injury determination of the knowledge that this proceeding was this investigation and from the ITC.15 If the ITC finds a reasonable possible when the petition for an scheduled verification of its books and indication of present material injury to antidumping duty investigation was records. Thus, we are using facts the relevant U.S. industry, the 20 filed on December 29, 2011. available, in accordance with section Department will determine that a Petitioners noted that when a petition is 776(a) of the Act and, pursuant to reasonable basis exists to impute filed in the second half of a month, the section 776(b) of the Act, we also find importer knowledge that material injury month following the filing is treated as 16 that AFA is warranted so that the TJ is likely by reason of such imports. part of the post-petition period.21 Group does not obtain a more favorable Here, the ITC found that ‘‘there is a Petitioners also included in their result by failing to cooperate than if it reasonable indication that an industry allegation U.S. import data collected had fully cooperated. Accordingly, we in the United States is materially from the ITC’s Dataweb.22 Based on this preliminarily find that there were injured by reason of imports from data, Petitioners provided data for a massive imports of merchandise from Taiwan and Vietnam of steel wire five-month base period (August 2011 the TJ Group, pursuant to our practice.27 garment hangers, provided for in through December 2011) and a five- subheading 7326.20.00 of the month comparison period (January 2012 Separate Rate Respondents Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the through May 2012), the most recent data It has also been the Department’s United States * * *.’’ 17 available at the time of filing, in practice to conduct its massive imports showing whether imports were analysis of the separate rate respondents 12 See, e.g., Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod massive.23 Therefore, based on the date based on the experience of investigated From Germany, Mexico, Moldova, Trinidad and of the filing of the petition, i.e., companies.28 Thus, we did not request Tobago, and Ukraine: Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances, 67 FR 6224, 6225 (February December 29, 2012, which was in the monthly shipment information from the 11, 2002); Affirmative Preliminary Determination of second half of the month, the three separate rate respondents. Critical Circumstances: Magnesium Metal from the Department agrees with Petitioners that However, where mandatory respondents People’s Republic of China, 70 FR 5606, 5607 January 2012 is the month in which received AFA, we have not imputed (February 3, 2005). 13 importers, exporters, or producers knew adverse inferences of massive imports to See Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at 46053. the non-individually examined 14 See id. or should have known an antidumping 15 See, e.g., Certain Potassium Phosphate Salts duty investigation was likely, and falls from the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary within the comparison period. We also 24 See ‘‘Memorandum to the File, from Irene Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances agree that using a five-month base Gorelik, Analyst, Office 9; Antidumping Duty in the Antidumping Duty Investigation, 75 FR Investigation of Steel Wire Garment Hangers from 24572, 24573 (May 5, 2010) (‘‘Salt Critical period and a five-month comparison the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Preliminary Circumstances Prelim’’). period for import analysis is reasonable, Affirmative Critical Circumstances Memorandum,’’ 16 See, e.g., Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod as the ITC’s Dataweb contained data up (‘‘Dataweb Memo’’) dated concurrently with this From Germany, Mexico, Moldova, Trinidad and notice at Exhibits I–II; see also Petitioners’ Critical Tobago, and Ukraine: Preliminary Determination of Circumstances Allegation at Attachment I. 18 See 19 CFR 351.206(i). 25 Critical Circumstances, 67 FR 6224, 6225 (February See, e.g., Carbon Steel Pipe, 73 FR at 31972– 19 11, 2002); Affirmative Preliminary Determination of See Salt Critical Circumstances Prelim, 75 FR 73; SDGE, 74 FR 2052–53. Critical Circumstances: Magnesium Metal from the at 24574. 26 See the Department’s letter to the TJ Group People’s Republic of China, 70 FR 5606, 5607 20 See Petitioners’ Critical Circumstances dated August 2, 2012; see also TJ Group’s Letter of (February 3, 2005). Allegation dated August 2, 2012, at 4. Withdrawal dated August 3, 2012. 17 See Steel Wire Garment Hangers from Taiwan 21 See id. at 4. 27 See SDGE, 74 FR at 2052–2053. and Vietnam, Investigation Nos. 701–TA–487 and 22 See id. at 5. 28 See, e.g., Salt Critical Circumstances Prelim, 75 731–TA–1197–1198 (Preliminary), 77 FR 9701 23 See id. at Attachment 1. At the time of filing, FR at 24575; Carbon Steel Pipe, 73 FR at 31972– (February 17, 2012) (‘‘ITC Prelim’’). import data was available only through May 2012. 73; and SDGE, 74 FR at 2053.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51517
companies receiving a separate rate. was non-cooperative because certain Preliminary Affirmative Determination Instead, the Department has relied upon companies did not respond to our of Critical Circumstances the ITC’s Dataweb import statistics, requests for information.33 As a result, Record evidence indicates that where appropriate, in determining pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act, we importers of steel wire garment hangers whether there have been massive preliminarily found that the use of AFA knew, or should have known, that imports for the separate rate was warranted to determine the exporters were selling the merchandise respondents. Accordingly, as the basis Vietnam-wide rate.34 As AFA, we at LTFV, and that there was likely to be for determining whether imports were preliminarily assigned to the Vietnam- material injury by reason of such sales. massive for these separate rate wide entity a rate of 187.51 percent, In addition, we have imputed that the respondents, we are relying on the ITC’s which is the highest transaction-specific Vietnam-wide entity and the TJ Group Dataweb import statistics as evidence rate calculated for the TJ Group.35 has massive imports during a relatively that imports in the post-petition period Because the Vietnam-wide entity has short period. Lastly, record evidence were massive for those companies. As shows that the separate rate respondents stated above, in this case, the ITC’s been unresponsive for the duration of the proceeding, the record does not had massive imports during a relatively Dataweb import volume data shows an short period. Therefore, in accordance increase of 19.62 percent of steel wire contain shipment data from the Vietnam-wide entity for purposes of our with section 733(e)(1) of the Act, we garment hanger imports from Vietnam preliminarily find that there is reason to 29 critical circumstances analysis. during the comparison period. Thus, believe or suspect that critical Therefore, there is no verifiable pursuant to 19 CFR 351.206(h), we circumstances exist for imports of the information on the record with respect determine that this increase, being merchandise under consideration from to the Vietnam-wide entity’s base and greater than 15 percent, shows that the Vietnam-wide entity (which comparison period shipment volumes. imports in the five-month comparison includes Hamico), the TJ Group, and the period were massive for the separate Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides separate rate respondents (CTN Limited rate respondents. that, if an interested party or any other Company, Ju Fu Co., Ltd., and Triloan person (A) withholds information that Vietnam-Wide Entity (Including Hangers, Inc.) in this antidumping duty has been requested by the administering Hamico) and the Application of AFA investigation.38 authority or the Commission under this In this investigation, the Department title, (B) fails to provide such Suspension of Liquidation selected Hamico and the TJ Group as information by the deadlines for In accordance with section mandatory respondents for individual submission of the information or in the 30 703(e)(2)(A) of the Act, we are directing examination. In the Preliminary form and manner requested, subject to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Determination, the Department subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 782, to suspend liquidation of any determined that there were exporters/ (C) significantly impedes a proceeding unliquidated entries of the merchandise producers of the merchandise under under this title, or (D) provides such under consideration from Vietnam investigation during the period of information but the information cannot entered, or withdrawn from warehouse investigation from Vietnam, including be verified as provided in section 782(i), for consumption, on or after May 4, Hamico,31 that either: (1) Did not the administering authority and the 2012, which is 90 days prior to the date respond to the Department’s request for of publication of the Preliminary information, or (2) failed to provide Commission shall, subject to section Determination in the Federal Register. information that was not available on 782(d), use the facts otherwise available the record but necessary to calculate an in reaching the applicable ITC Notification determination under this title. accurate dumping margin. Therefore, In accordance with section 733(f) of pursuant to 776(a)(2)(A), (B), and (C) of Furthermore, section 776(b) of the Act the Act, we have notified the ITC of our the Act we treated these Vietnamese provides that, if a party has failed to act preliminary affirmative critical exporters/producers, including Hamico, to the best of its ability, the Department circumstances determination. as part of the Vietnam-wide entity may apply an adverse inference. The because they did not qualify for a Vietnam-wide entity has been non- Public Comment separate rate.32 cooperative during the entire In the Preliminary Determination, the Further, information on the record proceeding.36 Thus, we are using facts Department stated that case briefs or indicates that the Vietnam-wide entity available, in accordance with section other written comments may be 776(a) of the Act, and, pursuant to submitted to the Assistant Secretary for 29 See Dataweb Memo at Exhibits I–II; see also section 776(b) of the Act, we also find Import Administration no later than Petitioners’ Critical Circumstances Allegation at Attachment I. that AFA is warranted so that the seven days after the date the final 30 See ‘‘Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Vietnam-wide entity does not obtain a verification report is issued.39 However, Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and more favorable result by failing to as noted above, the TJ Group withdrew Countervailing Duty Operations, from James C. cooperate than if it had fully from participation in this investigation, Doyle, Director, Office 9; Antidumping Duty Investigation of Steel Wire Garment Hangers from cooperated. Accordingly, as we have including the scheduled verification. the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Respondent done under similar factual scenarios in Consequently, as there were no other Selection,’’ dated February 16, 2012. other proceedings, we preliminarily find verifications scheduled for this 31 We preliminarily found that Hamico failed to that there were massive imports of proceeding, the Department is setting provide the information requested by the Department in a timely manner and in the form merchandise from the Vietnam-wide the public comment deadline herein. required, and significantly impeded the entity.37 Therefore, case briefs addressing any Department’s ability to calculate an accurate issues in the Preliminary Determination margin. The Department was unable to calculate a 33 or this preliminary affirmative margin without the necessary information, See id. requiring the application of facts otherwise 34 See id. determination of critical circumstances available to Hamico for the purpose of the 35 See id., 77 FR at 46053. Preliminary Determination. See Preliminary 36 See id. 38 See section 733(f) of the Act; 19 CFR Determination, 77 FR at 46049–51. 37 See, e.g., Salt Critical Circumstances Prelim, 75 351.206(c)(2)(ii). 32 See id. FR at 24572–24573. 39 See Preliminary Determination, 77 FR at 46054.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51518 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
may be submitted to the Assistant positions in the General Engineering, preference eligibles, as well as Secretary for Import Administration no 801 series and General Physical Science, information supporting the finding of a later than seven days after the 1301 series. severe shortage of candidates for the publication date of this notice. Rebuttal DATES: The direct-hire authority pilot positions covered under the direct-hire briefs, limited to issues raised in case program will begin on August 24, 2012, authority. briefs, are due no later than five days until August 24, 2013. On December 20, 2011, NIST after the deadline for submitting case FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: published a Federal Register notice (76 briefs.40 A list of authorities used and an Susanne Porch at the National Institute FR 78889) extending the direct-hire executive summary of issues should of Standards and Technology, (301) pilot for an additional six (6) months. accompany any briefs submitted to the 975–3000; or Valerie Smith at the U.S. During this extended pilot period, NIST Department. This summary should be Department of Commerce, (202) 482– submitted a request to the Department limited to five pages total, including 0272. of Commerce to implement direct-hire footnotes. All submissions to the authority under 5 U.S.C. 3304(a)(3) on a SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Department, including case briefs and permanent basis for Nuclear Reactor rebuttal briefs, must be filed Background Operator positions in NIST’s Scientific electronically using Import In accordance with Public Law 99– and Engineering Technician (ZT) career Administration’s Antidumping and 574, the National Bureau of Standards path at the Pay Band III and above, and Countervailing Duty Centralized Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1987, for all positions in NIST’s Scientific and Electronic Service System (‘‘IA the Office of Personnel Management Engineering (ZP) career path at the Pay ACCESS’’). An electronically filed (OPM) approved a demonstration Band III and above except for the document must be received successfully project plan, ‘‘Alternative Personnel Information Technology Management, in its entirety by the Department’s Management System (APMS) at the 2210 series; the General Engineering, electronic records system, IA ACCESS, National Institute of Standards and 801 series; and the General Physical by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, on the Technology (NIST),’’ and published the Science, 1301 series. The request date of the established deadline, if plan in the Federal Register on October included a statistical analysis applicable. Finally, this notice is a 2, 1987 (52 FR 37082). The project plan determining the impact of direct-hire public document and is on file has been modified twice, on May 17, authority on preference eligibles as well electronically via IA ACCESS. IA 1989 (54 FR 21331) and Sept. 25, 1990 as a justification supporting the finding ACCESS is available to registered users (55 FR 39220), to clarify certain NIST of a severe shortage of candidates in the at http://iaaccess.trade.gov and in the authorities. The project plan and covered positions. Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the subsequent amendments were On April 20, 2012, the Department of main Department of Commerce consolidated in the final APMS plan, Commerce, in consultation with the building. Office of Personnel Management, This determination is published which became permanent on October 21, 1997 (62 FR 54604). NIST first approved NIST’s request to implement pursuant to sections 733(f) and 777(i) of direct-hire authority on a permanent the Act and 19 CFR 351.206(c)(2)(ii). amended the plan on May 6, 2005 (70 FR 23996), to strengthen the link basis for the above occupations. The Dated: August 20, 2012. between pay and performance, to Department of Commerce also granted Paul Piquado, simplify the pay-for-performance NIST approval to pilot direct-hire Assistant Secretary for Import system, and to broaden the link between authority under 5 U.S.C. 3304(a)(3) for Administration. performance and retention service credit all positions in the General Engineering, [FR Doc. 2012–20911 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] for reduction in force, which became 801 series and the General Physical BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P effective upon the date of publication. Science, 1301 series. NIST amended the plan again on July The APMS plan provides for 15, 2008 (73 FR 40500), to improve modifications to be made as experience DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE flexibility in rewarding new and mid- is gained, results are analyzed, and level employees and to broaden the conclusions are reached on how the National Institute of Standards and system is working. This notice formally Technology ability to make performance distinctions, and that amendment announces the modification to the [Docket Number 120706223–2223–01] became permanent on October 1, 2008. APMS plan to implement direct-hire On December 3, 2010, the Department procedures under 5 U.S.C. 3304(a)(3) on Alternative Personnel Management of Commerce approved NIST’s request a pilot basis for twelve (12) months. System (APMS) at the National to pilot direct-hire under 5 U.S.C. During this pilot period, NIST will Institute of Standards and Technology 3304(a)(3) for a period of one year for all gather data on the impact of direct-hire authority on preference eligibles. NIST AGENCY: National Institute of Standards positions within the Scientific and will also include data from the previous and Technology, Department of Engineering (ZP) career path at the Pay pilot’s expiration date of June 5, 2012. Commerce. Band III and above, for Nuclear Reactor Operator positions in the Scientific and If additional time is required to ACTION: Notice. Engineering Technician (ZT) career path complete review of the data, the pilot SUMMARY: This notice announces at Pay Band III and above, and for all may be extended for an additional six changes to existing provisions of the occupations for which there is a special (6) months. National Institute of Standards and rate under the General Schedule (GS) Dated: August 2, 2012. Technology’s (NIST) Alternative pay system. On January 5, 2011, NIST David Robinson, Personnel Management System (APMS). published a Federal Register notice (76 Associate Director for Management NIST will pilot direct-hire authority for FR 539) announcing that the agency Resources. a period of one year from the would be implementing the direct-hire publication date of this notice, for all pilot for a period of one year. During the Table of Contents pilot, information was gathered on the I. Executive Summary 40 See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(i), (d)(1). impact of direct-hire authority on II. Basis for APMS Plan Modification
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51519
III. Changes to the APMS Plan to jobs for which OPM determines that DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE I. Executive Summary there is a severe shortage of candidates or a critical hiring need. National Oceanic and Atmospheric The National Institute of Standards OPM’s direct-hire authority enables Administration and Technology’s (NIST) Alternative agencies to hire, after public notice is Personnel Management System (APMS) RIN 0648–XC184 given, any qualified application without is designed to (1) improve hiring and Marine Mammals; File No. 17403 allow NIST to compete more effectively regard to 5 U.S.C. 3309–3318, 5 CFR part 211, or 5 CFR part 337, subpart A. for high-quality researchers through AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries NIST’s APMS allows the NIST Director direct hiring, selective use of higher Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and to modify procedures if no new waiver entry salaries, and selective use of Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), from law or regulation is added. Given recruiting allowances; (2) motivate and Commerce. this modification is in accordance with retain staff through higher pay potential, ACTION: Notice; receipt of application. pay-for-performance, more responsive existing law and regulation, the NIST personnel systems, and selective use of Director is authorized to make the SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that retention allowances; (3) strengthen the changes described in this notice. The Robert Pilley, Leighside, Bridge Road, manager’s role in personnel modification to our final Federal Leighwoods, Bristol, BS8 3PB, United management through delegation of Register notice, dated October 21, 1997, Kingdom, has applied in due form for a personnel authorities; and (4) increase with respect to our Staffing authorities permit to conduct commercial/ the efficiency of personnel systems is provided below. educational photography on bottlenose through installation of a simpler and In 1987, with the approval of the dolphins (Tursiops truncatus). more flexible classification system NIST APMS (52 FR 37082), and in 1997, DATES: Written, telefaxed, or email based on pay banding through reduction when the APMS plan was modified (62 comments must be received on or before of guidelines, steps, and paperwork in FR 54604), OPM concurred that all September 24, 2012. occupations in the ZP career path at the classification, hiring, and other ADDRESSES: The application and related Pay Band III and above constitute a personnel systems, and through documents are available for review shortage category; Nuclear Reactor automation. upon written request or by appointment Operator positions in the ZT Career Path Since implementing the APMS in in the following offices: at the Pay Band III and above constitute 1987, according to findings in the Office Permits and Conservation Division, a shortage category; and all occupations of Personnel Management’s ‘‘Summative Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, for which there is a special rate under Evaluation Report National Institute of 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, the General Schedule pay system Standards and Technology Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301) constitute a shortage category. Demonstration Project: 1988–1995,’’ 427–8401; fax (301) 713–0376; and NIST has accomplished the following: III. Changes in the APMS Plan Southeast Region, NMFS, 263 13th NIST is more competitive for talent; Avenue South, Saint Petersburg, FL NIST retained more top performers than The APMS at NIST, published in the 33701; phone (727) 824–5312; fax (727) a comparison group; and NIST managers Federal Register on October 21, 1997 824–5309. reported significantly more authority to (62 FR 54604) is amended as follows. Written comments on this application make decisions concerning employee 1. The information under the should be submitted to the Chief, pay. This modification builds on this subsection titled: ‘‘Direct Hire: Critical Permits and Conservation Division, at success by piloting direct-hire authority Shortage Occupations’’ is replaced with: the address listed above. Comments may for the General Engineering, 801 series NIST uses direct-hire procedures for also be submitted by facsimile to (301) and General Physical Science, 1301 categories of occupations which require skills 713–0376, or by email to NMFS. series under 5 U.S.C. 3304(a)(3) for a that are in short supply. All Nuclear Reactor [email protected]. Please include period of twelve (12) months. Operator positions at the Pay Band III and the File No. in the subject line of the This amendment modifies the October above in the ZT Career Path constitute a email comment. 21, 1997 Federal Register notice. shortage category, and all occupations at the Those individuals requesting a public Specifically, it enables NIST to hire, Pay Band III and above in the ZP Career Path hearing should submit a written request after public notice is given, any constitute a shortage category except for the to the Chief, Permits and Conservation qualified applicant without regard to 5 Information Technology Management, 2210 series; the General Engineering, 801 series; Division at the address listed above. The U.S.C. 3309–3318, 5 CFR part 211, or 5 request should set forth the specific CFR part 337, subpart A for a period of and the General Physical Science, 1301 series. NIST will pilot direct-hire procedures reasons why a hearing on this twelve (12) months. During this pilot for the General Engineering, 801 series and application would be appropriate. period, NIST will gather data on the the General Physical Science, 1301 series for FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: impact of direct-hire authority on a period of twelve (12) months. Any Colette Cairns or Carrie Hubard, (301) preference eligibles. NIST will also positions in these categories may be filled 427–8401. include data from the previous pilot’s through direct-hire procedures in accordance expiration date of June 5, 2012. If with 5 U.S.C. 3304(a)(3). NIST advertises the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The additional time is required to complete availability of job opportunities in direct-hire subject permit is requested under the a review of the data, the pilot may be occupations by posting on the OPM authority of the Marine Mammal extended for an additional six (6) USAJOBS Web site. NIST will follow internal Protection Act of 1972, as amended direct-hire procedures for accepting (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) and the months. applications. NIST will continually monitor the regulations governing the taking and effectiveness of this amendment. importing of marine mammals (50 CFR NIST intends to publish a part 216). Section 104(c)(6) provides for II. Basis for APMS Plan Modification consolidated plan that reflects all photography for educational or Section 3304(a)(3) of title 5, United amendments to the APMS in FY13. commercial purposes involving non- States Code, provides agencies with the [FR Doc. 2012–20919 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] endangered and non-threatened marine authority to appoint candidates directly BILLING CODE 3510–13–P mammals in the wild.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51520 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
Mr. Pilley requests a five-year and conservation efforts. The Application Received photography permit to film bottlenose application and related documents may Permit 17077 dolphin strand-feeding events in the be viewed online at: https:// estuaries and creeks of Bull Creek and apps.nmfs.noaa.gov/preview/ The University of California, Davis is around Hilton Head, South Carolina, preview_open_for_comment.cfm. These requesting a 4-year scientific research and mud-plume feeding events in the documents are also available upon and enhancement permit to take adult waters of the Florida Keys. Filmmakers written request or by appointment by and juvenile CCV steelhead, SR winter- plan to use three filming platforms: a contacting NMFS by phone (916) 930– run Chinook salmon, CV spring-run static, remotely-operated camera placed 3607 or fax (916) 930–3629. Chinook salmon, and sDPS green on the mudflats, a radio-controlled DATES: Written comments on the permit sturgeon associated with research camera helicopter, and a radio- applications must be received at the activities in the Cache Slough Complex, controlled camera boat. For both appropriate address or fax number (see Sherman Lake, and Suisun Marsh in the locations combined, up to 196 dolphins ADDRESSES) no later than 5 p.m. Pacific San Francisco estuary, California. In the annually may be approached and standard time on September 24, 2012. studies described below, researchers do filmed. Filming would occur over 14 not expect to kill any listed fish but a days in each location. Footage would be ADDRESSES: Written comments on either small number, up to 20 percent used in two wildlife education application should be submitted to the (equivalent to one fish), may die as an documentaries: ‘‘Earthflight 3D’’, and Protected Resources Division, NMFS, unintended result of the research ‘‘Dolphins-Spy in the Pod’’, both for the 650 Capitol Mall, Room 5–100, activities. Sacramento, CA 95814. Comments may British Broadcasting Corporation and The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is also be submitted via fax to (916) 930– Discovery Channel. dominated by deep-water aquatic In compliance with the National 3629 or by email to habitats that tend to support invasive Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 [email protected]. fishes such as largemouth bass and not U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), an initial FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: native species. Relatively little shallow determination has been made that the Amanda Cranford, Sacramento, water and marsh (SWM) habitat activity proposed is categorically California, ph.: 916–930–3706, email: remains, although it dominated the excluded from the requirement to [email protected]. Delta before the 1850s. In other prepare an environmental assessment or estuaries, such areas are critical for fish environmental impact statement. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Concurrent with the publication of reproduction, fish rearing, and fish this notice in the Federal Register, Species Covered in This Notice foraging. However, in the San Francisco Estuary (SFE), there are limited data on NMFS is forwarding copies of the This notice is relevant to federally application to the Marine Mammal fish usage of such habitat, in part threatened California Central Valley because of the difficulty in effectively Commission and its Committee of (CCV) steelhead (Oncorhynchus Scientific Advisors. sampling SWM regions. The purpose of mykiss), threatened Central Valley (CV) this project is to develop better Dated: August 21, 2012. spring-run Chinook salmon (O. understanding of how physical habitat, Tammy C. Adams, tshawytscha), endangered Sacramento flow and other factors interact to Acting Chief, Permits and Conservation River (SR) winter-run Chinook salmon maintain assemblages of native and non- Division, Office of Protected Resources, (O. tshawytscha), and threatened native aquatic species in the upper SFE. National Marine Fisheries Service. southern distinct population segment of The project will span three distinct North American (sDPS) green sturgeon [FR Doc. 2012–20931 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] regions across the SFE: (1) The Cache- (Acipenser medirostris). BILLING CODE 3510–22–P Lindsay Slough complex, (2) the Authority Sherman Lake complex and (3) Suisun Marsh. The survey methods will be the DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Scientific research permits are issued same for each of these regions, and will in accordance with section 10(a)(1)(A) include otter trawling, beach seining National Oceanic and Atmospheric of the ESA of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531– and electrofishing. Water quality and Administration 1543) and regulations governing listed habitat data will be collected fish and wildlife permits (50 CFR parts RIN 0648–XC171 concurrently. 222–226). NMFS issues permits based Endangered and Threatened Species; on findings that such permits: (1) Are The project specifically targets Take of Anadromous Fish applied for in good faith; (2) if granted splittail and other native minnow and exercised, would not operate to the populations. Some incidental take of AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries ESA listed salmonids and sDPS green Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and disadvantage of the listed species which are the subject of the permits; and (3) sturgeon may be expected. All sampled Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), fish will be placed in a bucket of Commerce. are consistent with the purposes and policies set forth in section 2 of the aerated, ambient water, examined for ACTION: Receipt of application for ESA. The authority to take listed species responsiveness and returned to the scientific research and enhancement. is subject to conditions set forth in the water as soon as possible with minimal handling that will include species SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that permits. identification and length estimates. NMFS has received one scientific Anyone requesting a hearing on the research and enhancement permit application listed in this notice should Dated: August 21, 2012. application request relating to set out the specific reasons why a Dwayne Meadows, anadromous species listed under the hearing on the application(s) would be Acting Chief, Endangered Species Division, Endangered Species Act (ESA). The appropriate (see ADDRESSES). Such Office of Protected Resources, National proposed research activities are hearings are held at the discretion of the Marine Fisheries Service. intended to increase knowledge of the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, [FR Doc. 2012–20929 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] species and to help guide management NMFS. BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51521
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE action during this meeting. Action will specifications for 2013/14. The teams be restricted to those issues specifically also will review status reports on National Oceanic and Atmospheric listed in this notice and any issues various management actions, review the Administration arising after publication of this notice draft Ecosystems Considerations RIN 0648–XC179 that require emergency action under Chapter, and proposed changes to section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Bering Sea/Aleutian Island and Gulf of New England Fishery Management Act, provided the public has been Alaska groundfish stock assessment Council; Public Meeting notified of the Council’s intent to take models. final action to address the emergency. The Agenda is subject to change, and AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries the latest version is posted at http:// Special Accommodations Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/npfmc/ Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), This meeting is physically accessible PDFdocuments/meetings/ Commerce. to people with disabilities. Requests for GPTagenda912. ACTION: Notice; public meeting. sign language interpretation or other Although non-emergency issues not auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul contained in this agenda may come SUMMARY: The New England Fishery J. Howard, Executive Director, at (978) before this group for discussion, those Management Council (Council) is 465–0492, at least 5 days prior to the issues may not be the subject of formal scheduling a public meeting of its meeting date. action during these meetings. Action Scientific and Statistical Committee to Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. will be restricted to those issues consider actions affecting New England specifically listed in this notice and any Dated: August 21, 2012. fisheries in the exclusive economic zone issues arising after publication of this William D. Chappell, (EEZ). Recommendations from this notice that require emergency action group will be brought to the full Council Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable under section 305(c) of the Magnuson- Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. for formal consideration and action, if Stevens Fishery Conservation and appropriate. [FR Doc. 2012–20936 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Management Act, provided the public DATES: This meeting will be held on BILLING CODE 3510–22–P has been notified of the Council’s intent Wednesday, September 12, 2012 at 9 to take final action to address the a.m. and Thursday, September 13, 2012 emergency. at 8:30 a.m. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Special Accommodations ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at National Oceanic and Atmospheric the Hotel Providence, 139 Mathewson Administration These meetings are physically Street, Providence, RI 02903; telephone: accessible to people with disabilities. (401) 861–8000; fax: (401) 861–8002. RIN 0648–XC183 Requests for sign language Council address: New England interpretation or other auxiliary aids North Pacific Fishery Management Fishery Management Council, 50 Water should be directed to Gail Bendixen, Council; Public Meetings Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. (907) 271–2809, at least 5 working days FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries prior to the meeting date. J. Howard, Executive Director, New Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Dated: August 21, 2012. England Fishery Management Council; Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), William D. Chappell, telephone: (978) 465–0492. Commerce. Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On ACTION: Notice of public meetings. Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. Wednesday, September 12, the [FR Doc. 2012–20933 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery Scientific and Statistical Committee Management Council’s (Council) Gulf of BILLING CODE 3510–22–P (SSC) will review Scallop Plan Alaska (GOA) and Bering Sea/Aleutian Development Team projections and Islands (BS/AI) groundfish plan teams develop acceptable biological catch will meet in Seattle, WA. COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM (ABC) recommendations for fishing PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR DATES: The meetings will begin at 9 a.m. years 2013 and 2014. In addition, they SEVERELY DISABLED will provide input to the Terms of on Tuesday, September 11, and Reference for a review of scallop survey continue through Friday, September 14, Procurement List; Additions methods to be conducted by the NOAA/ 2012. NMFS Northeast Fisheries Science ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From Center. the Alaska Fisheries Science Center, People Who Are Blind or Severely On Thursday, September 13, the SSC 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Building 4, Disabled. will continue to review groundfish stock National Marine Mammal Lab Room ACTION: Additions to the Procurement assessments and develop ABC 2039 (GOA Plan Team) and Traynor List. recommendations for fishing years 2013 Room 2076 (BS/AI Plan Team), Seattle, SUMMARY: through 2015 for Gulf of Maine WA. This action adds products and haddock, Cape Cod/Gulf of Maine Council address: North Pacific services to the Procurement List that yellowtail flounder, Southern New Fishery Management Council, 605 W. will be furnished by nonprofit agencies England/Mid-Atlantic yellowtail 4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK employing persons who are blind or flounder, Georges Bank yellowtail 99501–2252. have other severe disabilities. flounder, witch flounder, plaice, and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane DATES: Effective Date: 9/24/2012. Georges Bank/Gulf of Maine white hake. DiCosimo or Diana Stram, NPFMC; ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase Although non-emergency issues not telephone: (907) 271–2809. From People Who Are Blind or Severely contained in this agenda may come SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda: Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, before this group for discussion, those Principal business is to recommend 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, issues may not be the subject of formal proposed groundfish catch Arlington, Virginia 22202–3259.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51522 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leaf, Whole, 6/5 oz Containers COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM Patricia Briscoe, Telephone: (703) 603– NSN: 8950–01–E61–8133—Spice, Oregano PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR 7740, Fax: (703) 603–0655, or email Leaf, Whole, 3/24 oz Containers SEVERELY DISABLED [email protected]. NSN: 8950–01–E61–0664—Spice, Thyme, Ground, 6/12 oz Containers Procurement List Proposed Additions SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NSN: 8950–01–E61–8136—Spice, Thyme, Leaf, Whole, 6/6 oz Containers AGENCY: Additions Committee for Purchase From NSN: 8950–01–E62–2182—Spice, Basil, Leaf, People Who Are Blind or Severely On 5/25/2012 (77 FR 31335–31336) Whole 3/1.62 lb Containers Disabled. NSN: 8950–01–E60–9314—Spice, Basil, and 6/29/2012 (77 FR 38775–38776), the ACTION: Ground, 6/12 oz Containers Proposed additions to the Committee for Purchase From People Procurement List. Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled NSN: 8950–01–E60–9311—Spice, Blend, Poultry, 6/12 oz Containers published notices of proposed additions SUMMARY: The Committee is proposing NSN: 8950–01–E62–0115—Spice, Blend, to the Procurement List. Curry, Powder, No MSG, 6/16 oz to add products and a service to the After consideration of the material Containers Procurement List that will be furnished presented to it concerning capability of NSN: 8950–01–E62–0116—Spice, Blend, by nonprofit agencies employing qualified nonprofit agencies to provide Santa Fe, 6/16 oz Containers persons who are blind or have other the products and services and impact of NSN: 8950–01–E62–2187—Spice, Onion, severe disabilities. the additions on the current or most Granulated, 6/18 oz Containers Comments Must be Received on or recent contractors, the Committee has NSN: 8950–01–E62–0149—Spice, Bay Leaf, Before: 9/24/2012. determined that the products and Whole, 6/2 oz Containers ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase services listed below are suitable for NSN: 8950–00–NSH–0234—Spice, Blend, From People Who Are Blind or Severely procurement by the Federal Government Cajun, 6/22 oz Containers NSN: 8950–01–E61–6697—Spice, Blend, Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, under 41 U.S.C. 8501–8506 and 41 CFR Italian Seasoning, 6/6.25 oz Containers 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, 51–2.4. NSN: 8950–01–E62–2190—Spice, Blend, Arlington, Virginia 22202–3259. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification Italian Seasoning, 3/28 oz Containers For Further Information or to Submit NSN: 8950–01–E62–2191—Spice, Pepper, Comments Contact: Patricia Briscoe, I certify that the following action will Red, Crushed, 3/3.25 lb Containers Telephone: (703) 603–7740, Fax: (703) not have a significant impact on a NPA: CDS Monarch, Webster, NY 603–0655, or email substantial number of small entities. Contracting Activity: Defense Logistics [email protected]. The major factors considered for this Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, PA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: certification were: Coverage: C-List for 100% of the requirement This 1. The action will not result in any of the Department of Defense, as notice is published pursuant to 41 additional reporting, recordkeeping or aggregated by the Defense Logistics U.S.C. 8503(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51–2.3. Its other compliance requirements for small Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, purpose is to provide interested persons PA. entities other than the small an opportunity to submit comments on organizations that will furnish the Services the proposed actions. products and services to the Service Type/Locations: Operation Support Additions Government. Service, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, If the Committee approves the 2. The action will result in National Ground Intelligence Center proposed additions, the entities of the authorizing small entities to furnish the (NGIC), Rivanna Station Complex, 2055 Federal Government identified in this products and services to the Boulders Road, Charlottesville, VA notice will be required to procure the Government. NPA: The Chimes, Inc., Baltimore, MD products and service listed below from 3. There are no known regulatory Contracting Activity: Dept of the Army, 0002 MI CTR Contract DODAAC, nonprofit agencies employing persons alternatives which would accomplish Charlottesville, VA who are blind or have other severe the objectives of the Javits-Wagner- Service Type/Location: Mess Attendant disabilities. O’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501–8506) in Services, 121st Air Refueling Wing, 7370 connection with the products and Minuteman Way, Redtail Dining Facility, Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification services proposed for addition to the Bldg. 917, Columbus, OH I certify that the following action will Procurement List. NPA: First Capital Enterprises, Inc., not have a significant impact on a Chillicothe, OH substantial number of small entities. End of Certification Contracting Activity: Dept of the Army, The major factors considered for this Accordingly, the following products W7NU USPFO Activity OH ARNG, Columbus, OH certification were: and services are added to the 1. If approved, the action will not Procurement List: Service Type/Location: Management of State Department High Threat Division Kit, result in any additional reporting, Products Department of State High Threat recordkeeping or other compliance NSN: 8415–MD–001–0268—Sack, Division (Off-site: Virginia Industries for requirements for small entities other Compression Stuff, Extreme Cold the Blind, Charlottesville, VA), 2216 than the small organizations that will Weather (ECW CSS) U.S. Marine Corps, Gallows Road, Dunn Loring, VA furnish the products and service to the One size fits all NPA: Virginia Industries for the Blind, Government. NPA: The Lighthouse for the Blind, Inc. Charlottesville, VA 2. If approved, the action will result Contracting Activity: Department of State, DS (Seattle Lighthouse), Seattle, WA in authorizing small entities to furnish Contracting Activity: Dept of the Army, Office of Acquisition MGMT, Arlington, VA the products and service to the W6QK ACC–APG Natick, Natick, MA Government. Coverage: C-List for 100% of the requirement Patricia Briscoe, of the U.S. Marine Corps, as aggregated 3. There are no known regulatory Deputy Director, Business Operations, by the Army Contracting Command— alternatives which would accomplish (Pricing and Information Management). Aberdeen Proving Ground, Natick the objectives of the Javits-Wagner- Contracting Division, Natick, MA. [FR Doc. 2012–20844 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] O’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501–8506) in NSN: 8950–01–E61–8129—Spice, Oregano BILLING CODE 6353–01–P connection with the products and
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51523
service proposed for addition to the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Christy A. Slamowitz—Counsel to the Procurement List. Inspector General. Comments on this certification are I. Background Robert W. Young—Special Assistant to invited. Commenters should identify the The Inspector General Act of 1978, as the Inspector General for the Recovery statement(s) underlying the certification amended, created the Offices of Act. on which they are providing additional Inspectors General as independent and Gilroy Harden—Assistant Inspector information. objective units to conduct and supervise General for Audit. audits and investigations relating to Rodney G. DeSmet—Deputy Assistant End of Certification Federal programs and operations. The Inspector General for Audit. The following products and service Inspector General Reform Act of 2008, Tracy A. LaPoint—Deputy Assistant are proposed for addition to the established the Council of the Inspectors Inspector General for Audit. Procurement List for production by the General on Integrity and Efficiency Steven H. Rickrode, Jr.—Deputy nonprofit agencies listed: (CIGIE) to address integrity, economy, Assistant Inspector General for Audit. Karen L. Ellis—Assistant Inspector Products and effectiveness issues that transcend individual Government agencies; and General for Investigations. NSN: 9905–00–NIB–0343—Tape, Barricade, increase the professionalism and Kathy C. Horsley—Deputy Assistant Yellow, ‘‘CAUTION’’, Economy Grade, Inspector General for Investigations. 3″W x 1000′L effectiveness of personnel by developing policies, standards, and approaches to Lane M. Timm—Assistant Inspector NSN: 9905–00–NIB–0344—Tape, Barricade, General for Management. Yellow, ‘‘CAUTION’’, Premium Grade, aid in the establishment of a well- 3″W x 1000′L trained and highly skilled workforce in Department of Commerce COVERAGE: A-List for the Total Government the Offices of Inspectors General. The Phone Number: (202) 482–4661. Requirement as aggregated by the CIGIE is an interagency council whose CIGIE Liaison—Justin Marsico (202) General Services Administration. executive chair is the Deputy Director NSN: 9905–00–NIB–0342—Tape, Barricade, 482–9107. ″ for Management, Office of Management Wade Green, Jr.—Counsel to the Red, ‘‘DANGER’’, Economy Grade, 3 W x and Budget, and is comprised 1000′L Inspector General and Associate COVERAGE: B-List for the Broad principally of the 73 Inspectors General Deputy Inspector General. Government Requirement as aggregated (IGs). Allen Crawley—Assistant Inspector by the General Services Administration. II. CIGIE Performance Review Board General for Systems Acquisition and NPA: West Texas Lighthouse for the Blind, IT Security. San Angelo, TX Under 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(1)–(5), and in Ronald C. Prevost—Assistant Inspector Contracting Activity: General Services accordance with regulations prescribed General for Economic and Statistical Administration, Fort Worth, TX by the Office of Personnel Management, Program Assessment. Service each agency is required to establish one or more Senior Executive Service (SES) Department of Defense Service Type/Location: Administrative performance review boards. The Service, U.S. Army MEDCOM Northern Phone Number: (703) 604–8324. Region Contracting Office, 6021 5th purpose of these boards is to review and CIGIE Liaison—John R. Crane (703) Street, Building 1467, Fort Belvoir, VA. evaluate the initial appraisal of a senior 604–8324. NPA: Able Force, Inc., Tampa, FL executive’s performance by the Daniel R. Blair—Deputy Inspector Contracting Activity: Dept. of the Army, supervisor, along with any General for Auditing. W40M Natl Region Contract OFC, Fort recommendations to the appointing James B. Burch—Deputy Inspector Belvoir, VA authority relative to the performance of General for Investigations. G. Tracy Burnett—Assistant Inspector Patricia Briscoe, the senior executive. The current members of the Council of the General for Investigations, Deputy Director, Business Operations (Pricing International Operations. and Information Management). Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency Performance Review Board, Alice F. Carey—Assistant Inspector [FR Doc. 2012–20845 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] as of October 1, 2012, are as follows: General for Readiness and Operations BILLING CODE 6353–01–P Support. Agency for International Development Michael S. Child—Chief of Staff. Phone Number: (202) 712–1150. John R. Crane—Assistant Inspector COUNCIL OF THE INSPECTORS CIGIE Liaison—Marcelle Davis (202) General for Communications and GENERAL ON INTEGRITY AND 712–1150. Congressional Liaison. EFFICIENCY Michael G. Carroll—Deputy Inspector Carolyn R. Davis—Assistant Inspector General. General for Audit Policy and Senior Executive Service Performance Lisa Risley—Assistant Inspector General Oversight. Review Board Membership for Investigations. Amy J. Frontz—Principal Assistant Melinda Dempsey—Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Auditing. AGENCY: Council of the Inspectors Marguerite C. Garrison—Deputy General on Integrity and Efficiency. Inspector General for Audits. Lisa McClennon—Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Administrative ACTION: Notice. Inspector General for Investigations. Investigations. Lynne M. Halbrooks—Principal Deputy SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the Alvin A. Brown—Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Audits. Inspector General. names and titles of the current James R. Ives—Assistant Inspector membership of the Council of the Lisa Goldfluss—Legal Counsel to the Inspector General. General for Investigations, Inspectors General on Integrity and Investigative Operations. Efficiency (CIGIE) Performance Review Department of Agriculture Kenneth P. Moorefield—Deputy Board as of October 1, 2012. Phone Number: (202) 720–8001. Inspector General for Special Plans DATES: Effective Date: October 1, 2012. CIGIE Liaison—Dina J. Barbour (202) and Operations. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 720–8001. James L. Pavlik—Assistant Inspector Individual Offices of Inspectors General David R. Gray—Deputy Inspector General for Investigative Policy and at the telephone numbers listed below. General. Oversight.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51524 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
Henry C. Shelley Jr.—General Counsel. Carolyn Copper—Assistant Inspector Frank W. Deffer—Assistant Inspector Randolph R. Stone—Deputy Inspector General for Program Evaluation. General for Information Technology. General for Policy and Oversight. Louise M. McGlathery—Deputy General Services Administration Ross W. Weiland—Assistant Inspector Assistant Inspector General for General for Investigations, Internal Phone Number: (202) 501–0450. Management. Operations. CIGIE Liaison—Sarah S. Breen (202) James P. Gaughran—Deputy Assistant Jacqueline L. Wicecarver—Assistant 219–1351. Inspector General for Investigations. Inspector General for Acquisition and Robert C. Erickson—Deputy Inspector Wayne H. Salzgaber—Deputy Assistant Contract Management. General. Inspector General for Investigations. Stephen D. Wilson—Assistant Inspector Richard P. Levi—Counsel to the Thomas M. Frost, Jr.—Assistant General for Administration and Inspector General. Inspector General for Investigations. Management. Theodore R. Stehney—Assistant Inspector General for Auditing. Department of Housing and Urban Department of Education Geoffrey Cherrington—Assistant Development Phone Number: (202) 245–6900. Inspector General for Investigations. Phone Number: (202) 708–0430. CIGIE Liaison—Teri Clark (202) 245– Lee Quintyne—Deputy Assistant CIGIE Liaison—Helen Albert (202) 708– 6340. Inspector General for Investigations. 0614, Ext. 8187. Mary Mitchelson—Deputy Inspector Larry L. Gregg—Assistant Inspector John McCarty—Assistant Inspector General. General for Administration. General for Inspections and Wanda Scott—Assistant Inspector Department of Health and Human Evaluations. General for Evaluation, Inspection, Services Lester Davis—Deputy Assistant and Management Services. Inspector General for Investigations. Patrick Howard—Assistant Inspector Phone Number: (202) 619–3148. Randy McGinnis—Assistant Inspector General for Audit. CIGIE Liaison—Sheri Denkensohn (202) General for Audit. Vacant—Deputy Assistant Inspector 205–9492 and Elise Stein (202) 619– Brenda Patterson—Deputy Assistant General for Audit. 2686. Inspector General for Audit. William Hamel—Assistant Inspector Larry Goldberg—Principal Deputy Helen Albert—Assistant Inspector General for Investigations. Inspector General. General for Management and Policy. Lester Fernandez—Deputy Assistant Joanne Chiedi—Deputy Inspector Frank Rokosz—Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Investigations. General for Management and Policy. Inspector General for Audit. Charles Coe—Assistant Inspector Paul Johnson—Assistant Inspector General for Information Technology General for Management and Policy Department of the Interior Audits and Computer Crime (Chief Operating Officer). Phone Number: (202) 208–5745. Investigations. Robert Owens, Jr.—Assistant Inspector CIGIE Liaison—Joann Gauzza (202) 208– Marta Erceg—Counsel to the Inspector General for Information Technology 5745. General. (Chief Information Officer). Stephen Hardgrove—Chief of Staff. Gary Cantrell—Deputy Inspector Kimberly Elmore—Assistant Inspector Department of Energy General for Investigations. General for Audits, Inspections and Phone Number: (202) 586–4393. Jay Hodes—Assistant Inspector General Evaluations. CIGIE Liaison—Juston Fontaine (202) for Investigations. Robert Knox—Assistant Inspector 586–1959. Stuart E. Wright—Deputy Inspector General for Investigations. John Hartman—Deputy Inspector General for Evaluation and Bruce Delaplaine—General Counsel. General for Investigations. Inspections. Roderick Anderson—Assistant Inspector Rickey Hass—Deputy Inspector General Greg Demske—Deputy Inspector General for Management. for Audits and Inspections. General for Legal Affairs. Linda Snider—Deputy Inspector Gloria Jarmon—Deputy Inspector Department of Justice General for Management and General for Audit Services. Phone Number: (202) 514–3435. Administration. Kay Daly—Assistant Inspector General CIGIE Liaison—Jay Lerner (202) 514– George Collard—Assistant Inspector for Financial Management—Regional 3435. General for Audits. Operations. Cynthia Schnedar—Deputy Inspector Sandra Bruce—Assistant Inspector Brian Ritchie—Assistant Inspector General. General for Inspections. General for Healthcare Audits. William M. Blier—General Counsel. Raymond J. Beaudet—Assistant Environmental Protection Agency Department of Homeland Security Inspector General for Audit. Phone Number: (202) 566–0847. Phone Number: (202) 254–4100. Carol F. Ochoa—Assistant Inspector CIGIE Liaison—Eileen McMahon (202) CIGIE Liaison—Erica Paulson (202) General for Oversight and Review. 566–2546. 254–0938. Gregory T. Peters—Assistant Inspector Charles Sheehan—Deputy Inspector D. Michael Beard—Assistant Inspector General for Management and General. General for Emergency Management Planning. Aracely Nunez-Mattocks—Chief of Staff Oversight. Thomas F. McLaughlin—Assistant to the Inspector General. Richard N. Reback—Counsel to the Inspector General for Investigations. Melissa Heist—Assistant Inspector Inspector General. Caryn A. Marske—Deputy Assistant General for Audit. Anne L. Richards—Assistant Inspector Inspector General for Audit. Eileen McMahon—Assistant Inspector General for Audits. George L. Dorsett—Deputy Assistant General for Congressional, Public Mark Bell—Deputy Assistant Inspector Inspector General for Investigations. Affairs and Management. General for Audits. Patrick Sullivan—Assistant Inspector John E. McCoy II—Deputy Assistant Department of Labor General for Investigations. Inspector General for Audits. Phone Number: (202) 693–5100. Patricia Hill—Assistant Inspector Carlton I. Mann—Assistant Inspector CIGIE Liaison—Christopher Seagle (202) General for Mission Systems. General for Inspections. 693–5231.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51525
Nancy F. Ruiz de Gamboa—Assistant Michael R. Esser—Assistant Inspector Steve Mason—Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Management General for Audits. Inspector General for Investigations. and Policy. Michelle B. Schmitz—Assistant Michael Robinson—Assistant Inspector Inspector General for Investigations. General for Technology and Resource National Aeronautics and Space J. David Cope—Assistant Inspector Management. Administration General for Legal Affairs. Special Inspector General for Troubled Phone Number: (202) 358–1220. Jeffery E. Cole—Deputy Assistant Asset Relief Program CIGIE Liaison—Renee Juhans (202) 358– Inspector General for Audits. 1712. Kimberly A. McKinley—Deputy Phone Number: (202) 622–2658. Gail Robinson—Deputy Inspector Assistant Inspector General for CIGIE Liaison—(202) 622–2658. General. Investigations. Peggy Ellen—Deputy Special Inspector Frank LaRocca—Counsel to the Melissa D. Brown—Deputy Assistant General. Inspector General. Inspector General for Audits. Kurt Hyde—Deputy Special Inspector Kevin Winters—Assistant Inspector General, Audit. General for Investigations. Peace Corps Kimberly Caprio—Assistant Deputy James Morrison—Assistant Inspector Phone Number: (202) 692–2900. Special Inspector General, Audit. General for Audits. CIGIE Liaison—Joaquin Ferrao (202) Scott Rebein—Deputy Special Inspector Hugh Hurwitz—Assistant Inspector 692–2921. General, Investigations. General for Management and Kathy Buller—Inspector General Thomas Kelly—Assistant Deputy Planning. (Foreign Service). Special Inspector, Investigations. Michael Rivera—Chief Investigative National Credit Union Administration United States Postal Service Counsel Phone Number: (703) 518–6351. Phone Number: (703) 248–2100. Roderick Fillinger—General Counsel. CIGIE Liaison—William DeSarno (703) CIGIE Liaison—Agapi Doulaveris (703) Cathy Alix—Deputy Special Inspector 518–6351. 248–2286. General, Operations. James Hagen—Deputy Inspector Elizabeth Martin—General Counsel. Mia Levine—Chief of Staff. General. Gladis Griffith—Deputy General Department of State and the Counsel. National Endowment for the Arts Broadcasting Board of Governors David Sidransky—Chief, Computer Phone Number: (202) 682–5774. Phone Number: (202) 663–0361. Crimes. CIGIE Liaison—Michael Wolfson (703) CIGIE Liaison—Tonie Jones (202) 682– Lance Carrington—Deputy Assistant 284–2710. 5402. Inspector General for Investigations— Erich O. Hart—General Counsel. Tonie Jones—Inspector General. West. Robert B. Peterson—Assistant Inspector National Science Foundation Mark Duda—Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Inspections. General for Audits—Support Anna Gershman—Assistant Inspector Phone Number: (703) 292–7100. Operations. General for Investigations. CIGIE Liaison—Susan Carnohan (703) Larry Koskinen—Chief Technology Evelyn R. Klemstine—Assistant 292–5011 & Maury Pully (703) 292– Officer. Inspector General for Audits. 5059. Railroad Retirement Board Norman P. Brown—Deputy Assistant Allison C. Lerner—Inspector General. Inspector General for Audits. Thomas (Tim) Cross—Deputy Inspector Phone Number: (312) 751–4690. Carol N. Gorman—Deputy Assistant General. CIGIE Liaison—Jill Roellig (312) 751– Inspector General for Middle East Brett M. Baker—Assistant Inspector 4993. Regional Office. General for Audit. Patricia A. Marshall—Counsel to the Alan Boehm—Assistant Inspector Inspector General. Department of Transportation General for Investigations. Diana Kruel—Assistant Inspector Phone Number: (202) 366–1959. Kenneth Chason—Assistant Inspector General for Audit. CIGIE Liaison—Nathan P. Richmond General for Legal, Legislative, and Small Business Administration (202) 366–1959. External Affairs. Calvin L. Scovel III—Inspector General. Phone Number: (202) 205–6586. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ann M. Calvaressi Barr—Deputy CIGIE Liaison—Robert F. Fisher (202) Inspector General. Phone Number: (301) 415–5930. 205–6583. Brian A. Dettelbach—Assistant CIGIE Liaison—Deborah S. Huber (301) Glenn P. Harris—Counsel to the Inspector General for Legal, 415–5930. Inspector General. Legislative, and External Affairs. David C. Lee—Deputy Inspector John K. Needham—Assistant Inspector Susan L. Dailey—Assistant Inspector General. General for Auditing. General for Administration. Stephen D. Dingbaum—Assistant Daniel J. O’Rourke—Assistant Inspector Timothy M. Barry—Principal Assistant Inspector General for Audits. General for Investigations. Inspector General for Investigations. Joseph A. McMillan—Assistant Robert F. Fisher—Assistant Inspector Robert Westbrooks—Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Investigations. General for Management and Policy. Inspector General for Investigations. Lou E. Dixon—Principal Assistant Office of Personnel Management Social Security Administration Inspector General for Auditing and Phone Number: (202) 606–1200. Phone Number: (410) 966–8385. Evaluation. CIGIE Liaison—Joyce D. Price (202) CIGIE Liaison—Misha Kelly (202) 358– Jeffrey B. Guzzetti—Assistant Inspector 606–2156. 6319. for Aviation and Special Program Norbert E. Vint—Deputy Inspector Gale Stone—Deputy Assistant Inspector Audits. General. General for Audit. Matthew E. Hampton—Deputy Assistant Tern Fazio—Assistant Inspector General B. Chad Bungard—Counsel to the Inspector General for Aviation and for Management. Inspector General. Special Program Audits.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51526 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
Louis King—Assistant Inspector General Gladys Hernandez—Deputy Chief and 3:30 p.m.–4:30 p.m. open to the for Financial and Information Counsel. public; and 8 a.m.–12:15 p.m. on Technology Audits. Michael McCarthy—Chief Counsel. Wednesday, 12 September 2012, with Joseph W. Come—Assistant Inspector George Jakabcin—Chief Information the sessions from 10:15 a.m.–11:15 p.m. General for Highway and Transit Officer. open to the public. The banquet from 6 p.m.–9 p.m. on 11 September 2012 at Audits. Department of Veterans Affairs Thomas Yatsco—Deputy Assistant the Crystal Gateway Marriott, 1700 Inspector General for Highway and Phone Number: (202) 461–4720. Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington VA Transit Audits. CIGIE Liaison—Joanne Moffett (202) 22202 will also be open to the public. Mitchell L. Behm—Assistant Inspector 461–4720. The purpose of this Air Force General for Rail, Maritime and Maureen Regan—Counselor to the Scientific Advisory Board quarterly Economic Analysis. Inspector General. meeting is to introduce the FY13 SAB Mary Kay Langan-Feirson—Assistant James O’Neill—Assistant Inspector study topics tasked by the Secretary of Inspector General for Acquisition and General for Investigations. the Air Force and receive presentations Procurement Audits. Joseph Sullivan—Deputy Assistant that address relevant subjects to the Inspector General for Investigations SAB mission to include introduction of Department of the Treasury (Field Operations). the new Board members for FY13, status Phone Number: (202) 622–1090. Joseph Vallowe—Deputy Assistant of FY12 studies and the FY13 Board CIGIE Liaison—Tricia Hollis (202) 927– Inspector General for Investigations schedule; the Air Force’s science and 5835. (HQs Operations). technology needs with respect to space Richard K. Delmar—Counsel to the Linda Halliday—Assistant Inspector operations; Department of the Army Inspector General. General for Audits and Evaluations. acquisition and technology practices Debra Ritt—Special Deputy IG for Small Sondra McCauley—Deputy Assistant and lessons learned; latest perspectives Business Lending Fund Program Inspector General for Audits and on operations, plans, and requirements Oversight. Evaluations (HQs Management and for the Air Force; future of Air Force Tricia Hollis—Assistant Inspector Inspections). and DoD cyberspace for assuring General for Management. Dana Moore—Assistant Inspector cyberspace advantage; Air Force Global P. Brian Crane—Assistant Inspector General for Management and Strike Command overview highlighting General for Investigations. Administration. high priority capability gaps and Marla A. Freedman—Assistant Inspector John Daigh—Assistant Inspector General technology solution partnerships; and General for Audit. for Healthcare Inspections. intelligence, surveillance, and Robert A. Taylor—Deputy Assistant Patricia Christ—Deputy Assistant reconnaissance needs for contested Inspector General for Audit (Program Inspector General for Healthcare environments. Audits). Inspections. In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552b, as Joel Grover—Deputy Assistant Inspector Dated: August 9, 2012. amended, and 41 CFR 102–3.155, The General for Audit (Financial Mark D. Jones, Administrative Assistant of the Air Management Audits). Executive Director. Force, in consultation with the Air Force General Counsel, has agreed that Treasury Inspector General for Tax [FR Doc. 2012–20677 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] the public interest requires some Administration/Department of the BILLING CODE 6820–C9–M sessions of the United States Air Force Treasury Scientific Advisory Board meeting be Phone Number: (202) 622–6500 closed to the public because they will CIGIE Liaison—Mathew Sutphen (202) DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE discuss information and matters covered 622–6500 by section 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1). Department of the Air Force Michael A. Phillips—Acting Principal Any member of the public wishing to Deputy Inspector General. U.S. Air Force Scientific Advisory provide input to the United States Air Michael McKenney—Acting Deputy Board; Notice of Meeting Force Scientific Advisory Board should Inspector General for Audit. submit a written statement in Michael Delgado—Assistant Inspector AGENCY: Department of the Air Force, accordance with 41 CFR 102–3.140(c) General for Investigations. U.S. Air Force Scientific Advisory and section 10(a)(3) of the Federal Alan Duncan—Assistant Inspector Board, DoD. Advisory Committee Act and the General for Audit (Security & ACTION: Meeting notice. procedures described in this paragraph. Information Technology Services). Written statements can be submitted to John Fowler—Assistant Inspector SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the the Designated Federal Officer at the General for Investigations. Federal Advisory Committee Act of address detailed below at any time. David Holmgren—Deputy Inspector 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), Statements being submitted in response General for Inspections and the Government in the Sunshine Act of to the agenda mentioned in this notice Evaluations. 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and must be received by the Designated Timothy Camus—Deputy Inspector 41 CFR 102–3.150, the Department of Federal Officer at the address listed General for Investigations. Defense announces that the United below at least five calendar days prior Margaret Begg—Acting Associate States Air Force Scientific Advisory to the meeting which is the subject of Inspector General for Mission Board (SAB) meeting will take place 11– this notice. Written statements received Support. 12 September 2012 at the Secretary of after this date may not be provided to Nancy Nakamura—Assistant Inspector the Air Force Technical and Analytical or considered by the United States Air General for Audit (Management Support Conference Center, 1550 Force Scientific Advisory Board until its Planning and Workforce Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202. The next meeting. The Designated Federal Development). meeting will be from 7:45 a.m.–4:30 Officer will review all timely Randy Silvis—Deputy Assistant p.m. on Tuesday, 11 September 2012, submissions with the United States Air Inspector General for Investigations. with the sessions from 7:45 a.m.–11 a.m. Force Scientific Advisory Board
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51527
Chairperson and ensure they are Bayou Casotte Channel segment to DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE provided to members of the United widen the channel from the Federally States Air Force Scientific Advisory authorized width of 350 feet and depth Department of the Navy Board before the meeting that is the of ¥42 feet mean lower low water subject of this notice. (MLLW) (with 2 feet of allowable over- Notice of Extension of Public Comment Period for the Draft FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The depth and 2 feet of advanced United States Air Force Scientific maintenance) to a width of 450 feet, Environmental Impact Statement for Advisory Board Executive Director and parallel to the existing channel the Proposed Modernization and Designated Federal Officer, Lt. Col. centerline and to the existing Federally Expansion of Townsend Bombing Matthew E. Zuber, 240–612–5503, authorized depth of ¥42 feet MLLW. Range, Georgia United States Air Force Scientific The proposed project would include the AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD. Advisory Board, 1500 West Perimeter placement of approximately 3.4 million ACTION: Notice. Road, Ste. #3300, Joint Base Andrews, cubic yards of dredged material MD 20762, resulting from the channel modification. SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy [email protected]. DATES: The Corps invites the public to (DoN) is extending the public comment period for the Draft Environmental Henry Williams Jr., comment on the Final EIS during the public comment period, which ends Impact Statement (EIS) for the Proposed Acting Air Force Federal Register Liaison Modernization and Expansion of Officer. September 25, 2012. The Corps will Townsend Bombing Range (TBR), [FR Doc. 2012–20841 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] consider all comments postmarked or received during the public comment Georgia (GA) until September 27, 2012. BILLING CODE 5001–10–P period in preparing the Record of A Notice of Availability (NOA) and a Decision and will consider late Notice of Public Meetings (NOPMs) for DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE comments to the extent practicable. the Draft EIS were published in the Additional information on how to Federal Register on Friday, July 13, Department of the Army; Corps of submit comments is included below. 2012 (Federal Register/Vol. 77, No. 135, Engineers FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pages 41385–41387 (NOPMs) and Page Written and emailed comments to the 41403 (NOA)). Those notices announced Notice of Availability for the Final Corps will be received until September the initial public comment period, Environmental Impact Statement for 25, 2012. Correspondence concerning including public meetings that took the Proposed Widening of the this Notice should refer to Public Notice place on Tuesday, August 7, 2012 and Pascagoula Lower Sound/Bayou Number SAM–2011–00389–PAH and Thursday, August 9, 2012, and provided Casotte Channel, Jackson County, MS should be directed to the U.S. Army additional information on the background and scope of the Draft EIS. AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. Engineer District, RD–C–M Attention: Army Corps of Engineers, DoD Mr. Philip Hegji, Post Office Box 2288, The initial public comment period requested the submission of all ACTION: Notice of availability. Mobile, Alabama 36628–0001, via email at [email protected] or by comments on the Draft EIS to the DoN SUMMARY: On April 6, 2011, the Jackson phone at (251) 690–3222. We encourage by August 27, 2012. The DoN is County Port Authority (JCPA) submitted any additional comments from extending the public comment period a joint application to the U.S. Army interested public, agencies and local until September 27, 2012. Corps of Engineers (Corps), Mobile officials. For additional information FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: District, Mississippi Department of about our Regulatory Program, please Contact Capt. Cochran, 596 Geiger Blvd. Environmental Quality (MDEQ) and the visit our Web site at MCAS Beaufort, SC 29904 at 843–228– Mississippi Department of Marine www.sam.usace.army.mil/rd/reg/. 6123. Resources (MDMR) for authorization to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The JCPA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The DoN, impact wetlands and other waters of the requested a Department of the Army as lead agency, has prepared and filed United States associated with the permit pursuant to Section 10 of the the Draft EIS for the Proposed proposed widening of the Pascagoula Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, Section Modernization and Expansion of TBR, Lower Sound/Bayou Casotte Channel 103 of the Marine Protection, Research GA in accordance with the requirements (the proposed project). The proposed and Sanctuaries Act and Section 404 of of the National Environmental Policy project is located in the Pascagoula the Clean Water Act, including a Act of 1969 (42 United States Code 4321 Lower Sound/Bayou Casotte, Section 404(b)(1) analysis to help ensure et seq.) and its implementing Pascagoula, Jackson County, Mississippi compliance. The Corps is the lead regulations (40 Code of Regulations ° (Latitude 30.365 North, Longitude Federal agency for the preparation of parts 1500–1508). The Draft EIS ° 88.556 West). The Corps prepared a this FEIS in compliance with the evaluates the potential environmental Draft Environmental Impact Statement requirements of the National impacts of acquiring additional property (DEIS) to assess the potential Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and and constructing the necessary environmental impacts associated with the President’s Council on infrastructure to allow the use of inert the proposed project and to promote Environmental Quality regulations for precision-guided munitions (PGMs) at informed decision-making by implementing NEPA. The National TBR, GA. appropriate agencies; the DEIS was Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. The purpose of the Proposed Action released April 13, 2012. The Corps is Coast Guard are cooperating agencies for is to provide an air-to-ground training now publishing a Final Environmental the preparation of the EIS. range capable of providing a wider Impact Statement (FEIS) to assess the variety of air-to-ground operations, potential environmental impacts Dated: August 15, 2012. including the use of PGMs, to meet associated with the proposed project. Craig J. Litteken, current training requirements. The The proposed project is the dredging of Chief, Regulatory Division. Proposed Action is needed to more approximately 38,200 feet (7.2 miles) of [FR Doc. 2012–20942 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] efficiently meet current training the existing Pascagoula Lower Sound/ BILLING CODE 3720–58–P requirements for the United States
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51528 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
Marine Corps aviation assets by DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 5130, Attn: Code C6 (NSWCDD PAO), significantly increasing air-to-ground Fax: 1–540–653–4679, Email: training capabilities in the Beaufort, Department of the Navy [email protected], Phone: South Carolina Region. The Draft EIS 1–540–653–8154, or Web site: http:// Notice of Public Hearings for the Draft has identified and considered four www.navsea.navy.mil/nswc/dahlgren/ Environmental Impact Statement for action alternatives and a No Action EIS/index.aspx. Outdoor Research, Development, Test SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A Notice alternative. and Evaluation Activities, Naval of Intent to prepare the NSWCDD More information of the Draft EIS can Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren Outdoor RDT&E Activities Draft EIS was be found in the previously published Division, Dahlgren, VA NOA and NOPM (see Federal Register published in the Federal Register on AGENCY: June 18, 2007 (72 FR 33456–33457). on Friday, July 13, 2012 (Federal Department of the Navy, DoD. Five public scoping meetings were held Register/Vol. 77, No. 135, Pages 41385– ACTION: Notice. on the following dates and locations: 41387 (NOPMs) and Page 41403 (NOA)). SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 1. July 23, 2007, Shiloh Baptist Federal, State, and local agencies, (102)(2)(c) of the National Church, 13457 Kings Highway, King elected officials, and other interested Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and George, VA 22485; parties and individuals, are invited and the Council on Environmental Quality 2. July 24, 2007, Christ Episcopal encouraged to review and comment on regulations for implementing the Church, 37497 Zach Fowler Road, the Draft EIS. Comments on the Draft procedural provisions of NEPA (Title 40 Chaptico, MD 20621; EIS can be submitted via the project Code of Federal Regulations Parts 1500– 3. July 25, 2007, La Plata Volunteer email address 1508), the Department of the Navy Fire Department, 911 Washington ([email protected]), (DoN) has prepared and filed with the Avenue, La Plata, MD 20646; project Web site or submitted in writing U.S. Environmental Protection Agency a 4. July 30, 2007, Saint Mary’s to: Townsend Bombing Range EIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement Episcopal Church, 203 Dennison Street, Project Manager, Post Office Box (EIS) to evaluate the potential Colonial Beach, VA 22443; and 180458, Tallahassee, Florida, 32318. All environmental effects of expanding 5. July 31, 2007, Callao Rescue Squad comments must be postmarked or Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren Hall, 1348 Northumberland Highway, electronically dated on or before Division’s (NSWCDD) research, Callao, VA 22435. September 27, 2012 to be sure they development, test and evaluation The proposed action is to expand become part of the public record. (RDT&E) activities within the Potomac NSWCDD’s RDT&E capabilities within River Test Range (PRTR) complex, the PRTR Complex, the EEA Range The Draft EIS has been distributed to Explosives Experimental Area (EEA) Complex, Mission Area, and SUA. various Federal, State, local agencies, Range complex, the Mission Area, and These RDT&E activities include outdoor and Native American Tribes, as well as Special-Use Airspace (SUA) located at operations that require the use of other interested parties and individuals. Naval Support Facility (NSF) Dahlgren, ordnance, high-power electromagnetic In addition, copies of the Draft EIS are Dahlgren, VA. (EM) energy, high-energy (HE) lasers, available for public review at the The DoN will conduct three public and chemical and biological simulants following public libraries: Ida Hilton hearings to receive oral and written (non-toxic substances used to mimic Public Library, 1105 North Way, Darien, comments on the Draft EIS. Federal, dangerous agents). Under the proposed GA, 31305; Long County Public Library, state, and local agencies, elected action, the average number of events 28 S. Main Street, Ludowici, GA, 31316; officials, and other interested that could take place annually (with the and Hog Hammock Public Library, 1023 individuals and organizations are exception of large-caliber gun firing Hillery Lane, Sapelo Island, GA, 31327. invited to be present or represented at events) would increase above current the public hearings. This notice An electronic copy of the Draft EIS is baseline levels. To ensure that announces the dates and locations of the also available for public viewing at equipment and materials work public hearings for this Draft EIS. http:// effectively, even in less-than-ideal www.townsendbombingrangeeis.com. DATES AND ADDRESSES: Public hearings conditions, some activities would take will be held on the following dates and place under conditions in which To be considered, all comments on locations: activities are now rarely/never the Draft EIS must be received by 1. September 11, 2012 at the Newburg conducted, such as at dusk, dawn, and September 27, 2012. The DoN will Volunteer Rescue Squad and Fire night and in adverse weather. consider and respond to all comments Department, 12245 Rock Point Road, The purpose of the proposed action is received on the Draft EIS when Newburg, MD 20664; to enable NSWCDD to meet current and preparing the Final EIS. The DoN 2. September 12, 2012 at the A.T. future mission-related warfare and expects to issue the Final EIS in spring Johnson Alumni Museum, 18849 Kings force-protection requirements by 2013, at which time a NOA will be Highway, Montross, VA 22520; and providing RDT&E of surface ship published in the Federal Register and 3. September 13, 2012 at the Mary combat systems, ordnance, HE lasers local print media. A Record of Decision Washington University-Dahlgren and directed-energy systems, force-level is expected in summer 2013. Campus, 4224 University Drive, King warfare, and homeland and force George, VA 22485. protection. Dated: August 17, 2012. All meetings will be held from 6:00 The need for the proposed action is to C.K. Chiappetta, p.m. to 8:00 p.m. and will begin with a enable the DoN and other stakeholders Lieutenant Commander, U. S. Navy, Office presentation followed by a public to successfully meet current and future of the Judge Advocate General, U.S. Navy, comment period. national and global defense challenges Federal Register Liaison Officer. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: required under 10 U.S.C. 5062 (2006) by [FR Doc. 2012–20872 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Commander, Naval Surface Warfare developing a robust capability to carry BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P Center Dahlgren Division, 6149 Welsh out assigned RDT&E activities within Road, Suite 203, Dahlgren, VA 22448– the PRTR and EEA Range Complexes,
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51529
the Mission Area, and the SUA at NSF numbers of future annual test events, and we are awaiting concurrence from Dahlgren. firings, and hours of use are harder to NMFS. NSWCDD evaluated a range of predict because of the uncertainties Federal Coastal Consistency alternatives that would meet action inherent in carrying out RDT&E. Determinations will be forwarded to objectives, and applied screening The Draft EIS evaluates the potential Virginia and Maryland with the Draft criteria to identify those alternatives environmental effects associated with EIS. Based on analysis, the DoN has that were ‘‘reasonable’’ (i.e., practical NSWCDD’s outdoor RDT&E activities. made a preliminary finding that there and feasible). Reasonable alternatives Alternatives were evaluated within would be no to minimal impact on were carried through the Draft EIS resource areas including land use and coastal resources, and the Proposed analysis. Screening criteria included: plans, coastal zone resources, Action is consistent to the maximum 1. Criterion 1—accommodate socioeconomics, environmental justice extent practical with Virginia and historical and current, baseline RDT&E communities, protection of children, Maryland policies. We are awaiting mission requirements for activities that utilities, air quality, noise levels, concurrence from the Virginia and have the potential to affect human cultural resources, hazardous materials Maryland Coastal Management health and/or the environment; namely, and hazardous waste, health and safety, Programs. those involving ordnance, the use of geology, topography, soils and The DoN consulted with the State high-power EM energy, HE lasers, sediments, water resources, and aquatic Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs) chemical simulants, and the use of the and terrestrial biological resources. The in Maryland and Virginia. Both SHPOs PRTR; analysis includes an evaluation of the concluded there would be no adverse 2. Criterion 2—accommodate known direct, indirect, and cumulative effect on National Register-listed or future requirements, which include the impacts. Methods to reduce or minimize eligible resources in the areas of use of biological simulants alone; impacts to affected resources are potential effect under all the 3. Criterion 3—accommodate optimal addressed. alternatives. potential future requirements by The DoN has made a preliminary NSWCDD will continue to adhere to incorporating a margin of growth for the finding that for all three alternatives general safety and environmental most actively evolving programs for there would be no significant impact to protective measures for all RDT&E which it is difficult to accurately land use and plans, coastal zone activities and to implement specific forecast future needs, and include resources, socioeconomics, low-income protective measures for RDT&E mixtures of biological and chemical and minority populations, children, activities using chemical and biological simulants; and utilities, air quality, noise levels, stimulants. No specific mitigation 4. Criterion 4—minimize impacts to cultural resources, hazardous materials measures are required. commercial and recreational use of the and hazardous waste, health and safety, The Draft EIS was distributed to Potomac River. geology, topography, soils and federal, state, and local agencies, elected Reasonable alternatives were carried sediments, water resources, and aquatic officials, and other interested through the Draft EIS analysis. The Draft and terrestrial biological resources, and individuals and organizations. The EIS considers three alternatives as we are awaiting concurrence from the public comment period will end on summarized below: respective agencies. October 1, 2012. The Draft EIS is 1. No Action Alternative—maintains available for review or download at: All alternatives have the potential to current operations and provides a http://www.navsea.navy.mil/nswc/ affect fish and sea turtles species baseline against which to measure the dahlgren/EIS/index.aspx. protected under the Endangered Species impacts of the other two alternatives. Copies of the Draft EIS are available Act (ESA). In accordance with Section 2. Alternative 1—includes No Action for public review at the following 7 of the ESA, the DoN consulted with Alternative plus growth above No libraries: Action Alternative levels necessary to the National Marine Fisheries Service 1. Lewis Egerton Smoot Memorial meet RDT&E mission requirements in (NMFS) for potential impacts to Library, 8562 Dahlgren Road, King the near future. federally-listed species. NMFS George, VA 22485; 3. Alternative 2—Provides for roughly concurred with the DoN’s finding that 2. Cooper Memorial Library, 20 15% growth in activity levels above that the alternatives are not likely to Washington Avenue, Colonial Beach, of Alternative 1 to provide a margin of adversely affect the endangered VA 22443; growth for the most actively evolving shortnose sturgeon, the Atlantic 3. Northumberland Public Library, programs. It addresses current baseline sturgeon, or ESA-listed sea turtles. No 7204 Northumberland Highway, requirements, known future terrestrial animals or plants protected Heathsville, VA 22473; requirements, and projected increases in under the ESA, the Migratory Bird 4. Charles County Public Library, La the foreseeable future based on current Treaty Act, or Bald and Golden Eagle Plata Branch, 2 Garrett Avenue, La trends. This alternative is the Preferred Protection Act would be affected. Based Plata, MD 20646; and Alternative. on the DoN’s analysis, the proposed 5. St. Mary’s County Library, Alternatives 1 and 2 constitute action would not result in the incidental Leonardtown Branch, 23250 Hollywood increases in current activities of small- harassment of marine mammals Road, Leonardtown, MD 20650. arms firing, detonations, high-power EM protected under the Marine Mammal Federal, state, and local agencies, energy events, HE laser events, chemical Protection Act. elected officials, and interested and biological simulant (defense) The DoN is also consulting with individuals and organizations are events, and PRTR hours of use. NMFS regarding potential effects on invited to be present or represented at Alternative 2 (Preferred Alternative) essential fish habitat under the the public hearings where oral and satisfies current baseline requirements, Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation written comments on the Draft EIS will includes the growth necessary to meet and Management Act with the release of be received. Oral statements will be known RDT&E mission requirements for this Draft EIS. The DoN has made a heard and transcribed by a the near future and includes a margin of preliminary finding that there would be stenographer; however, to ensure the growth for the most actively evolving no adverse impacts on essential fish accuracy of the record, all statements programs, namely those for which the habitat under any of the alternatives, should be submitted in writing. All
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51530 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
statements, both oral and written, will Desk Officer may be telephoned at 202– ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION become part of the public record on the 395–4650. AGENCY Draft EIS and will be responded to in ADDRESSES: [ER–FRL9004–7] the Final EIS. Equal weight will be Written comments should given to both oral and written be sent to the DOE Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Amended Environmental Impact statements. In the interest of available Statement Filing System Guidance for time, and to ensure all who wish to give Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 10102, Implementing 40 CFR 1506.9 and an oral statement have the opportunity 1506.10 of the Council on 735 17th Street NW., Washington, DC to do so, each speaker’s comments will Environmental Quality’s Regulations 20503, and to Julie Squires by fax at be limited to two (2) minutes. If a long Implementing the National (202) 586–0406 or by email at statement is to be presented, it should Environmental Policy Act be summarized at the public hearing [email protected]. with the full text submitted either in 1. Introduction FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: writing at the hearing, or mailed, faxed, On October 7, 1977, the Council of or emailed to Commander, Naval Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection Environmental Quality (CEQ) and the Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Division, 6149 Welsh Road, Suite 203, instrument and instructions should be directed to Julie Squires at signed a Memorandum of Agreement Dahlgren, VA 22448–5130, Attn: Code (MOA) that allocated the [email protected]. C6 (NSWCDD PAO), Fax: 1–540–653– responsibilities of the two agencies for 4679, or Email: DLGR_NSWC_EIS@navy. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This assuring the government-wide mil during the comment period. All information collection request contains: implementation of the National written comments must be postmarked Environmental Policy Act of 1969 or received by October 01, 2012 to (1) OMB No. 1910–5144. (NEPA). Specifically, the MOA ensure they become part of the official (2) Information Collection Request transferred to EPA the administrative record. All comments will be addressed Title: records, and secures approval of aspects of the environmental impact in the Final EIS. all foreign travel conducted by DOE statement (ElS) filing process. Within Dated: August 20, 2012. federal employees and contractors. The EPA, the Office of Federal Activities has C.K. Chiappetta, system allows DOE to have full been designated the official recipient in Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate accountability of all travel and in cases EPA of all EISs. These responsibilities General’s Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register of emergency DOE is able to quickly have been codified in CEQ’s NEPA Liaison Officer. retrieve information as to who is Implementing Regulations (40 CFR Parts [FR Doc. 2012–20937 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] traveling, where the individual is 1500–1508), and are totally separate BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P traveling, and the dates of travel. from the substantive EPA reviews Information gathered is listed under performed pursuant to both NEPA and three categories: (1) Traveler Section 309 of the Clean Air Act. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Information which requests traveler’s Under 40 CFR 1506.9, EPA can issue name, passport information, site, guidelines to implement its EIS filing Proposed Agency Information position, and contact information, (2) responsibilities. The purpose of the EPA Filing System Guidelines is to provide Collection General Trip Information which consists guidance to Federal agencies on filing of estimated travel costs, and (3) Trip AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy. EISs, including draft, final, and ACTION: Notice and request for OMB Itinerary Information which consists of supplemental EISs. Information is review and comment. destination, dates of travel, and provided on: (1) How to file EISs; (2) the purpose. steps to follow when a Federal agency SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (3) Type of Respondents: DOE Federal is adopting an EIS, or when an EIS is (DOE) has submitted to the Office of employees and contractors traveling on withdrawn, delayed or reopened; (3) Management and Budget (OMB) for behalf of DOE. public review periods; (4) issuance of clearance a proposal for collection of notices of availability in the Federal information under the provisions of the (4) Estimated Annual Number of Respondents 8,313. Register; and (5) retention of filed EISs. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The The guidelines published today proposed collection will enable DOE to (5) Estimated Annual Number of update the previous guidelines, which have current knowledge of Federal Burden Hours: 4,228. were first published in the Federal employees and contractors conducting (6) Estimated Annual Cost Burden: Register on March 7, 1989. These foreign travel to a non U.S. territory on None. updated guidelines have been modified the behalf of DOE. Information gathered to incorporate changes necessary to Authority: DOE Order 551.1D (April 2, will include dates of travel, destination, implement the e-NEPA electronic filing 2012), regarding ‘‘Official Foreign Travel.’’ purpose, and after-hour contact system. information in case of emergency. Issued in Washington, DC, on August 14, DATES: Comments regarding this 2012. 2. Purpose collection must be received on or before Umeki G. Thorne, Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9 and 30 days after date of publication in the Director, Office of Management, Office of 1506.10, EPA is responsible for Federal Register. If you anticipate that International Travel and Exchange Visitor administering the EIS filing process, and you will be submitting comments, but Programs. can issue guidelines to implement those find it difficult to do so within the [FR Doc. 2012–20840 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] responsibilities. The process of EIS period of time allowed by this notice, filing includes the following: (1) BILLING CODE 6450–01–P please advise the DOE Desk Officer at Receiving and recording of the EISs, so OMB of your intention to make a that information in them can be submission as soon as possible. The incorporated into EPA’s computerized
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51531
data base; (2) establishing the beginning period, and will publish this ensure that the date they use is based on and ending dates for comment and information in the next NOA. the date of publication of the NOA in review periods for draft and final EISs, Requirements for circulation of EISs the Federal Register. If the published respectively; (3) publishing these dates appear in 40 CFR 1502.19. Please note date gives reviewers less than the in a weekly Notice of Availability that the EIS submitted to the Office of minimum review time computed by (NOA) in the Federal Register; (4) Federal Activities through e-NEPA is EPA, EPA will send the agency contact retaining the EISs in a central only for filing purposes. a letter explaining how the review repository; and (5) determining whether EPA must be notified when a Federal period is calculated and the correct date time periods can be lengthened or agency adopts an EIS in order to by which comments are due back to the shortened for ‘‘compelling reasons of commence the appropriate comment or lead agency. This letter also encourages national policy.’’ review period. If a Federal agency agencies to notify all reviewers and Under 40 CFR 1506.9, lead agencies chooses to adopt an EIS written by interested parties of the corrected are responsible for distributing EISs, another agency, and it was not a review periods. and for providing additional copies of cooperating agency in the preparation of already distributed EISs, to the the original EIS, the EIS must be re- 4. Notice in the Federal Register interested public for review. However, circulated and filed with EPA according EPA will prepare a weekly report of EPA will assist the public and other to the requirements set forth in 40 CFR all EISs filed during the preceding week Federal agencies by providing agency 1506.3(b). In turn, EPA will publish a for publication each Friday under a contacts on, and information about, NOA in the Federal Register NOA in the Federal Register. If the EISs. announcing that the document will have Friday is a Federal holiday the an appropriate comment or review publication will be on Thursday. At the 3. Filing Draft, Final, and Supplemental period. When an agency adopts an EIS time EPA sends its weekly report for EISs on which it served as a cooperating publication in the Federal Register, the Federal agencies are required to agency, the document does not need to report will also be sent to the CEQ. prepare EISs in accordance with 40 CFR be circulated for public comment or Amended notices may be added to the part 1502, and to file the EISs with EPA review; it is not necessary to file the EIS NOA to include corrections, changes in as specified in 40 CFR 1506.9. As of again with EPA. However, EPA should time periods of previously filed EISs, October 1, 2012, Federal agencies file an be notified in order to ensure that the withdrawals of EISs by lead agencies, EIS by submitting the complete EIS, official EIS record is accurate. and retraction of EISs by EPA. including appendices, to EPA through Notifications can be sent by email to: 5. Time Periods the e-NEPA electronic filing system. [email protected]. EPA will publish an To sign up for e-NEPA, register for an amended NOA in the Federal Register The minimum time periods set forth account at: https://cdx.epa.gov/ that states that an adoption has in 40 CFR 1506.10 (b), (c), and (d) are epa_home.asp occurred. This will not establish a calculated from the date EPA publishes Select ‘‘NEPA Electronic Filing comment period, but will complete the the NOA in the Federal Register. System (e-NEPA)’’ when prompted to public record. Comment periods for draft EISs, draft add a program. Inquiries can also be EPA should also be notified of all supplements, and revised draft EISs will made to: (202) 564–7146 or (202) 564– situations where an agency has decided end 45 calendar days after publication 0678 or by email to: [email protected]. to withdraw, delay, or reopen a review of the NOA in the Federal Register; Please note that if a Federal agency period on an EIS. Notifications can be review periods for final EISs and final prepares an abbreviated Final EIS (as sent by email to: [email protected]. All supplements will end 30 calendar days described in 40 CFR 1503.4(c)), it such notices to EPA will be reflected in after publication of the NOA in the should include copies of the Draft EIS EPA’s weekly Notices of Availability Federal Register. If a calculated time when filing the Final EIS. published in the Federal Register. In the period would end on a non-working The EISs must be filed no earlier than case of reopening EIS review periods, day, the assigned time period will be the they are transmitted to commenting the lead agency should notify EPA as to next working day (i.e., time periods will agencies and made available to the what measures will be taken to ensure not end on weekends or Federal public (40 CFR 1506.9). This will assure that the EIS is available to all interested holidays). While these time periods are that the EIS is received by all interested parties. This is especially important for minimum time periods, a lead agency parties by the time EPA’s NOA appears EIS reviews that are being reopened may establish longer time periods. If the in the Federal Register, and, therefore, after a substantial amount of time has lead agency employs a longer time allows for the full minimum comment passed since the original review period period, it must notify EPA of the and review periods. closed. extended time period when either filing If EPA receives a request to file an EIS Once received by EPA, each EIS is the EIS through e-NEPA or by email to: and transmittal of that EIS is not assigned an official filing date and [email protected] when the lead agency complete, it will not publish a NOA in checked for completeness and extends the time period. It should be the Federal Register until assurances compliance with 40 CFR 1502.10. If the noted that 40 CFR 1506.10(b) allows for have been given that the transmittal EIS is not ‘‘complete’’ (i.e., if the an exception to the rules of timing. An process is complete. Similarly, if EPA documents do not contain the required exception may be made in the case of discovers that a filed EIS has not been components), EPA will contact the lead an agency decision which is subject to transmitted, EPA will issue a notice agency to obtain the omitted a formal internal appeal. Agencies with the weekly Notices of Availability information or to resolve any questions should assure that EPA is informed so retracting the EIS from public review of prior to publishing the NOA in the that the situation is accurately reflected the EIS until the transmittal process is Federal Register. in the NOA. completed. Once the agency has Agencies often publish (either in their Moreover, under 40 CFR 1506.10(d), fulfilled the requirements of 40 CFR EISs or individual notices to the public) EPA has the authority to both extend 1506.9, and has completed the a date by which all comments on an EIS and reduce the time periods on draft transmittal process, EPA will reestablish are to be received; such actions are and final EISs based on a demonstration the filing date and the minimum time encouraged. However, agencies should of ‘‘compelling reasons of national
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51532 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
policy.’’ A lead agency request to EPA on EISs are available at: http:// EIS No. 20120274, Draft EIS, USFS, AZ, to reduce time periods or another www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ Prescott National Forest Land and Federal agency (not the lead agency) eisdata.html. Resource Management Plan, request to formally extend a time period SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Starting Implementation, Yavapai and should be submitted in writing to the October 1, 2012, EPA will not accept Coconino Counties, AZ, Comment Director, Office of Federal Activities, paper copies or CDs of EISs for filing Period Ends: 10/08/2012, Contact: and outline the reasons for the request. purposes; all submissions on or after Mary C. Rasmussen 928–443–8265. These requests can be submitted by October 1, 2012 must be made through email to: [email protected]. EPA will EIS No. 20120275, Draft EIS, USFS, MT, e-NEPA. While this system eliminates accept telephone requests; however, Wild Cramer Forest Health and Fuels the need to submit paper or CD copies agencies should follow up such requests Reduction Project, Swan Lake Ranger to EPA to meet filing requirements, in writing so that the documentation District, Flathead National Forest, electronic submission does not change supporting the decision is complete. A Flathead County, MT, Comment requirements for distribution of EISs for meeting to discuss the consequences for Period Ends: 10/08/2012, Contact: public review and comment. To begin the project and any decision to change Richard Kehr 406–837–7500. using e-NEPA, you must first register time periods may be necessary. For this with EPA’s electronic reporting site— reason, EPA asks that it be made aware Amended Notices https://cdx.epa.gov/epa_home.asp. of any intent to submit requests of this EIS No. 20120201, Draft Supplement, EIS No. 20120268, Draft EIS, USFWS, type as early as possible in the NEPA USACE, IN, Indianapolis North Flood process. This is to prevent the WV, Proposed Issuance of an Incidental Take Permit for the Beech Damage Reduction, Modifications to possibility of the time frame for the Project Features and Realignment of decision on the time period Ridge Energy Wind Project Habitat the South Warfleigh Section, Marion modification from interfering with the Conservation Plan, Implementation, County, IN, Comment Period Ends: lead agency’s schedule for the EIS. EPA Greenbrier and Nicholas Counties, 08/31/2012, Contact: Michael Turner will notify CEQ of any reduction or WV, Comment Period Ends: 10/23/ extension granted. 2012, Contact: Laura Hill 304–636– 502–315–6900. 6586, ext 18. 6. Retention Revision to FR Notice Published 07/ EIS No. 20120269, Final EIS, FHWA, 20/2012; Extending Comment Period Filed EISs are retained in the e-NEPA CA, State Route 91 Corridor from 08/31/2012 to 09/28/2012. Filing system for two years. After two Improvement Project, Widening SR 91 years the EISs are sent to the National from SR 91/State Route 241 EIS No. 20120227, Draft EIS, USMC, Records Center. After a total of twenty Interchange in Orange County to GA, Proposed Modernization and (20) years the EISs are transferred to the Pierce Street in Riverside County, Expansion of Townsend Bombing National Archives Records Orange and Riverside Counties, CA, Range, Acquiring Additional Property Administration (NARA). Review Period Ends: 09/24/2012, and Constructing Infrastructure to Please note that EPA maintains a Web Contact: Aaron Burton 909–388–2841. Allow the Use of Precision-Guided site that will make available copies of EIS No. 20120270, Final Supplement, Munitions, McIntosh and Long the filed EISs to the public. The FHWA, MN, Trunk Highway 60 Counties, GA, Comment Period Ends: retention schedule does not affect the between Windom and St. James, 09/27/2012, Contact: Veronda availability of these electronic copies. Implementation of Transportation Johnson 571–256–2783. Dated: August 21, 2012. System Improvements, Funding, Revision to FR Notice Published 7/13/ Cliff Rader, USACE Section 404 Permit, 2012; Extending Review Period from 8/ Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office Cottonwood and Watonwan Counties, 27/12 to 09/27/2012. of Federal Activities. MN, Review Period Ends: 09/24/2012, [FR Doc. 2012–20914 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Contact: Philip Forst 651–291–6110. EIS No. 20120247, Final EIS, USACE, BILLING CODE 6560–50–P EIS No. 20120271, Final EIS, USFWS, 00, Mississippi River Gulf Outlet NV, Sheldon National Wildlife Refuge Ecosystem Restoration, To Develop a Project, Draft Resource Conservation Comprehensive Ecosystem ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Plan, Implementation, Humboldt and Restoration Plan To Restore the Lake AGENCY Washoe Counties, NV and Lake Borgne Ecosystems, LA and MS, [ER–FRL–9004–6] County, OR, Review Period Ends: 09/ Review Period Ends: 09/06/2012, 24/2012, Contact: Aaron Collins 541– Contact: Tammy Gilmore 504–862– Environmental Impacts Statements; 947–3315, ext. 223. 1002. Notice of Availability EIS No. 20120272, Final EIS, USN, CA, Revision to FR Notice Published 7/27/ AGENCY: Office of Federal Activities, Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton 2012; Extending Review Period from 08/ General Information (202) 564–7146 or Project, Base wide Water 27/2012 to 09/06/2012. http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ Infrastructure, Construction and Dated: August 21, 2012. Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Operation, San Diego County, CA, Statements Filed 08/13/2012 Through Review Period Ends: 09/24/2012, Cliff Rader, 08/17/2012 Pursuant to 40 CFR Contact: Jesse Martinez 619–532– Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office 1506.9. 3844. of Federal Activities. EIS No. 20120273, Final EIS, FHWA, [FR Doc. 2012–20913 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Notice CO, Breckenridge Ski Resort Peak 6 BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act Project, Implementation, White River requires that EPA make public its National Forest, Summit County, CO, comments on EISs issued by other Review Period Ends: 09/24/2012, Federal agencies. EPA’s comment letters Contact: Joe Foreman 970–262–3443.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51533
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Those persons who are or may be List of Subjects AGENCY required to conduct testing of chemical Environmental protection. substances under the Federal Food, [EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0003; FRL–9359–8] Drug and Cosmetics Act (FFDCA), or the Dated: August 14, 2012. R. McNally, SFIREG POM Working Committee; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Notice of Public Meeting Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and those who Director, Field External Affairs Division, sell, distribute or use pesticides, as well Office of Pesticide Programs. AGENCY: Environmental Protection as any Non Government Organization. [FR Doc. 2012–20908 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Agency (EPA). This listing is not intended to be BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ACTION: Notice. exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be SUMMARY: The Association of American affected by this action. Other types of ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Pesticide Control Officials (AAPCO)/ entities not listed in this unit could also AGENCY State FIFRA Issues Research and be affected. If you have any questions [FRL–9720–5] Evaluation Group (SFIREG), Pesticides regarding the applicability of this action Operations and Management (POM) to a particular entity, consult the person Good Neighbor Environmental Board Working Committee will hold a 2-day listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Notification of Public Advisory meeting, beginning on September 17, CONTACT. Committee Teleconference 2012, and ending September 18, 2012. This notice announces the location and B. How can I get copies of this document AGENCY: Environmental Protection times for the meeting and sets forth the and other related information? Agency (EPA). tentative agenda topics. The docket for this action, identified ACTION: Notification of Public Advisory DATES: The meeting will be held on by docket identification (ID) number Committee Teleconference. Monday, September 17, 2012, from 8:30 EPA–HQ–OPP–2012–0003, is available a.m. to 5 p.m. and 8:30 a.m. to 12 noon either electronically through http:// SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal on Tuesday, September 18, 2012. www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at Advisory Committee Act, Public Law To request accommodation of a the OPP Docket in the Environmental 92–463, notice is hereby given that the disability, please contact the person Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/ Good Neighbor Environmental Board listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATON DC), located in EPA West, Rm. 3334, (GNEB) will hold a public CONTACT, preferably at least 10 days 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., teleconference on September 6, 2012 prior to the meeting, to give EPA as Washington, DC 20460–0001. The from 2 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. Eastern much time as possible to process your Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 Standard Time. The meeting is open to request. a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through the public. For further information ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Friday, excluding legal holidays. The regarding the teleconference and EPA, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), telephone number for the Public background materials, please contact First Floor South Conference Room, Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and Mark Joyce at the number listed below. 2777 Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. the telephone number for the OPP Due to logistical complications, EPA is Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review announcing this teleconference with FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron the visitor instructions and additional less than 15 days public notice. Kendall, Field External Affairs Division Background: GNEB is a federal (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets. advisory committee chartered under the Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, II. Tentative Agenda Topics Law 92–463. GNEB provides advice and DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 1. State Lead Agency (SLA) label recommendations to the President and (703) 305–5561; fax number: (703) 305– improvement activities/efforts; Congress on environmental and 5884; email address: 2. Next steps as the result of the label infrastructure issues along the U.S. [email protected]. or Grier Stayton, improvement workshop. Do we need a border with Mexico. SFIREG Executive Secretary, P.O. Box workshop focusing on structural labels? Purpose of Meeting: The purpose of 466, Milford, DE 19963; telephone 3. Identifying/negotiating regional this teleconference is to discuss and number: (302) 422–8152; fax number: commitments in cooperative approve the Good Neighbor (302) 422–2435; email address: agreements; Environmental Board’s Fifteenth Report, stayton.grier@[email protected]. 4. Reconciling SLA referrals to EPA which focuses on water infrastructure SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: for enforcement vs. SLA efforts to fix issues in the U.S.-Mexico border region. violative labels in a timely manner; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If you I. General Information 5. Risk mitigation on seed bag tags; wish to make oral comments or submit A. Does this action apply to me? 6. Persistent herbicides in compost (sources); written comments to the Board, please You may be potentially affected by 7. Methomyl issue paper; contact Mark Joyce at least five days this action if you are interested in 8. Non-crop issue paper; prior to the meeting. pesticide regulation issues affecting 9. SLA availability to answer EPA/ General Information: Additional States and any discussion between EPA Registration Division questions. What information concerning the GNEB can and SFIREG on FIFRA field process can be effective? be found on its Web site at implementation issues related to human 10. Update on Insect Repellency Mark www.epa.gov/ofacmo/gneb. health, environmental exposure to Initiative. Meeting Access: For information on pesticides, and insight into EPA’s access or services for individuals with decision-making process. You are III. How can I request to participate in disabilities, please contact Mark Joyce at invited and encouraged to attend the this meeting? (202) 564–2130 or email at meetings and participate as appropriate. This meeting is open for the public to [email protected]. To request Potentially affected entities may attend. You may attend the meeting accommodation of a disability, please include, but are not limited to: without further notification. contact Mark Joyce at least 10 days prior
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51534 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
to the meeting to give EPA as much time Section 6924(u), for the Point Breeze methods: http://www.FDIC.gov/ as possible to process your request. operation in 1988 and for the Girard regulations/laws/federal/notices.html. Dated: August 20, 2012. Point operation in 1989. Both permits Email: [email protected]. Include Mark Joyce, require Sunoco, Inc. (R&M) to, among the name of the collection in the subject other things, investigate solid waste line of the message. Acting Designated Federal Officer. management units (‘‘SWMUs’’) and Mail: Gary A. Kuiper (202.898.3877), [FR Doc. 2012–20882 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] evaluate remedy options. Both permits Counsel, Room NYA–5046, Federal BILLING CODE 6560–50–P have been extended by EPA until final Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th remedy selection. After PES R&M LLC Street NW., Washington, DC 20429. purchases the Property, Sunoco, Inc. Hand Delivery: Comments may be ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (R&M) will be required to complete its hand-delivered to the guard station at AGENCY RCRA corrective action obligations at the rear of the 17th Street Building [FRL–9710–8] the Property. (located on F Street), on business days DATES: Comments must be submitted on between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Notice of Proposed Prospective or before thirty (30) days after the date All comments should refer to the Purchaser Agreement Pursuant to the of publication of this notice. relevant OMB control number. A copy Comprehensive Environmental ADDRESSES: The Proposed PPA and of the comments may also be submitted Response, Compensation and Liability additional background information to the OMB desk officer for the FDIC: Act of 1980, as Amended (‘‘CERCLA’’), relating to the Proposed PPA are Office of Information and Regulatory and the Solid Waste Disposal Act available for public inspection at the Affairs, Office of Management and AGENCY: Environmental Protection U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Budget, New Executive Office Building, Agency (EPA). Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Washington, DC 20503. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ACTION: Notice; request for public Philadelphia, PA 19103. A copy of the Gary comment. Proposed PPA may be obtained from A. Kuiper, at the FDIC address above. Hon Lee, U.S. Environmental Protection SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Proposal SUMMARY: In accordance with the Agency (3LC23), 1650 Arch Street, to renew the following currently- Comprehensive Environmental Philadelphia, PA 19103 or at lee.hon@ approved collection of information: Response, Compensation, and Liability epa.gov or at 215–814–3419. Comments 1. Title: Notice Regarding Act of 1980, as amended (‘‘CERCLA’’), should reference the ‘‘PES LLC PPA’’ Unauthorized Access to Customer and the Solid Waste Disposal Act, and ‘‘CERC/RCRA–03–2012–0224DC,’’ Information. commonly referred to as the Resource and should be forwarded to Hon Lee at OMB Number: 3064–0145. Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, the above address. Frequency of Response: On occasion. as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Dated: July 23, 2012. Affected Public: Insured state Waste Amendments of 1984 (‘‘RCRA’’), Abraham Ferdas, nonmember banks. notice is hereby given that a proposed Director, Land and Chemicals Division, U.S. Number of FDIC regulated banks that Prospective Purchaser Agreement Environmental Protection Agency, Region III. will notify customers: 93. (‘‘PPA’’) associated with a 1400-acre Estimated Time per Response: 29 [FR Doc. 2012–20870 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] parcel of property located in hours. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (‘‘Property’’) BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Annual Burden: 2,697 hours. was executed by the Environmental General Description of Collection: Protection Agency and the Department This collection reflects the FDIC’s of Justice. Once finalized, the PPA will FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE expectations regarding a response resolve potential claims under Sections CORPORATION program that financial institutions 106 and 107(a) of CERCLA, and Sections Agency Information Collection should develop to address unauthorized 3005 and 3008(a) of RCRA, against Activities: Proposed Collection access to or use of customer information Philadelphia Energy Solutions LLC Renewal; Comment Request that could result in substantial harm or (‘‘PES LLC’’) and Philadelphia Energy inconvenience to a customer. The Solutions Refining & Marketing (‘‘PES AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance information collections require financial R&M LLC’’). The proposed PPA is now Corporation (FDIC). institutions to: (1) Develop notices to subject to public comment after which ACTION: Notice and request for comment. customers; and (2) in certain the United States may modify or circumstances, determine which withdraw its consent if comments SUMMARY: The FDIC, as part of its customers should receive the notices received disclose facts or considerations continuing effort to reduce paperwork and send the notices to customers. which indicate that the PPA is and respondent burden, invites the 2. Title: Identity Theft Red Flags and inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. general public and other Federal Address Discrepancies Under the Fair Sunoco, Inc. (R&M), a subsidiary of agencies to take this opportunity to and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of Sunoco, Inc., currently operates the comment on the renewal of existing 2003 (FACT Act). Property as a crude oil refinery to information collections, as required by OMB No.: 3064–0152. distribute, store and process petroleum. the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Affected Public: Individuals; PES R&M LLC has proposed to purchase (44 U.S.C. chapter 35). Currently, the businesses or other for-profit. the Property and continue crude oil FDIC is soliciting comment on renewal Estimated Number of Respondents: refining and related operations at the of the information collections described 4,546. Property. below. Estimated Time per Response: 16 The Property consists of two formerly DATES: Comments must be submitted on hours. separate refining operations known as or before October 23, 2012. Estimated Total Annual Burden: ‘‘Point Breeze’’ and ‘‘Girard Point.’’ EPA ADDRESSES: Interested parties are 72,736 hours. issued a RCRA Corrective Action Permit invited to submit written comments to General Description of the Collection: under RCRA Section 3004(u), 42 U.S.C. the FDIC by any of the following 12 CFR 334.82, 334.90, 334.91 and
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51535
Appendix J to Part 334 implement address discrepancy from a CRA. A user ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file a sections 114 and 315 of the Fair and of consumer reports must also develop comment online or on paper, by Accurate Credit Transactions Act of and implement reasonable policies and following the instructions in the 2003 (FACT Act), Public Law 108–159 procedures for furnishing an address for Request for Comment part of the (2003). Section 114 amended section the consumer that the user has SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 615 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act reasonably confirmed to be accurate to below. Write ‘‘Health Breach (FCRA) to require the OCC, FRB, FDIC, the CRA from which it receives a notice Notification Rule, PRA Comments, P– OTS, NCUA, and FTC (Agencies) to of address discrepancy when: (1) The 125402’’ on your comment and file your issue jointly (i) Guidelines for financial user can form a reasonable belief that comment online at https:// institutions and creditors regarding the consumer report relates to the ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ identity theft with respect to their consumer about whom the user has healthbreachnotificationPRA2, by account holders and customers; (ii) requested the report; (2) the user following the instructions on the web- regulations requiring each financial establishes a continuing relationship based form. If you prefer to file your institution and creditor to establish with the consumer; and (3) the user comment on paper, mail or deliver your reasonable policies and procedures for regularly and in the ordinary course of comment to the following address: implementing the guidelines to identify business furnishes information to the Federal Trade Commission, Office of the possible risks to account holders or CRA from which it received the notice Secretary, Room H–113 (Annex J), 600 customers or to the safety and of address discrepancy. Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580. soundness of the institution or creditor; Request for Comment and (iii) regulations generally requiring FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: credit and debit card issuers to assess Comments are invited on: (a) Whether Amanda Koulousias, Attorney, Division the validity of change of address the collection of information is of Privacy and Identity Protection, requests under certain circumstances. necessary for the proper performance of Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Section 315 amended section 605 of the the FDIC’s functions, including whether Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania FCRA to require the Agencies to issue the information has practical utility; (b) Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580, regulations providing guidance the accuracy of the estimates of the (202) 326–2252. burden of the information collection, regarding reasonable policies and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: including the validity of the procedures that a user of consumer Title: Health Breach Notification Rule. methodology and assumptions used; (c) reports must employ when a user OMB Control Number: 3084–0150. ways to enhance the quality, utility, and receives a notice of address discrepancy Type of Review: Extension of a clarity of the information to be from a consumer reporting agency currently approved collection. (CRA). The information collections in collected; and (d) ways to minimize the Abstract: The Health Breach Sec. 334.90 require each financial burden of the information collection on Notification Rule (‘‘Rule’’), 16 CFR Part institution and creditor that offers or respondents, including through the use 318, requires vendors of personal health maintains one or more covered accounts of automated collection techniques or records and PHR related entities 1 to to develop and implement a written other forms of information technology. provide: (1) Notice to consumers whose Identity Theft Prevention Program All comments will become a matter of unsecured personally identifiable health (Program). In developing the Program, public record. information has been breached; and (2) financial institutions and creditors are Dated at Washington, DC, this 20th day of notice to the Commission. The Rule required to consider the guidelines in August 2012. only applies to electronic health records Appendix J to Part 334 and include Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. and does not include recordkeeping those that are appropriate. The initial Robert E. Feldman, requirements. The Rule requires third Program must be approved by the board Executive Secretary. party service providers (i.e., those of directors or an appropriate committee [FR Doc. 2012–20810 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] companies that provide services such as thereof and the board, an appropriate billing or data storage) to vendors of BILLING CODE 6714–01–P committee thereof or a designated personal health records and PHR related employee at the level of senior entities to provide notification to such management must be involved in the vendors and PHR related entities FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION oversight of the Program. In addition, following the discovery of a breach. To staff must be trained to carry out the Agency Information Collection notify the FTC of a breach, the Program. Pursuant to Sec. 334.91, each Activities; Submission for OMB Commission developed a form, which is credit and debit card issuer is required Review; Comment Request; Extension posted at www.ftc.gov/healthbreach, for to establish and implement policies and entities subject to the rule to complete procedures to assess the validity of a AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission and return to the agency. change of address request under certain (‘‘FTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’). On May 29, 2012, the FTC sought circumstances. Before issuing an ACTION: Notice. comment on the information collection additional or replacement card, the card requirements associated with the Rule. issuer must notify the cardholder or use SUMMARY: The FTC intends to ask the 77 FR 31612. No comments were another means to assess the validity of Office of Management and Budget the change of address. The information (‘‘OMB’’) to extend through September 1 ‘‘PHR related entity’’ means an entity, other than collections in Sec. 41.82 require each 30, 2015, the current Paperwork a HIPAA-covered entity or an entity to the extent Reduction Act (‘‘PRA’’) clearance for the that it engages in activities as a business associate user of consumer reports to develop and of a HIPAA-covered entity, that: (1) Offers products implement reasonable policies and information collection requirements in or services through the Web site of a vendor of procedures designed to enable the user the Health Breach Notification Rule. personal health records; (2) offers products or to form a reasonable belief that a That clearance expires on September 30, services through the Web sites of HIPAA-covered 2012. entities that offer individuals personal health consumer report relates to the consumer records; or (3) accesses information in a personal about whom it requested the report DATES: Comments must be filed by health record or sends information to a personal when the user receives a notice of September 24, 2012. health record. 16 CFR 318.2(f).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51536 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
received. Pursuant to the OMB If you want the Commission to give to OMB by U.S. postal mail, however, regulations, 5 CFR Part 1320, that your comment confidential treatment, are subject to delays due to heightened implement the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et you must file it in paper form, with a security precautions. Thus, comments seq., the FTC is providing this second request for confidential treatment, and instead should be sent by facsimile to opportunity for public comment while you have to follow the procedure (202) 395–5167. seeking OMB approval to renew the pre- explained in FTC Rule 4.9(c).2 Your existing clearance for the Rule. For more comment will be kept confidential only Willard K. Tom, details about the Rule requirements and if the FTC General Counsel, in his or her General Counsel. the basis for the calculations sole discretion, grants your request in [FR Doc. 2012–20909 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] summarized below, see 77 FR 31612. accordance with the law and the public BILLING CODE 6750–01–P Estimated Annual Burden: 100 hours interest. per breach (to determine what Postal mail addressed to the information has been breached, identify Commission is subject to delay due to DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND the affected customers, prepare the heightened security screening. As a HUMAN SERVICES breach notice, and make the required result, we encourage you to submit your report to the Commission) + 192 hours comments online. To make sure that the Meeting of the National Vaccine to process an estimated 500 calls in the Commission considers your online Advisory Committee event of a data breach. comment, you must file it at https:// AGENCY: Department of Health and Estimated Frequency: 2 breach ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ Human Services, Office of the Secretary, incidents. healthbreachnotificationPRA2, by Office of the Assistant Secretary for Total Annual Labor Cost: $13,379. following the instructions on the web- Health. Total Annual Capital or Other Non- based form. If this Notice appears at Labor Cost: $7,918. http://www.regulations.gov/#!home, you ACTION: Notice of meeting. Request For Comment: also may file a comment through that You can file a comment online or on SUMMARY: As stipulated by the Federal Web site. Advisory Committee Act, the paper. For the Commission to consider If you file your comment on paper, Department of Health and Human your comment, we must receive it on or write ‘‘Health Breach Notification Rule, Services (HHS) is hereby giving notice before September 24, 2012. Write PRA comments, P–125402’’ on your that the National Vaccine Advisory ‘‘Health Breach Notification Rule, PRA comment and on the envelope, and mail Committee (NVAC) will hold a meeting. Comments, P–125402’’ on your or deliver it to the following address: comment. Your comment—including Federal Trade Commission, Office of the The meeting is open to the public. Pre- your name and your state—will be Secretary, Room H–113 (Annex J), 600 registration is required for both public placed on the public record of this Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, attendance and comment. Individuals proceeding, including to the extent DC 20580. If possible, submit your who wish to attend the meeting and/or practicable, on the public Commission paper comment to the Commission by participate in the public comment Web site, at http://www.ftc.gov/os/ courier or overnight service. session should register at http:// publiccomments.shtm. As a matter of Visit the Commission Web site at www.hhs.gov/nvpo/nvac, email discretion, the Commission tries to http://www.ftc.gov to read this Notice [email protected] or call 202–690–5566 and remove individuals’ home contact and the news release describing it. The provide name, organization, and email information from comments before FTC Act and other laws that the address. placing them on the Commission Web Commission administers permit the DATES: The meeting will be held on site. collection of public comments to September 11–12, 2012. The meeting Because your comment will be made consider and use in this proceeding as times and agenda will be posted on the public, you are solely responsible for appropriate. The Commission will NVAC Web site at http://www.hhs.gov/ making sure that your comment does consider all timely and responsive nvpo/nvac as soon they become not include any sensitive personal public comments that it receives on or available. information, like anyone’s Social before September 24, 2012. You can find ADDRESSES: U.S. Department of Health Security number, date of birth, driver’s more information, including routine and Human Services, Hubert H. license number or other state uses permitted by the Privacy Act, in Humphrey Building, Room 800, 200 identification number or foreign country the Commission’s privacy policy, at Independence Avenue SW., equivalent, passport number, financial http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm. account number, or credit or debit card Comments on the disclosure and Washington, DC 20201. number. You are also solely responsible reporting requirements subject to review FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: for making sure that your comment does under the PRA should additionally be National Vaccine Program Office, U.S. not include any sensitive health submitted to OMB. If sent by U.S. mail, Department of Health and Human information, like medical records or they should be addressed to Office of Services, Room 715–H, Hubert H. other individually identifiable health Information and Regulatory Affairs, Humphrey Building, 200 Independence information. In addition, do not include Office of Management and Budget, Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20201. any ‘‘[t]rade secret or any commercial or Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Phone: (202) 690–5566; Fax: (202) 690– financial information which is * * * Trade Commission, New Executive 4631; email: [email protected]. privileged or confidential’’ as provided Office Building, Docket Library, Room SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant in Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 10102, 725 17th Street NW., to Section 2101 of the Public Health 46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR Washington, DC 20503. Comments sent Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300aa–1), the 4.10(a)(2). In particular, do not include Secretary of Health and Human Services competitively sensitive information 2 In particular, the written request for confidential was mandated to establish the National such as costs, sales statistics, treatment that accompanies the comment must Vaccine Program to achieve optimal include the factual and legal basis for the request, inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, and must identify the specific portions of the prevention of human infectious diseases manufacturing processes, or customer comment to be withheld from the public record. See through immunization and to achieve names. FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). optimal prevention against adverse
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51537
reactions to vaccines. The National change as priorities dictate. Please DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Vaccine Advisory Committee was check the NBSB Web site for the most HUMAN SERVICES established to provide advice and make up-to-date information. recommendations to the Director of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid National Vaccine Program on matters ADDRESSES: The closed session will be Services held by teleconference and/or webinar related to the Program’s responsibilities. [CMS–3258–FN] The Assistant Secretary for Health and will not be open to the public as serves as Director of the National stipulated under exemption 9(B) of the Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Vaccine Program. Government in Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. Continued Approval of Det Norske Among the topics to be discussed at section 552b(c). Veritas Healthcare’s (DNVHC’s) the NVAC meeting are: Implementation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Hospital Accreditation Program of the National Vaccine Plan, pertussis, National Biodefense Science Board immunizations and health information AGENCY: Centers for Medicare and mailbox: [email protected]. technology, Healthy People 2020, Medicaid Services, HHS. immunization goals, and vaccine SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant ACTION: Final notice. hesitancy. The meeting agenda will be to section 319M of the Public Health SUMMARY: This final notice announces posted on the NVAC Web site: http:// Service Act (42 U.S.C. 247d–7f) and our decision to approve the Det Norske www.hhs.gov/nvpo/nvac prior to the section 222 of the Public Health Service Veritas Healthcare (DNVHC) for meeting. Act (42 U.S.C. 217a), the Department of continued recognition as a national Public attendance at the meeting is Health and Human Services established accrediting organization for hospitals limited to space available. Individuals the National Biodefense Science Board. that wish to participate in the Medicare who plan to attend and need special The Board shall provide expert advice or Medicaid programs. A hospital that assistance, such as sign language and guidance to the Secretary on participates in Medicaid must also meet interpretation or other reasonable scientific, technical, and other matters the Medicare conditions of participation accommodations, should notify the of special interest to the Department of as referenced in 42 CFR 488.5(3)(b) and National Vaccine Program Office at the 42 CFR 488.6(b). This approval is address/phone listed above at least one Health and Human Services (HHS) regarding current and future chemical, effective September 26, 2012, through week prior to the meeting. Members of September 26, 2018. the public will have the opportunity to biological, nuclear, and radiological DATES: This final notice is effective provide comments at the NVAC meeting agents, whether naturally occurring, September 26, 2012, through September during the public comment periods on accidental, or deliberate. The Board may 26, 2018. the agenda. Individuals who would like also provide advice and guidance to the to submit written statements should Secretary and/or the Assistant Secretary FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: email or fax their comments to the for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) Barbara Easterling, (410) 786–0482; National Vaccine Program Office at least on other matters related to public health Cindy Melanson, (410) 786–0310; or five business days prior to the meeting. emergency preparedness and response. Patricia Chmielewski, (410) 786–6899. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Dated: August 21, 2012. Background: The NBSB continues to Bruce Gellin, review and evaluate the 2012 Public I. Background Director, National Vaccine Program Office, Health Emergency Medical Under the Medicare program, eligible Executive Secretary, National Vaccine Countermeasures Enterprise (PHEMCE) beneficiaries may receive covered Advisory Committee. Strategy and Implementation Plan (SIP). services in a hospital provided certain [FR Doc. 2012–20910 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Therefore, the Board’s deliberations on requirements are met. Section 1861(e) of BILLING CODE 4150–44–P the PHEMCE SIP task are being the Social Security Act (the Act) conducted in closed sessions in establishes distinct criteria for facilities accordance with provisions set forth seeking designation as a hospital. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND under exemption 9(B) of the Regulations concerning provider HUMAN SERVICES Government in Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. agreements are at 42 CFR part 489 and section 552b(c), and with approval by those pertaining to activities relating to Meetings of the National Biodefense the survey and certification of facilities Science Board the ASPR. For a full description for the basis for closing this session, please see are at part 488. The regulations at part AGENCY: Department of Health and the previous meeting notice published 482 specify the conditions that a Human Services, Office of the Secretary. at 77 FR 13129 (2012). hospital must meet to participate in the Medicare program, the scope of covered ACTION: Notice. Availability of Materials: The meeting services and the conditions for Medicare agenda and materials will be posted on SUMMARY: As stipulated by the Federal payment for hospitals. Advisory Committee Act, the U.S. the NBSB Web site at www.PHE.GOV/ Generally, to enter into an agreement, Department of Health and Human NBSB. a hospital must first be certified by a Services is hereby giving notice that the Procedures for Providing Public Input: state survey agency as complying with National Biodefense Science Board All written comments should be sent by the conditions or requirements set forth (NBSB) will be holding a closed session email to [email protected] with ‘‘NBSB in part 482. Thereafter, the hospital is under exemption 9(B) of the Public Comment’’ as the subject line. subject to regular surveys by a state Government in Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. survey agency to determine whether it Dated: August 20, 2012. section 552b(c). continues to meet these requirements. DATES: The closed session of the NBSB Nicole Lurie, However, there is an alternative to will take place on September 17, 2012, Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and surveys by state agencies. Certification and is tentatively scheduled from 1:30 Response. by a nationally recognized accreditation p.m. to 3:30 p.m. EST. The agenda and [FR Doc. 2012–20930 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] program can substitute for ongoing state time for the session are subject to BILLING CODE 4150–37–P review.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51538 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
Section 1865(a)(1) of the Act provides DNVHC’s request for approval of its In accordance with section that, if a provider entity demonstrates hospital accreditation program. In the 1865(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the March 23, through accreditation by an approved March 23, 2012 proposed notice, we 2012 proposed notice also solicited national accrediting organization (AO) detailed our evaluation criteria. Under public comments regarding whether that all applicable Medicare conditions section 1865(a)(2) of the Act and in our DNVHC’s requirements met or exceeded are met or exceeded, we will deem those regulations at § 488.4 and § 488.8, we the Medicare conditions of participation provider entities as having met the conducted a review of DNVHC’s for hospitals. We received two requirements. Accreditation by an application in accordance with the comments in response to our proposed accrediting organization is voluntary criteria specified by our regulations, notice. The commenters expressed and is not required for Medicare which include, but are not limited to the continued support for DNVHC’s participation. following: hospital accreditation program. In If an accrediting organization is • An onsite administrative review of addition, the commenters stated recognized by the Secretary of the DNVHC’s: (1) Corporate policies; (2) DNVHC’s standards are closely aligned Department of Health and Human financial and human resources available with the hospital conditions of Services as having standards for to accomplish the proposed surveys; (3) participation, thus allowing hospitals to accreditation that meet or exceed procedures for training, monitoring, and be in compliance with the Medicare Medicare requirements, any provider evaluation of its surveyors; (4) ability to requirements. entity accredited by the national investigate and respond appropriately to IV. Provisions of the Final Notice accrediting body’s approved program complaints against accredited facilities; would be deemed to have met the and (5) survey review and decision- A. Differences Between DNVHC’s Medicare conditions. A national making process for accreditation. Standards and Requirements for accrediting organization applying for • The comparison of DNVHC’s Accreditation and Medicare’s approval of its accreditation program accreditation to our current Medicare Conditions and Survey Requirements under part 488, subpart A, must provide hospital conditions of participation. We compared DNVHC’s hospital us with reasonable assurance that the • A documentation review of accrediting organization requires the requirements and survey process with DNVHC’s survey process to determine the Medicare conditions of participation accredited provider entities to meet the following: requirements that are at least as and survey process as outlined in the + Determine the composition of the State Operations Manual (SOM). Our stringent as the Medicare conditions. survey team, surveyor qualifications, Our regulations concerning the approval review and evaluation of DNVHC’s and DNVHC’s ability to provide hospital application, which were of accrediting organizations are set forth continuing surveyor training. at § 488.4 and § 488.8(d)(3). The conducted as described in section III. of + Compare DNVHC’s processes to this final notice, yielded the following: regulations at § 488.8(d)(3) require those of state survey agencies, including • accrediting organizations to reapply for To meet the requirements at survey frequency, and the ability to § 482.13(a), DNVHC revised its continued approval of its accreditation investigate and respond appropriately to program every 6 years or sooner as standards to include language to address complaints against accredited facilities. the hospital’s responsibility to protect determined by us. + Evaluate DNVHC’s procedures for Det Norske Veritas Healthcare’s and promote each patient’s rights. monitoring hospitals out of compliance • current term of approval for their To meet the requirements at with DNVHC’s program requirements. hospital accreditation program expires § 482.13(a)(2), DNVHC revised its The monitoring procedures are used September 26, 2012. standards to require prompt resolution only when DNVHC identifies of patient grievances. II. Application Approval Process noncompliance. If noncompliance is • To meet the requirements at Section 1865(a)(3)(A) of the Act identified through validation reviews, § 482.13(b)(3), DNVHC revised its provides a statutory timetable to ensure the state survey agency monitors standards to include the requirements at that our review of applications for CMS- corrections as specified at § 488.7(d). § 489.100, § 489.102, § 489.104 approval of an accreditation program is + Assess DNVHC’s ability to report regarding advanced directive. conducted in a timely manner. The deficiencies to the surveyed facilities • To meet the requirements at statute provides CMS 210 days after the and respond to the facility’s plan of § 482.52(b), DNVHC revised its date of receipt of a complete correction in a timely manner. standards to ensure anesthesia services application, with any documentation + Establish DNVHC’s ability to are consistent with the needs and necessary to make the determination, to provide us with electronic data and resources of the hospital. complete our survey activities and reports necessary for effective validation • To meet the requirements at application process. Within 60 days and assessment of the organization’s § 489.13, DNVHC modified its policies after receiving a complete application, survey process. related to the accreditation effective we must publish a notice in the Federal + Determine the adequacy of staff and date. Register that identifies the national other resources. • To meet the survey process accrediting body making the request, + Confirm DNVHC’s ability to requirements in Appendix A of the describes the request, and provides no provide adequate funding for SOM, DNVHC revised its policy less than a 30-day public comment performing required surveys. outlining the minimum number of period. At the end of the 210-day + Confirm DNVHC’s policies with inpatient records required for review period, we must publish a notice in the respect to whether surveys are during an accreditation survey. Federal Register approving or denying announced or unannounced. • To meet the requirements at § 488.4, the application. + Obtain DNVHC’s agreement to DNVHC revised its policies to require a provide us with a copy of the most copy of the surveyor’s annual evaluation III. Provisions of the Proposed Notice current accreditation survey together be included in the surveyor’s file. In the March 23, 2012 Federal with any other information related to • DNVHC revised its complaint Register (77 FR 17070), we published a the survey as we may require, including policies to ensure all complaint proposed notice in the announcing corrective action plans. investigations are conducted in
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51539
accordance with the requirements at Organ Procurement Organization (OPO). Human Services, 7500 Security SOM chapter five. The request was made in accordance Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244–1850. • DNVHC revised its policies and with section 1138(a)(2) of the Social If you intend to deliver your procedures to clarify that they do not Security Act (the Act). In addition, this comments to the Baltimore address, call have authority to advise facilities notice requests comments from OPOs telephone number (410) 786–9994 in regarding certification issues. Instead, and the general public for our advance to schedule your arrival with DNVHC must contact the CMS Regional consideration in determining whether one of our staff members. Office on facility specific certification we should grant the requested waiver. Comments erroneously mailed to the issues for consultation and direction. DATES: Comment Date: To be assured addresses indicated as appropriate for hand or courier delivery may be delayed B. Term of Approval consideration, comments must be received at one of the addresses and received after the comment period. Based on our review and observations provided below, no later than 5 p.m. on For information on viewing public described in section III. of this final October 23, 2012. comments, see the beginning of the notice, we have determined that ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. DNVHC’s requirements for hospitals to file code CMS–1452–NC. Because of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: meet or exceed our requirements. staff and resource limitations, we cannot Patricia Taft, (410) 786–4561. Therefore, we approve DVNHC as a accept comments by facsimile (FAX) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: national accreditation organization for Inspection transmission. of Public Comments: All comments hospitals that request participation in You may submit comments in one of the Medicare program, effective received before the close of the four ways (please choose only one of the comment period are available for September 26, 2012, through September ways listed): 26, 2018. viewing by the public, including any 1. Electronically. You may submit personally identifiable or confidential V. Collection of Information electronic comments on this regulation business information that is included in Requirements to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow a comment. We post all comments the ‘‘Submit a comment’’ instructions. received before the close of the This document does not impose 2. By regular mail. You may mail information collection and comment period on the following Web written comments to the following site as soon as possible after they have recordkeeping requirements. address ONLY: Consequently, it need not be reviewed been received: http:// Centers for Medicare & Medicaid www.regulations.gov. Follow the search by the Office of Management and Services, Department of Health and Budget under the authority of the instructions on that Web site to view Human Services, Attention: CMS–1452– public comments. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 NC, P.O. Box 8010, Baltimore, MD U.S.C. 35). Comments received timely will also 21244–1850. be available for public inspection as Please allow sufficient time for mailed Authority: Section 1865 of the Social they are received, generally beginning Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395bb). comments to be received before the approximately 3 weeks after publication close of the comment period. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance of a document, at the headquarters of Program No. 93.778, Medical Assistance 3. By express or overnight mail. You Program; No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital may send written comments to the the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Insurance Program; and No. 93.774, following address ONLY: Services, 7500 Security Boulevard, Medicare—Supplementary Medical Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Baltimore, Maryland 21244, Monday Insurance Program) Services, Department of Health and through Friday of each week from 8:30 Dated: August 9, 2012. Human Services, Attention: CMS–1452– a.m. to 4 p.m. To schedule an appointment to view public comments, Marilyn Tavenner, NC, Mail Stop C4–26–05, 7500 Security phone 1–800–743–3951. Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244–1850. & Medicaid Services. 4. By hand or courier. Alternatively, I. Background you may deliver (by hand or courier) [FR Doc. 2012–20199 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Organ Procurement Organizations BILLING CODE 4120–01–P your written comments ONLY to the following addresses: (OPOs) are not-for-profit organizations a. For delivery in Washington, DC— that are responsible for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid procurement, preservation, and DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND transport of organs to transplant centers HUMAN SERVICES Services, Department of Health and Human Services, Room 445–G, Hubert throughout the country. Qualified OPOs Centers for Medicare & Medicaid H. Humphrey Building, 200 are designated by the Centers for Services Independence Avenue SW., Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to Washington, DC 20201. recover or procure organs in CMS- [CMS–1452–NC] (Because access to the interior of the defined exclusive geographic service Hubert H. Humphrey Building is not areas, pursuant to section 371(b)(1) of Medicare and Medicaid Programs; readily available to persons without the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. Announcement of Application From a Federal government identification, 273(b)(1)) and our regulations at 42 CFR Hospital Requesting Waiver for Organ commenters are encouraged to leave 486.306. Once an OPO has been Procurement Service Area their comments in the CMS drop slots designated for an area, hospitals in that AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & located in the main lobby of the area that participate in Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. building. A stamp-in clock is available Medicaid are required to work with that ACTION: Notice with comment period. for persons wishing to retain a proof of OPO in providing organs for transplant, filing by stamping in and retaining an pursuant to section 1138(a)(1)(C) of the SUMMARY: This notice with comment extra copy of the comments being filed.) Social Security Act (the Act) and our period announces a hospital’s request b. For delivery in Baltimore, MD— regulations at 42 CFR 482.45. for a waiver from the requirement to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Section 1138(a)(1)(A)(iii) of the Act have an agreement with its designated Services, Department of Health and provides that a hospital must notify the
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51540 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
designated OPO (for the service area in public comments, as required by section DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND which it is located) of potential organ 1138(a)(2)(D) of the Act. HUMAN SERVICES donors. Under section 1138(a)(1)(C) of According to these requirements, we the Act, every participating hospital will review the comments received. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid must have an agreement only with its During the review process, we may Services consult on an as-needed basis with the designated OPO to identify potential [CMS–4166–FN] donors. Health Resources and Services However, section 1138(a)(2)(A) of the Administration’s Division of Medicare Program; Approved Renewal Act provides that a hospital may obtain Transplantation, the United Network for of Deeming Authority of the a waiver of the above requirements from Organ Sharing, and our regional offices. Accreditation Association for the Secretary under certain specified If necessary, we may request additional Ambulatory Health Care, Inc. for conditions. A waiver allows the hospital clarifying information from the applying Medicare Advantage Health to have an agreement with an OPO other hospital or others. We will then make a Maintenance Organizations and Local than the one initially designated by final determination on the waiver Preferred Provider Organizations CMS, if the hospital meets certain request and notify the hospital and the conditions specified in section designated and requested OPOs. AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & 1138(a)(2)(A) of the Act. In addition, the Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. III. Hospital Waiver Request Secretary may review additional criteria ACTION: Final notice. described in section 1138(a)(2)(B) of the As permitted by 42 CFR 486.308(e), Act to evaluate the hospital’s request for the following hospital has requested a SUMMARY: This notice announces our a waiver. waiver in order to enter into an decision to renew the Medicare Section 1138(a)(2)(A) of the Act states agreement with a designated OPO other Advantage ‘‘deeming authority’’ of the that in granting a waiver, the Secretary than the OPO designated for the service Accreditation Association for must determine that the waiver—(1) is area in which the hospital is located: Ambulatory Health Care, Inc. (AAAHC) expected to increase organ donations; Tri-Lakes Medical Center in for Health Maintenance Organizations and (2) will ensure equitable treatment Batesville, Mississippi, is requesting a and Preferred Provider Organizations for of patients referred for transplants waiver to work with: Mississippi Organ a term of 6 years. within the service area served by the Recovery Agency, 12 River Bend Pl., DATES: This final notice is effective designated OPO and within the service Flowood, MS 39232. through July 10, 2018. The Hospital’s Designated OPO is: area served by the OPO with which the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mid-South Transplant Foundation, Inc., hospital seeks to enter into an Abraham Weinschneider, (410) 786– agreement under the waiver. In making 8001 Centerview Parkway, Suite 302, Memphis, TN 38018. 5688; or Edgar Gallardo, (410) 786– a waiver determination, section 0361. 1138(a)(2)(B) of the Act provides that IV. Collection of Information SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: the Secretary may consider, among Requirements other factors: (1) Cost-effectiveness; (2) I. Background improvements in quality; (3) whether This document does not impose there has been any change in a information collection and Under the Medicare program, eligible hospital’s designated OPO due to the recordkeeping requirements. beneficiaries may receive covered changes made in definitions for Consequently, it need not be reviewed services through a Medicare Advantage metropolitan statistical areas; and (4) by the Office of Management and (MA) organization that contracts with the length and continuity of a hospital’s Budget under the authority of the CMS. The regulations specifying the relationship with an OPO other than the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 Medicare requirements that must be met hospital’s designated OPO. Under U.S.C. 35). for a Medicare Advantage Organization (MAO) to enter into a contract with section 1138(a)(2)(D) of the Act, the IV. Response to Comments Secretary is required to publish a notice CMS are located at 42 CFR part 422. Because of the large number of public of any waiver application received from These regulations implement Part C of comments we normally receive on a hospital within 30 days of receiving Title XVIII of the Social Security Act Federal Register documents, we are not the application, and to offer interested (the Act), which specifies the services able to acknowledge or respond to them parties an opportunity to submit that an MAO must provide and the individually. We will consider all comments during the 60-day comment requirements that the organization must comments we receive by the date and period beginning on the publication meet to be an MA contractor. Other time specified in the DATES section of date in the Federal Register. relevant sections of the Act are Parts A The criteria that the Secretary uses to this preamble, and, when we proceed and B of Title XVIII and Part A of Title evaluate the waiver in these cases are with a subsequent document, we will XI pertaining to the provision of the same as those described above under respond to the comments in the services by Medicare-certified providers sections 1138(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Act preamble to that document. and suppliers. Generally, for an entity to and have been incorporated into the (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance be an MA organization, the organization regulations at § 486.308(e) and (f). Program No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital must be licensed by the State as a risk- Insurance; Program No. 93.774, Medicare— bearing organization as set forth in part II. Waiver Request Procedures Supplementary Medical Insurance, and 422. On October 1995, we issued a Program No. 93.778, Medical Assistance As a method of assuring compliance Program) Program Memorandum (Transmittal No. with certain Medicare requirements, an A–95–11) detailing the waiver process Dated: August 20, 2012. MA organization may choose to become and discussing the information Marilyn Tavenner, accredited by a CMS-approved hospitals must provide in requesting a Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare accrediting organization (AO). Once waiver. We indicated that upon receipt & Medicaid Services. accredited by such a CMS-approved AO, of a waiver request, we would publish [FR Doc. 2012–20920 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] we deem the MA organization to be a Federal Register notice to solicit BILLING CODE 4120–01–P compliant in one or more of six
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51541
requirements set forth in section day period, we must publish an • A description of the organization’s 1852(e)(4)(B) of the Act. For an AO to approval or denial of the application. data management and analysis system be able to ‘‘deem’’ an MA plan III. Proposed Notice with respect to its surveys and compliant with these MA requirements, accreditation decisions, including the the AO must prove to CMS that its In the March 30, 2012, Federal kinds of reports, tables, and other standards are at least as stringent as Register (76 FR 19290), we published a displays generated by that system. Medicare requirements. Health proposed notice announcing AAAHC’s • A description of the organization’s maintenance organizations (HMOs) or request for continued CMS approval of procedures for responding to and preferred provider organizations (PPOs) its deeming authority for MA HMOs and accredited by an approved AO may PPOs. In the proposed notice, we investigating complaints against receive, at their request, ‘‘deemed’’ detailed our evaluation criteria. Under accredited organizations, including status for CMS requirements with section 1852(e)(4) of the Act and our policies and procedures regarding respect to the following six MA criteria: regulations at § 422.158 (Federal review coordination of these activities with Quality Improvement; of accrediting organizations), we appropriate licensing bodies and Antidiscrimination; Access to Services; conducted a review of AAAHC’s ombudsmen programs. Confidentiality and Accuracy of application in accordance with the • A description of the organization’s Enrollee Records; Information on criteria specified by our regulations, policies and procedures with respect to Advanced Directives; and Provider which include, but are not limited to the the withholding or removal of Participation Rules. (See 42 CFR following: accreditation for failure to meet the • The types of MA plans that it would 422.156(b)). At this time, recognition of accreditation organization’s standards or accreditation does not include the Part review as part of its accreditation process. requirements, and other actions the D areas of review set out at § 423.165(b). • organization takes in response to AOs that apply for MA deeming A detailed comparison of the organization’s accreditation noncompliance with its standards and authority are generally recognized by requirements. the health care industry as entities that requirements and standards with the • accredit HMOs and PPOs. As we specify Medicare requirements (for example, a A description of all types (for crosswalk). example, full, partial) and categories (for at § 422.157(b)(2)(ii), the term for which • an AO may be approved by CMS may Detailed information about the example, provisional, conditional, not exceed 6 years. For continuing organization’s survey process, including temporary) of accreditation offered by approval, the AO must apply to CMS to the following— the organization, the duration of each ++ Frequency of surveys and whether renew its ‘‘deeming authority’’ for a type and category of accreditation and a surveys are announced or unannounced. subsequent approval period. ++ Copies of survey forms, and statement identifying the types and The Accreditation Association for guidelines and instructions to categories that would serve as a basis for Ambulatory Health Care, Inc. (AAAHC) surveyors. accreditation if CMS approves the was approved by CMS as an ++ Descriptions of— accreditation organization. accreditation organization for MA —The survey review process and the • A list of all currently accredited MA HMOs and PPOs on July 12, 2006, and accreditation status decision making organizations and the type, category, that term will expire on July 11, 2012. process; and expiration date of the accreditation On December 14, 2011, AAAHC —The procedures used to notify held by each of them. submitted an application to renew its accredited MA organizations of • A list of all full and partial deeming authority. On that same date, deficiencies and to monitor the AAAHC submitted materials requested correction of those deficiencies; and accreditation surveys scheduled to be from CMS which included updates and/ —The procedures used to enforce performed by the accreditation or changes to items set out in Federal compliance with accreditation organization as requested by CMS. regulations at § 422.158(a) that are requirements. • The name and address of each prerequisites for receiving approval of • Detailed information about the person with an ownership or control its accreditation program from CMS, individuals who perform surveys for the interest in the accreditation and which were furnished to CMS by accreditation organization, including organization. AAAHC as a part of their renewal the following— • applications for HMOs and PPOs. CMS also considers AAAHC’s past ++ The size and composition of performance in the deeming program II. Deeming Applications Approval accreditation survey teams for each type and results of recent deeming validation Process of plan reviewed as part of the reviews, or look-behind audits accreditation process; conducted as part of continuing Federal Section 1865(a)(3)(A) of the Act ++ The education and experience oversight of the deeming program under provides a statutory timetable to ensure requirements surveyors must meet; that our review of deeming applications ++ The content and frequency of the § 422.157(d). is conducted in a timely manner. The in-service training provided to survey In accordance with section Act provides us with 210 calendar days personnel; 1865(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the March 30, after the date of receipt of an application ++ The evaluation systems used to 2012 proposed notice (76 FR 19290) also to complete our survey activities and monitor the performance of individual solicited public comments regarding application review process. Within 60 surveyors and survey teams; and whether AAAHC’s requirements met or days of receiving a completed ++ The organization’s policies and exceeded the Medicare conditions of application, we must publish a notice in practice with respect to the participation as an accrediting the Federal Register that identifies the participation, in surveys or in the organization for MA HMOs and PPOs. accreditation decision process by an national accreditation body making the We received no public comments in request, describes the request, and individual who is professionally or response to our proposed notice. provides no less than a 30-day public financially affiliated with the entity comment period. At the end of the 210- being surveyed.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51542 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
IV. Provisions of the Final Notice Dated: August 9, 2012. contact Raymond Bulls at the following Marilyn Tavenner, email address: [email protected] A. Differences Between AAAHC’s Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare or call 410–786–7267. Standards and Requirements for & Medicaid Services. Advisory Committees’ Information Accreditation and Medicare’s Lines: You may also refer to the CMS Conditions and Survey Requirements [FR Doc. 2012–20195 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120–01–P Federal Advisory Committee Hotlines at We compared the standards and 1–877–449–5659 (toll-free) or 410–786– survey process contained in AAAHC’s 3985 (local) for additional information. application with the Medicare DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND News Media: Representatives should conditions for accreditation. Our review HUMAN SERVICES contact the CMS Press Office at 202– and evaluation of AAAHC’s application 690–6145. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid for continued CMS-approval were SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Services conducted as described in section III of I. Background this final notice, and yielded the [CMS–1596–N] following: The Secretary is required by section • Medicare Program; Solicitation of Two 1833(t)(9)(A) of the Social Security Act To meet the requirements at Nominations to the Advisory Panel on (the Act), and section 222 of the Public § 488.10(b), AAAHC modified its Hospital Outpatient Payment Health Service Act (PHS Act) to consult policies to include ‘‘person(s) receiving with an expert outside advisory panel hospice benefits prior to completing an AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & regarding the clinical integrity of the enrollment request for an MSA plan’’ as Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. APC groups and relative payment an exception where an MAO may deny ACTION: Notice. weights that are components of the enrollment based on medical status. Medicare Hospital Outpatient SUMMARY: This notice solicits • AAAHC amended its crosswalk to Prospective Payment System (OPPS), nominations for two new members to ensure current AAAHC standards are and the appropriate supervision level the Advisory Panel on Hospital clearly crosswalked to the following for hospital outpatient services. The Outpatient Payment (HOP, the Panel). regulatory requirements: panel may use data collected or There will be two vacancies on the §§ 422.112(a)(7); 422.118(d); developed by entities and organizations Panel beginning September 30, 2012. 422.202(d)(1); and 422.204(b)(2). (other than DHHS) in conducting the The purpose of the Panel is to advise • review. The Panel is governed by the To meet the amendments made at the Secretary of the Department of provisions of the Federal Advisory § 422.156 by the final rule published in Health and Human Services (DHHS) Committee Act (FACA) (Public Law 92– the April 15, 2011 Federal Register (76 (the Secretary) and the Administrator of 463), as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), CFR 21498), AAAHC removed Quality the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid which sets forth standards for the Improvement Projects and Chronic Care Services (CMS) (the Administrator) on formation and use of advisory panels. Improvement Programs from its the clinical integrity of the Ambulatory deeming process. The Charter requires that the Panel Payment Classification (APC) groups meet up to three times annually. CMS B. Term of Approval and their associated weights, and considers the technical advice provided supervision of hospital outpatient by the Panel as we prepare the proposed Based on the review and observations services. and final rules to update the OPPS for described in section III of this final The Secretary rechartered the Panel in the following calendar year. notice, we have determined that 2011 for a 2-year period effective The Panel shall consist of a chair and AAAHC’s accreditation program through November 15, 2013. up to 19 members who are full-time requirements meet or exceed our DATES: Submission of Nominations: We employees of hospitals, hospital requirements. Therefore, we approve will consider nominations if they are systems, or other Medicare providers AAAHC as a national accreditation received no later than 5 p.m. (e.s.t.) that are subject to the OPPS. (For organization with deeming authority for October 23, 2012. purposes of the Panel, consultants or MA HMOs and PPOs, effective July 11, ADDRESSES: Please mail or hand deliver independent contractors are not 2012 through July 10, 2018. nominations to the following address: considered to be full-time employees in V. Collection of Information Centers for Medicare & Medicaid these organizations.) Requirements Services; Attn: Raymond Bulls, The current Panel members are as Advisory Panel on HOP; Center for follows: (Note: The asterisk [*] indicates This document does not impose Medicare, Hospital & Ambulatory Policy the Panel members whose terms end on information collection and Group, Division of Outpatient Care; September 30, 2012.) recordkeeping requirements. 7500 Security Boulevard, Mail Stop C4– • E. L. Hambrick, M.D., J.D., Chair, a Consequently, it need not be reviewed 05–17; Baltimore, MD 21244–1850. CMS Medical Officer by the Office of Management and Web site: For additional information • Karen Borman, M.D. Budget under the authority of the on the Panel and updates to the Panel’s • Ruth L. Bush, M.D., M.P.H. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 activities, we refer readers to our Web • Lanny Copeland, M.D. U.S.C. 35). site at the following: http:// • Kari S. Cornicelli, C.P.A., FHFMA Authority: Section 1865 of the Social www.cms.gov/Regulations- • Dawn L. Francis, M.D., M.H.S. Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395bb). andGuidance/Guidance/FACA/ • David A. Halsey, M.D. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance AdvisoryPanelonAmbulatoryPayment • Brain D. Kavanagh, M.D., M.P.H. Program No. 93.778, Medical Assistance ClassificationGroups.html. • Judith T. Kelly, B.S.H.A., RHIT, RHIA, Program; No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CCS* Insurance Program; and No. 93.774, Contact: Persons wishing to nominate • Scott Manaker, M.D., Ph.D. Medicare—Supplemental Medical Insurance individuals to serve on the Panel or to • John Marshall, CRA, RCC, RT Program). obtain further information may also • Jim Nelson
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51543
• Leah Osbahr of expertise. Generally, members of the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND • Randall A. Oyer, M.D.* Panel serve overlapping terms up to 4 HUMAN SERVICES • Jacqueline Phillips years, based on the needs of the Panel • Daniel J. Pothen, M.S., RHIA, CHPS, and contingent upon the rechartering of Health Resources and Services CPHIMS, CCS, CCS–P, CHC the Panel. A member may serve after the Administration • Gregory J. Przbylski, M.D. expiration of his or her term until a • Traci Rabine National Advisory Committee on Rural • Marianna V. Spanki-Varelas M.D., successor has been sworn in. Health and Human Services; Notice of Ph.D., M.B.A. Any interested person or organization Meeting • Gale Walker may nominate one or more qualified Panel members serve without individuals. Self-nominations will also In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of compensation, according to an advance be accepted. Each nomination must the Federal Advisory Committee Act written agreement; however, for the include the following: (Pub. L. 92–463), notice is hereby given meetings, CMS reimburses travel, meals, that the following committee will • Letter of Nomination stating the lodging, and related expenses in convene its seventy-second meeting. reasons why the nominee should be accordance with standard Government Name: National Advisory Committee travel regulations. CMS has a special considered. on Rural Health and Human Services. interest in ensuring, while taking into • Curriculum Vitae or resume of the Dates and Times: September 26, 2012, account the nominee pool, that the nominee. 9:00 a.m.–5 p.m.; September 27, 2012, 9:00 a.m.–5 p.m.; September 28, 2012, Panel is diverse in all respects of the • Written and signed statement from following: geography; rural or urban 8:45 a.m.–11:15 a.m. the nominee that the nominee is willing Place: Radisson Hotel & Suites Austin practice; race, ethnicity, sex, and to serve on the Panel under the disability; medical or technical Downtown, 111 East Cesar Chavez conditions described in this notice and Street, Austin, TX 78701. specialty; and type of hospital, hospital further specified in the Charter. health system, or other Medicare Phone: (512) 478–9611. • provider subject to the OPPS. The hospital or hospital system Status: The meeting will be open to Based upon either self-nominations or name and address, or CAH name and the public. nominations submitted by providers or address, as well as all Medicare hospital Purpose: The National Advisory interested organizations, the Secretary, and or Medicare CAH billing numbers Committee on Rural Health and Human or her designee, appoints new members of the facility where the nominee is Services provides advice and to the Panel from among those employee. recommendations to the Secretary with candidates determined to have the respect to the delivery, research, required expertise. New appointments III. Copies of the Charter development, and administration of are made in a manner that ensures a health and human services in rural To obtain a copy of the Panel’s areas. balanced membership under the FACA Charter, we refer readers to our Web site guidelines. Agenda: Wednesday morning at 9:00 at the following: http://www.cms.gov/ a.m., the meeting will be called to order II. Criteria for Nominees Regulations-and-Guidance/Guidance/ by the Chairman of the Committee, the The Panel must be fairly balanced in FACA/AdvisoryPanelonAmbulatory Honorable Ronnie Musgrove. The its membership in terms of the points of PaymentClassificationGroups.html. Committee will be examining the future of the rural health care infrastructure view represented and the functions to IV. Collection of Information and the rural effects of recent changes be performed. Each Panel member must Requirements be employed full-time by a hospital, to the Temporary Assistance for Needy hospital system, or other Medicare This document does not impose Families (TANF) Program. The day will provider subject to payment under the information collection and conclude with a period of public OPPS. All members must have technical recordkeeping requirements. comment at approximately 5:00 p.m. expertise to enable them to participate Consequently, it need not be reviewed Thursday morning at approximately fully in the Panel’s work. Such expertise by the Office of Management and 9:00 a.m., the Committee will break into Subcommittees and depart for site visits encompasses hospital payment systems; Budget under the authority of the to rural healthcare and human services hospital medical care delivery systems; Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 providers in Texas. One panel from the provider billing systems; APC groups; U.S.C. 35). Current Procedural Terminology codes; Health Infrastructure Subcommittee will and alpha-numeric Health Care (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance visit the Llano Memorial Hospital in Common Procedure Coding System Program No. 93.774, Medicare— Llano, TX. Another panel from the codes; and the use of, and payment for, Supplementary Medical Insurance Program). Health Infrastructure Subcommittee will drugs, medical devices, and other Dated: August 8, 2012. visit Gonzales Healthcare System— Memorial Hospital, in Gonzales, TX. services in the outpatient setting, as Marilyn Tavenner, well as other forms of relevant expertise. The day will conclude at the Radisson Acting Administrator, Centers for Medicare Hotel & Suites Austin Downtown with For supervision deliberations, the Panel & Medicaid Services. shall have members that represent the a period of public comment at [FR Doc. 2012–20069 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] interests of Critical Access Hospitals approximately 5:00 p.m. (CAHs), who advise CMS only regarding BILLING CODE 4120–01–P The final session will be convened on the level of supervision for hospital Friday morning at 9 a.m. The Committee outpatient services. will summarize key findings from the It is not necessary for a nominee to meeting and develop a work plan for the possess expertise in all of the areas next quarter and the following meeting. listed, but each must have a minimum The meeting will adjourn at 11:15 a.m. of 5 years experience and currently have FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: full-time employment in his or her area Steve Hirsch, MSLS, Executive
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51544 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
Secretary, National Advisory Committee Dated: August 20, 2012. amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is on Rural Health and Human Services, Melanie J. Gray, hereby given of the following meetings. Health Resources and Services Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory The meetings will be closed to the Administration, Parklawn Building, Committee Policy. public in accordance with the Room 5A–05, 5600 Fishers Lane, [FR Doc. 2012–20804 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] provisions set forth in sections Rockville, MD 20857, Telephone (301) BILLING CODE 4140–01–P 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., 443–0835, Fax (301) 443–2803. as amended. The grant applications and Persons interested in attending any the discussions could disclose portion of the meeting should contact DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND confidential trade secrets or commercial Nathan Nash at the Office of Rural HUMAN SERVICES property such as patentable material, Health Policy (ORHP) via telephone at and personal information concerning (301) 443–0835 or by email at National Institutes of Health individuals associated with the grant [email protected]. The Committee applications, the disclosure of which meeting agenda will be posted on National Institute of Arthritis and would constitute a clearly unwarranted ORHP’s Web site http://www.hrsa.gov/ Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases; invasion of personal privacy. Notice of Closed Meeting advisorycommittees/rural/. Name of Committee: Healthcare Delivery Dated: August 16, 2012. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the and Methodologies Integrated Review Group Bahar Niakan, Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Community Influences on Health Behavior. Date: September 20–21, 2012. Director, Division of Policy and Information amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting. Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Coordination. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant [FR Doc. 2012–20932 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] The meeting will be closed to the applications. BILLING CODE 4165–15–P public in accordance with the Place: Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase provisions set forth in sections Pavilion, 4300 Military Road NW., 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., Washington, DC 20015. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND as amended. The grant applications and Contact Person: Wenchi Liang, Ph.D., HUMAN SERVICES the discussions could disclose Scientific Review Officer, Center for confidential trade secrets or commercial Scientific Review, National Institutes of National Institutes of Health property such as patentable material, Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3150, and personal information concerning MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– 0681, [email protected]. National Institute of Biomedical individuals associated with the grant Imaging and Bioengineering; Notice of applications, the disclosure of which Name of Committee: Oncology 2— Closed Meeting Translational Clinical Integrated Review would constitute a clearly unwarranted Group Drug Discovery and Molecular invasion of personal privacy. Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Pharmacology Study Section. Date: September 24–25, 2012. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Name of Committee: National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Time: 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is Diseases Special Emphasis Panel: Tissue Agenda: To review and evaluate grant hereby given of the following meeting. Engineering and Regenerative Medicine. applications. The meeting will be closed to the Date: September 21, 2012. Place: Hotel Nikko San Francisco, 222 public in accordance with the Time: 1:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. Mason Street, San Francisco, CA 94102. provisions set forth in sections Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Contact Person: Jeffrey Smiley, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., applications. Place: National Institutes of Health, One Scientific Review, National Institutes of as amended. The grant applications and Democracy Plaza, 6701 Democracy Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6194, the discussions could disclose Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone MSC 7804, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–594– confidential trade secrets or commercial Conference Call). 7945, [email protected]. property such as patentable material, Contact Person: Xincheng Zheng, Ph.D., Name of Committee: Center for Scientific and personal information concerning MD, Scientific Review Officer. Review Special Emphasis Panel Member individuals associated with the grant (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Conflict: Adult and Child Psychopathology applications, the disclosure of which Program Nos. 93.846, Arthritis, and Disorders of Development and Aging. would constitute a clearly unwarranted Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Research, Date: September 24, 2012. invasion of personal privacy. National Institutes of Health, HHS) Time: 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. Dated: August 20, 2012. Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Name of Committee: National Institute of Carolyn A. Baum, applications. Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Special Emphasis Panel NIBIB P41 Review Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, Committee Policy. (2013/01). (Telephone Conference Call). Date: October 7–9, 2012. [FR Doc. 2012–20816 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Contact Person: Mark Lindner, Ph.D., Time: 6 p.m. to 1 p.m. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P Scientific Review Officer, Center for Agenda: To review and evaluate grant Scientific Review, National Institutes of applications. Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3182, Place: Holiday Inn Pittsburgh University DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND MSC 7770, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–435– Center, 100 Lytton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA HUMAN SERVICES 0913, [email protected]. 15213. Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Contact Person: Ruth Grossman, DDS, National Institutes of Health Review Special Emphasis Panel RFA Panel: Scientific Review Officer, National Institute Investigations on Primary Immunodeficiency of Biomedical Imaging, and Bioengineering, Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Diseases. National Institutes of Health, 6707 Closed Meetings Date: September 24, 2012. Democracy Boulevard, Suite 960, Bethesda, Time: 12 p.m. to 3 p.m. MD 20892, 301–496–8775, Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Agenda: To review and evaluate grant [email protected]. Federal Advisory Committee Act, as applications.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51545
Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 This notice is being published less Hussein’s regime from March 1 through Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, than 15 days prior to the meeting due April 5 of 1991; (Virtual Meeting). to the timing limitations imposed by the Contact Person: Scott Jakes, Ph.D., (f) Poses no danger to the safety and Scientific Review Officer, Center for review and funding cycle. security of the United States; and Scientific Review, National Institutes of Summer King, (g) Warrants an exemption from the Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 4198, Statistician. MSC 7812, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301–495– relevant inadmissibility provision(s) in 1506, [email protected]. [FR Doc. 2012–20851 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] the totality of the circumstances. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance BILLING CODE 4162–20–P Implementation of this determination Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; will be made by U.S. Citizenship and 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, Immigration Services (USCIS), in 93.337, 93.393–93.396, 93.837–93.844, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND consultation with U.S. Immigration and 93.846–93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National SECURITY Institutes of Health, HHS) Customs Enforcement (ICE), or by U.S. consular officers, as applicable, who Office of the Secretary Dated: August 20, 2012. shall ascertain, to their satisfaction, and Melanie J. Gray, Exercise of Authority Under the in their discretion, that the particular Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Immigration and Nationality Act applicant meets each of the criteria set Committee Policy. forth above. AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DHS. [FR Doc. 2012–20805 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] This exercise of authority may be ACTION: Notice of determination. BILLING CODE 4140–01–P revoked as a matter of discretion and without notice at any time, with respect Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(3)(B)(i). to any and all persons subject to it. Any DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Following consultations with the determination made under this exercise HUMAN SERVICES Secretary of State and the Attorney of authority as set out above can inform Substance Abuse and Mental Health General, I hereby conclude, as a matter but shall not control a decision Services Administration of discretion in accordance with the regarding any subsequent benefit or authority granted to me by section protection application, unless such Center for Mental Health Services 212(d)(3)(B)(i) of the Immigration and exercise of authority has been revoked. (CMHS); Revised as of August 21, Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. This exercise of authority shall not be 1182(d)(3)(B)(i), as amended, as well as 2012; Amendment of Meeting Notice construed to prejudice, in any way, the the foreign policy and national security ability of the U.S. government to Pursuant to Public Law 92–463, interests deemed relevant in these commence subsequent criminal or civil notice is hereby given of an amendment consultations, that section 212(a)(3)(B) proceedings in accordance with U.S. of meeting agenda, date change, and of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)(B), law involving any beneficiary of this participant link change for the excluding subclause (i)(II), shall not Substance Abuse and Mental Health apply, with respect to an alien, for any exercise of authority (or any other Services Administration’s (SAMHSA), activity or association relating to the person). This exercise of authority Center for Mental Health Services uprisings against the government of creates no substantive or procedural National Advisory Council (CMHS Saddam Hussein in Iraq between March right or benefit that is legally NAC). 1 and April 5, 1991, provided that the enforceable by any party against the Public notice was published in the alien satisfies the relevant agency United States or its agencies or officers Federal Register on August 3, 2012, authority that the alien: or any other person. Volume 77, Number 150, page 46444 (a) Is seeking a benefit or protection In accordance with section announcing that the CMHS National under the INA and has been determined 212(d)(3)(B)(ii) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. Advisory Council would be convening to be otherwise eligible for the benefit 1182(d)(3)(B)(ii), a report on the aliens on August 24, 2012 at 1 Choke Cherry or protection; to whom this exercise of authority is Road, Rockville, MD. The discussion (b) Has undergone and passed all applied, on the basis of case-by-case and evaluation of grant applications will relevant background and security decisions by the U.S. Department of be added to the agenda. Therefore, a checks; Homeland Security or by the U.S. portion of the meeting will be closed to (c) Has fully disclosed, to the best of Department of State, shall be provided the public as determined by the his or her knowledge, in all relevant to the specified congressional SAMHSA Administrator, in accordance applications and interviews with U.S. committees not later than 90 days after with Title 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6) and 5 government representatives and agents, the end of the fiscal year. U.S.C. App. 2, § 10(d). Participants can the nature and circumstances of all join the event directly at https:// activities or associations falling within This determination is based on an www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php? the scope of section 212(a)(3)(B) of the assessment related to the national i=PW9819021&p=CSAUNDERS&t=c. INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)(B); security and foreign policy interests of The Conference number is (d) Has not participated in, or the United States as they apply to the PW9819021 and Passcode is knowingly provided material support to, particular persons described herein and CSAUNDERS. For additional terrorist activities that targeted shall not have any application with information, contact the CMHS National noncombatant persons not affiliated respect to other persons or to other Advisory Council, Acting Designated with Saddam Hussein’s regime from provisions of U.S. law. Federal Official, Crystal C. Saunders, 1 March 1 through April 5 of 1991, or U.S. Dated: August 17, 2012. Choke Cherry Road, Room 6–1063, interests; Rockville, MD 20857, telephone number (e) Has not engaged in terrorist Janet Napolitano, 240–276–1117, fax number 240–276– activity, not otherwise exempted, Secretary of Homeland Security. 1395 and email outside the context of resistance [FR Doc. 2012–20789 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] [email protected]. activities directed against Saddam BILLING CODE 9110–9M–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51546 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND property is described as for ‘‘off-site use SECURITY URBAN DEVELOPMENT only’’ recipients of the property will be required to relocate the building to their [Docket No. FR–5601–N–33] Federal Emergency Management own site at their own expense. Agency Federal Property Suitable as Facilities Homeless assistance providers To Assist the Homeless interested in any such property should [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA–4067– send a written expression of interest to DR; Docket ID FEMA–2012–0002] AGENCY: Office of the Assistant HHS, addressed to Theresa Ritta, Secretary for Community Planning and Division of PropertyManagement, Colorado; Amendment No. 4 to Notice Development, HUD. Program Support Center, HHS, room of a Major Disaster Declaration ACTION: Notice. 5B–17, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857; (301) 443–2265. (This is not AGENCY: Federal Emergency SUMMARY: This Notice identifies a toll-free number.) HHS will mail to the Management Agency, DHS. unutilized, underutilized, excess, and interested provider an application surplus Federal property reviewed by packet, which will include instructions ACTION: Notice. HUD for suitability for use to assist the for completing the application. In order homeless. to maximize the opportunity to utilize a SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: suitable property, providers should of a major disaster declaration for the Juanita Perry, Department of Housing submit their written expressions of State of Colorado (FEMA–4067–DR), and Urban Development, 451 Seventh interest as soon as possible. For dated June 28, 2012, and related Street SW., Room 7266, Washington, DC complete details concerning the determinations. 20410; telephone (202) 402–3970; TTY processing of applications, the reader is number for the hearing- and speech- encouraged to refer to the interim rule DATES: Effective Date: August 17, 2012. impaired (202) 708–2565 (these governing this program, 24 CFR part 581. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: telephone numbers are not toll-free), or For properties listed as suitable/to be Peggy Miller, Office of Response and call the toll-free Title V information line at 800–927–7588. excess, that property may, if Recovery, Federal Emergency subsequently accepted as excess by SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., In GSA, be made available for use by the Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–3886. accordance with 24 CFR part 581 and homeless in accordance with applicable section 501 of the Stewart B. McKinney law, subject to screening for other SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. of a major disaster declaration for the Federal use. At the appropriate time, 11411), as amended, HUD is publishing HUD will publish the property in a State of Colorado is hereby amended to this Notice to identify Federal buildings include the following area among those Notice showing it as either suitable/ and other real property that HUD has available or suitable/unavailable. areas determined to have been adversely reviewed for suitability for use to assist For properties listed as suitable/ affected by the event declared a major the homeless. The properties were unavailable, the landholding agency has disaster by the President in his reviewed using information provided to decided that the property cannot be declaration of June 28, 2012. HUD by Federal landholding agencies declared excess or made available for Teller County for emergency protective regarding unutilized and underutilized use to assist the homeless, and the measures (Category B) under the Public buildings and real property controlled property will not be available. Assistance program. by such agencies or by GSA regarding Properties listed as unsuitable will its inventory of excess or surplus The following Catalog of Federal Domestic not be made available for any other Federal property. This Notice is also Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used purpose for 20 days from the date of this published in order to comply with the for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Notice. Homeless assistance providers Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora December 12, 1988 Court Order in interested in a review by HUD of the Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; National Coalition for the Homeless v. determination of unsuitability should 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Veterans Administration, No. 88–2503– call the toll free information line at 1– Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); OG (D.D.C.). 800–927–7588 for detailed instructions 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; Properties reviewed are listed in this or write a letter to Ann Marie Oliva at 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Notice according to the following the address listed at the beginning of Individuals and Households in Presidentially categories: Suitable/available, suitable/ this Notice. Included in the request for Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, unavailable, suitable/to be excess, and review should be the property address Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance— unsuitable. The properties listed in the (including zip code), the date of Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals three suitable categories have been publication in the Federal Register, the and Households; 97.050, Presidentially reviewed by the landholding agencies, landholding agency, and the property Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and each agency has transmitted to number. and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, HUD: (1) Its intention to make the For more information regarding Disaster Grants—Public Assistance property available for use to assist the particular properties identified in this (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, homeless, (2) its intention to declare the Notice (i.e., acreage, floor plan, existing Hazard Mitigation Grant.) property excess to the agency’s needs, or sanitary facilities, exact street address), (3) a statement of the reasons that the providers should contact the W. Craig Fugate, property cannot be declared excess or appropriate landholding agencies at the Administrator, Federal Emergency made available for use as facilities to following addresses AIR FORCE: Mr. Management Agency. assist the homeless. Robert Moore, Air Force Real Property [FR Doc. 2012–20869 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Properties listed as suitable/available Agency, 143 Billy Mitchell Blvd., San BILLING CODE 9111–23–P will be available exclusively for Antonio, TX 78226, (210) 925–3047; homeless use for a period of 60 days ENERGY: Mr. Mark Price, Department of from the date of this Notice. Where Energy, Office of Engineering &
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51547
Construction Management, MA–50, Bldg. 6120 Guam 1000 Independence Ave. SW., Recreation Pavilion 3 Buildings Washington, DC 20585: (202) 586–5422; PITI GU 96540 Anthurium St. GSA: Mr. Flavio Peres, General Services Landholding Agency: Navy Santa Rita GU 96540 Administration, Office of Real Property Property Number: 77201230011 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Utilization and Disposal, 1800 F Street Property Number: 77201230018 Comments: Off-site removal only; 286 sf.; Status: Excess NW., Room 7040, Washington, DC deteriorating conditions; major renovations Directions: 703, 704, 705 20405, (202) 501–0084; INTERIOR: Mr. needed; restricted area; visitor’s pass Comments: Off-site removal only; 2,562 sf. Michael Wright, Acquisition & Property required & issued by Security Dept. per bldg; bachelor enlisted quarters; Management, Department of the Bldg. 793 deteriorating conditions; major renovations Interior, 1801 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Fern St. needed; restricted area; vistior’s pass 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20006: 202– Santa Rita GU 96540 required & issued by 254–5522; NAVY: Mr. Steve Matteo, Landholding Agency: Navy 9 Buildings Department of the Navy, Asset Property Number: 77201230012 Anthurium St. Management Division, Naval Facilities Status: Excess Santa Rita GU 96540 Engineering Command, Washington Comments: Off-site removal only; 2,411 sf.; Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77201230019 Navy Yard, 1330 Patterson Ave. SW., bachelor enlisted quarters; deteriorating conditions; major renovations needed; Status: Excess Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20374; restricted area; vistior’s pass required & Directions: 701, 706, 707, 708, 709, 710, 711, (202) 685–9426 (These are not toll-free issued by Sec. Dept. 712, 713 Comments: Off-site removal only; 2,038 sf. numbers). 16 Buildings per bldg.; bachelor enlisted quarters; Dated: August 16, 2012. S. Columbus Ave./Lotus Cir/Fern St. deteriorating conditions; major renovations Santa Rita GU 96540 Ann Marie Oliva, needed; restricted area; vistior’s pass Landholding Agency: Navy Deputy Assistant Secretary, for Special Needs required & issued by (Acting). Property Number: 77201230013 Status: Excess Bldg. 612 TITLE V, FEDERAL SURPLUS PROPERTY Directions: 766 thru 768, 770 thru 773, 775 Leary St., South Tipalao PROGRAM FEDERAL REGISTER REPORT thru 777, 794, 795, 797 thru 800 Santa Rita GU 96540 FOR 08/24/2012 Comments: Off-site removal only; 2,562 sf. Landholding Agency: Navy per bldg.; deteriorating conditions; Property Number: 77201230020 Suitable/Available Properties Status: Excess renovations needed; enlisted quarters; Comments: Off-site removal only; 6,280 sf.; Building restricted area; visitor’s pass required & bachelor enlisted quarters; deteriorating issued by Security Dept. Arkansas conditions; major renovations needed; Sulphur Rock Radio Station 13 Buildings restricted area; vistior’s pass required & N. Main Street Jasmin/South Columbus/Lotus Circle St. issued by Security Dept. Sulphur Rock AR 72579 Santa Rita GU 96540 Bldg. 605 Landholding Agency: GSA Landholding Agency: Navy U.S. Naval Base Property Number: 54201220008 Property Number: 77201230014 Santa Rita GU 96540 Status: Excess Status: Excess Landholding Agency: Navy GSA Number: 7–B–AR–576–AA Directions: 754 thru 761, 781, 782, 784 thru Property Number: 77201230021 Comments: Building #1: 152 sf.; building 786 Status: Excess #2:59 sf; radio tower Comments: Off-site removal only 2,038 sf. Directions: Leary Street, South Tipalao per bldg.; bachelor enlisted quarters; Florida Comments: Off-site removal only; 4,776 sf.; deteriorating conditions; major renovations bachelor enlisted quarters; deteriorating 4 Structures needed; restricted area; visitor’s pass conditions; major renovations needed; 142 Keeper’s Cottage Way required & issued restricted area; vistior’s pass required & Cape San Blas FL 32456 17 Buildings issued by Security Dept. Landholding Agency: GSA South Tipalao Bldg. 603 Property Number: 54201230008 Santa Rita GU 96540 U.S. Naval Base Status: Surplus Landholding Agency: Navy Santa Rita GU 96540 GSA Number: 4–D–FL–1265AA Property Number: 77201230015 Landholding Agency: Navy Directions: Cape San Blas Lighthouse, Status: Excess Property Number: 77201230022 Keeper’s Quarters A, Keeper’s Quarter B, & Directions: 733, 735, 736, 737, 738, 739, 740, Status: Excess an Oil/Storage 741, 742, 744, 746, 747, 748, 749, 750, 751, Directions: Leary Street, South Tipalao Comments: Off-site removal only, all 752 Comments: Off-site removal only; 3,672 sf.; structures must remain together; eligible as Comments: Off-site removal only; 2,038 sf. bachelor enlisted quarters; deteriorating Historic & will be conveyed w/a historic per bldg.; bachelor enlisted quarters; conditions; major renovations needed; covenant; transferee must maintain deteriorating conditions; major renovations restricted area; vistior’s pass required & structures in accordance with covenant; needed; restricted area; visitor’s pass issued by Security Dept. repairs needed; contact GSA 404–331–3625 required issued by 7 Buildings for further details 8 Buildings Leary Street, South Tipalao Guam Begonia St. Santa Rita GU 96540 Bldg. 6121 Santa Rita GU 96540 Landholding Agency: Navy U.S. Naval Base Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77201230023 PITI GU 96540 Property Number: 77201230016 Status: Excess Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Directions: 602, 604, 606, 607, 608, 609, 610 Property Number: 77201230010 Directions: 717, 718, 719, 720, 721, 725, 726, Comments: Off-site removal only; 3,164 sf. Status: Unutilized 727 per bldg.; bachelor enlisted quarters; Comments: Off-site removal only; 234 sf.; Comments: Off-site removal only; 2,038 sf. deteriorating conditions; major renovations bathroom; deteriorating conditions; major per bldg.; bachelor enlisted quarters; major needed; restricted area; vistior’s pass renovations needed; restricted area; renovations needed; restricted area; required & issued by visitor’s pass required & issued by Security visitor’s pass required & issued by Security Bldg. 601 Dept. Dept. U.S. Naval Base
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51548 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
Santa Rita GU 96540 Suitable/Available Properties Idaho Landholding Agency: Navy Land Moscow Federal Bldg. Property Number: 77201230024 220 East 5th Street Status: Excess California Moscow ID 83843 Directions: Leary Street, South Tipalao Drill Site #26 Landholding Agency: GSA Comments: Off-site removal only; 2,906 sf.; Ford City CA 93268 Property Number: 54201140003 bachelor enlisted quarters; deteriorating Landholding Agency: GSA Status: Surplus conditions; major renovations needed; Property Number: 54201040011 GSA Number: 9–G–ID–573 restricted area; vistior’s pass required & Status: Surplus Comments: 11,000 sq. ft.; current use: office issued by Security Dept. GSA Number: 9–B–CA–1673–AA Illinois Bldg. 27 Comments: 2.07 acres, mineral rights, utility 1LT A.J. Ellison U.S. Naval Base easements Santa Rita GU 96540 Army Reserve Kansas Landholding Agency: Navy Wood River IL 62095 Property Number: 77201230025 1.64 Acres Landholding Agency: GSA Status: Unutilized Wichita Automated Flight Service Property Number: 54201110012 Comments: Off-site removal only; 1,750 sf.; Anthony KS 67003 Status: Excess steam plant; deteriorating conditions; Landholding Agency: GSA GSA Number: 1–D–II–738 major renovations needed; restricted area; Property Number: 54201230002 Comments: 17,199 sq. ft. for the Admin. vistior’s pass required & issued by Security Status: Excess Bldg., 3,713 sq. ft. for the garage, public Dept. GSA Number: 7–U–KS–0526 space (roads and hwy) and utilities Comments: Agricultural surroundings; easements, asbestos and lead base paint Michigan remedial action has been taken for asbestos identified, most current Natl Weather Svc Ofc removal Iowa 214 West 14th Ave. Missouri Sault Ste. Marie Co: Chippewa MI U.S. Army Reserve Landholding Agency: GSA Long Branch Lake 620 West 5th St. Property Number: 54200120010 30174 Visitor Center Rd. Garner IA 50438 Status: Excess Macon MO 63552 Landholding Agency: GSA GSA Number: 1–C–MI–802 Landholding Agency: GSA Property Number: 54200920017 Comments: Previously unavailable; however, Property Number: 54201230006 Status: Excess the property is ‘available’ as a facility to Status: Surplus GSA Number: 7–D–IA–0510 assist the homess; 2230 sq. ft., presence of GSA Number: 7–D–MO–0579 Comments: 5743 sq. ft., presence of lead asbestos, most recent use—office Comments: 7.60 acres paint, most recent use—offices/classrooms/ storage, subject to existing easements Minnesota Suitable/Unavailable Properties Maine Noyes Land Port of Entry Building SW Side of US Rte. 75 Columbia falls Radar Site Noyes MN 56740 Alabama Tibbetstown Road Landholding Agency: GSA Federal Bldg. & Courthouse Columbia Falls ME 04623 Property Number: 54201230007 1118 Greensboro Ave. Landholding Agency: GSA Status: Excess Tuscaloosa AL 35401 Property Number: 54201140001 GSA Number: 1–G–MN–0593 Landholding Agency: GSA Status: Excess Directions: One main bldg.; one storage; Property Number: 54201220005 GSA Number: 1–D–ME–0687 approx. 16,000 and 900 sf. respectively Status: Surplus Directions: Buildings 1, 2, 3, and 4 Comments: Sits on 2.29 acres; approx. 17,000 GSA Number: AL–0074–ZZ Comments: Four bldgs. totaling 20,375 sq.ft. sf. total of bldg. space; office/governmental Comments: 10,494 sf.; federal offices/ each one-story; current use: varies among properties Pennsylvania courthouse; roof needs extensive repairs; severe leaks around drains, asbestos Maryland Old Marienville Compound identified 110 South Forest St. Appraisers Store Marienville PA 16239 District of Columbia Baltimore MD 21202 Landholding Agency: GSA West Heating Plant Landholding Agency: GSA Property Number: 54201230001 1051 29th St. NW Property Number: 54201030016 Status: Excess Washington DC 20007 Status: Excess GSA Number: 4–A–PA–808AD Landholding Agency: GSA GSA Number: 4–G–MD–0623 Directions: 10 bldgs.; wood farm duplex; Property Number: 54201140006 Comments: Redetermination: 169,801 sq. ft., office/garage; pole bard; shop; (2) wood Status: Surplus most recent use—federal offices, listed in sheds; block shed; trailer; carport; toilet GSA Number: DC–497–1 the Natl Register of Historic Places, use bldg. Comments: Redetermination: 1.97 acres; restrictions Comments: Sq. ft. for ea. bldg. on property current use: industry; transferee is required Consumer Products Safety Commission varies; contact GSA for specific sq. ft.; to remediate significant contaminants 10901 Darenestown Rd. Forest Service Admin. complex; mold and which includes arsenic, PCBs, and benzo Gaithersburg MD 20878 lead identified; historic property (a) pyrene Landholding Agency: GSA Utah Georgia Property Number: 54201220004 Status: Surplus 2 Buildings 5 Acres GSA Number: NCR–G–MR–1107–01 9160 N. Hwy 83 Former CB7 Radio Communication Directions: Property includes building and Corinne UT 84307 Townsend GA 31331 land Landholding Agency: GSA Landholding Agency: GSA Comments: 37,543 sf.; office/warehouse Property Number: 54201230003 Property Number: 54201210008 space; secured area; however, will not Status: Excess Status: Excess interfere w/conveyance; contact GSA for GSA Number: 7–Z–UT–0533 GSA Number: 4–U–GA–885AA further details Directions: T077 & T078; NASA Shuttle Comments: 5.0 acres; current use: unknown; Storage Warehouses property located in 100 yr. floodplain-not Michigan Comments: Off-site removal only; approx. in floodway and no impact in using CPT George S. Crabbe USARC 3,200 sf. each; storage property; contact GSA for more details 2901 Webber Street
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51549
Saginaw MI New Jersey Status: Excess Landholding Agency: GSA Camp Petricktown Sup. Facility GSA Number: 9–D–OR–0733 Property Number: 54201030018 US Route 130 Comments: 100,698 sq. ft., historical Status: Excess Pedricktown NJ 08067 property/National Register, most recent GSA Number: 1–D–MI–835 Landholding Agency: GSA use—office, needs to be brought up to meet Comments: 3891 sq. ft., 3-bay garage Property Number: 54200740005 earthquake code and local bldg codes, maintenance building Status: Excess presence of Beaver Island High Level Site GSA Number: 1–D–NJ–0662 Rager Ranger Station House South End Road Comments: 21 bldgs. need rehab, most recent 7615 Rager Rd. Beaver Island MI 49782 use—barracks/mess hall/garages/quarters/ Paulina Co: Crook OR 97751 Landholding Agency: GSA admin., may be issues w/right of entry, Landholding Agency: GSA Property Number: 54201140002 utilities privately controlled, contaminants Property Number: 54201220003 Status: Excess Status: Excess North Carolina GSA Number: 9–A–OR–0798 GSA Number: 1–X–MI–664B Greenville Site Comments: Off-site removal only; 1,560 sf.; Comments: 89 sq. ft; current use: storage; 10000 Cherry Run Rd. residential; extensive rehabilitation non-friable asbestos and lead base paint Greenville NC 27834 needed; contact GSA for further details present; currently under license to the CCE Landholding Agency: GSA Rhode Island Central Dispatch Authority Property Number: 54201210002 Missouri Status: Unutilized FDA Davisville Site GSA Number: 4–2–NC–0753 113 Bruce Boyer Street Whiteman-Annex No.3 North Kingstown RI 02852 312 Northern Hill Rd. Comments: 49,300 sq. ft.; current use: transmitter bldg.; possible PCB Landholding Agency: GSA Warrensburg MO 64093 Property Number: 54201130008 Landholding Agency: GSA contamination; not available-existing Federal need Status: Excess Property Number: 54201210003 GSA Number: 1–F–RI–0520 Status: Surplus Ohio Comments: 4,100 sq. ft.; recent use: storage; GSA Number: 7–D–MO–0694 Oxford USAR Facility property currently has no heating (all Comments: 120 sq. ft.; current use: support 6557 Todd Road repairs is the responsibility of owner) bldg. for radio tower; previously reported Oxford OH 45056 South Carolina by AF Landholding Agency: GSA Naval Health Clinic Property Number: 54201010007 Montana 3600 Rivers Ave. Status: Excess Boulder Admin. Site Charleston SC 29405 GSA Number: 1–D–OH–833 12 Depot Hill Rd. Landholding Agency: GSA Comments: Office bldg./mess hall/barracks/ Boulder MT 59632 Property Number: 54201040013 simulator bldg./small support bldgs., Landholding Agency: GSA Status: Excess structures range from good to needing Property Number: 54201130016 GSA Number: 4–N–SC–0606 major rehab Status: Excess Comments: Redetermination: 399,836 sq. ft., GSA Number: 7–A–MT–532–AA Army Reserve Center most recent use: office Comments: 4,799 sq. ft.; recent use: office, 5301 Hauserman Rd. South Dakota repairs are needed Parma Co: Cuyahoga OH 44130 Landholding Agency: GSA Main House James F. Battin & Courthouse Property Number: 54201020009 Lady C Ranch Rd. 316 North 26th Street Status: Excess Hot Springs SD 57747 Billings MT 59101 GSA Number: I–D–OH–842 Landholding Agency: GSA Landholding Agency: GSA Comments: 29, 212, and 6,097 sq. ft.; most Property Number: 54201130011 Property Number: 54201210005 recent use: office, storage, classroom, and Status: Surplus Status: Excess drill hall; water damage on 2nd floor; and GSA Number: 7–A–0523–3–AE Comments: Off-site removal only; The GSA Number: 7–G–MT–0621–AB wetland property Comments: 116,865 sf.; current use: office; property is a 2-story structure with 1,024 extensive asbestos contamination; needs LTC Dwite Schaffner sq. ft. per floor for a total of 2,048 sq. ft.; remediation U. S. Army Reserve Center structure type: Log Cabin; recent use: 1011 Gorge Blvd. residential Nebraska Akron Co: Summit OH 44310 Tennessee Decatur Microwave Repeater Landholding Agency: GSA Off County Rd. 31 Property Number: 54201120006 NOAA Admin. Bldg. Decatur NE 68020 Status: Excess 456 S. Illinois Ave. Landholding Agency: GSA GSA Number: 1–D–OH–836 Oak Ridge TN 38730 Property Number: 54201220001 Comments: 25,039 sq. ft., most recent use: Landholding Agency: GSA Status: Surplus Office; in good condition Property Number: 54200920015 Status: Excess GSA Number: 7–D–NE–0535 Oregon GSA Number: 4–B–TN–0664–AA Comments: 80 sf. for bldg.; current use (for 3 Bldgs/Land Comments: 15,955 sq. ft., most recent use— bldg.): support bldg; 2.41 acres of land; OTHR–B Radar office/storage/lab property is fenced w/gate Cty Rd 514 Virginia Nevada Christmas Valley OR 97641 Hampton Rds, Shore Patrol Bldg Alan Bible Federal Bldg. Landholding Agency: GSA Property Number: 54200840003 811 East City Hall Ave 600 S. Las Vegas Blvd. Norfolk VA 23510 Las Vegas NV 89101 Status: Excess GSA Number: 9–D–OR–0768 Landholding Agency: GSA Landholding Agency: GSA Property Number: 54201120009 Property Number: 54201210009 Comments: 14000 sq. ft. each/2626 acres, most recent use—radar site, right-of-way Status: Excess Status: Excess GSA Number: 4–N–VA–758 GSA Number: 9–G–NV–565 U.S. Customs House Comments: 9,623 sq. ft.; current use: storage, Comments: 81,247 sf.; current use: federal 220 NW 8th Ave. residential bldg.; extensive structural issues; needs Portland OR major repairs; contact GSA for further Landholding Agency: GSA Washington details Property Number: 54200840004 Log House
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51550 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
281 Fish Hatchery Rd. Comments: 2.21 acres, mineral rights, utility Status: Surplus Quilcene WA 98376 easements GSA Number: 9–N–CA–1508–AA Landholding Agency: GSA Drill Site #6 Comments: 10,493.60 sq. ft.; current use: Property Number: 54201220006 Ford City CA 93268 vacant lot Status: Excess Landholding Agency: GSA Seal Beach RR Right of Way GSA Number: 9–I–WA–1260 Property Number: 54201040006 Seal Beach Comments: Off-site removal only; 3,385 sf.; Status: Surplus Seal Beach CA 90740 residential/office former Seattle Branch GSA Number: 9–B–CA–1673–AC Landholding Agency: GSA Bldg. Comments: 2.13 acres, mineral rights, utility Property Number: 54201210006 1015 Second Ave. easements Status: Surplus Seattle WA 98104 Drill Site #9 GSA Number: 9–N–CA–1508–AH Landholding Agency: GSA Ford City CA 93268 Comments: 4,721.90 sf.; current use: vacant Property Number: 54201220007 Landholding Agency: GSA lot between residential bldg. Status: Excess Property Number: 54201040007 Seal Beach RR Right of Way GSA Number: 9–G–WA–1259 Status: Surplus Seal Beach Comments: 85,873 sf.; bank; several cracks GSA Number: 9–B–CA–1673–AH Seal Beach CA 90740 due to earthquake; possible lead & Comments: 2.07 acres, mineral rights, utility Landholding Agency: GSA asbestos; any renovations/new, easements Property Number: 54201210007 construction will need approval from State Drill Site #20 Status: Surplus Historic Preservation Off. Ford City CA 93268 GSA Number: 9–N–CA–1508–AJ Wisconsin Landholding Agency: GSA Comments: 6,028.70 sf.; current use: vacant lot between residential bldgs. Wausau Army Reserve Ctr. Property Number: 54201040008 1300 Sherman St. Status: Surplus Illinois GSA Number: 9–B–CA–1673–AD Wausau WI 54401 Former Outer Marker Compass Landholding Agency: GSA Comments: 2.07 acres, mineral rights, utility 2651 West 83rd Place Property Number: 54201210004 easements Chicago IL Status: Excess Drill Site #22 Landholding Agency: GSA GSA Number: 1–D–WI–610 Ford City CA 93268 Property Number: 54201220002 Comments: Bldg. 12,680 sq. ft.; garage 2,676 Landholding Agency: GSA Status: Excess sq. ft.; current use: vacant; possible Property Number: 54201040009 GSA Number: 1–U–I–797 asbestos; remediation may be required; Status: Surplus Comments: .22 acres; current use: airport subjected to existing easements; Contact GSA Number: 9–B–CA–1673–AF outermaker GSA for more Comments: 2.07 acres, mineral rights, utility Louisiana Land easements Drill Site #24 Almonaster Arizona Ford City CA 93268 4300 Almonaster Ave. Land Landholding Agency: GSA New Orleans LA 70126 95th Ave/Bethany Home Rd Property Number: 54201040010 Landholding Agency: GSA Glendale AZ 85306 Status: Surplus Property Number: 54201110014 Landholding Agency: GSA GSA Number: 9–B–CA–1673–AE Status: Surplus Property Number: 54201010014 Comments: 2.06 acres, mineral rights, utility GSA Number: 7–D–LA–0576 Status: Surplus easements Comments: 9.215 acres GSA Number: 9–AZ–852 Seal Beach RR Right of Way Massachusetts Comments: 0.29 acre, most recent use— West 19th Street irrigation canal 0.30 acre FAA Site Seal Beach CA 90740 Bethany Home Road Massasoit Bridge Rd. Landholding Agency: GSA Nantucket MA 02554 Glendale AZ 85306 Property Number: 54201140015 Landholding Agency: GSA Landholding Agency: GSA Status: Surplus Property Number: 54200830026 Property Number: 54201030010 GSA Number: 9–N–CA–1508–AF Status: Excess Status: Surplus Comments: 8,036.82 sq. ft.; current use: GSA Number: MA–0895 GSA Number: 9–I–AZ–0859 vacant lot Comments: 10 feet wide access road Comments: Approx 92 acres, entire parcel Seal Beach RR Right of Way within MA Division of Fisheries & Wildlife California East 17th Street Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Parcel F–2 Right of Way Seal Beach CA 90740 Program Seal Beach CA 90740 Landholding Agency: GSA Nevada Landholding Agency: GSA Property Number: 54201140016 Property Number: 54201030012 Status: Surplus RBG Water Project Site Status: Surplus GSA Number: 9–N–CA–1508–AB Bureau of Reclamation GSA Number: 9–N–CA–1508–AI Comments: 9,713.88 sq. ft.; current use: Henderson NV 89011 Comments: 6331.62 sq. ft., encroachment private home Landholding Agency: GSA Property Number: 54201140004 Drill Site #3A Seal Beach RR Right of Way Status: Surplus Ford City CA 93268 East of 16th Street GSA Number: 9–I–AZ–0562 Landholding Agency: GSA Seal Beach CA 90740 Comments: Water easement (will not affect Property Number: 54201040004 Landholding Agency: GSA conveyance); 22+/¥ acres; current use: Status: Surplus Property Number: 54201140017 water sludge disposal site; lead from GSA Number: 9–B–CA–1673–AG Status: Surplus shotgun shells on <1 acre. Comments: 2.07 acres, mineral rights, utility GSA Number: 9–N–CA–1508–AG easements Comments: 6,834.56 sq. ft.; current use: North Dakota Drill Site #4 vacant Vacant Land of MSR Site Ford City CA 93268 Seal Beach RR Right of Way Stanley Mickelsen Landholding Agency: GSA West of Seal Beach Blvd. Nekoma ND Property Number: 54201040005 Seal Beach CA 90740 Landholding Agency: GSA Status: Surplus Landholding Agency: GSA Property Number: 54201130009 GSA Number: 9–B–CA–1673–AB Property Number: 54201140018 Status: Surplus
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51551
GSA Number: 7–D–ND–0499 Ohio Licensing. This collection request has Comments: 20.2 acres; recent use: unknown Washington County Memorial been forwarded to the Office of Pennsylvania U.S. Army Reserve Center Management and Budget (OMB) for Approx. 16.88 Marietta OH 45750 review and approval. The information 271 Sterrettania Rd. Landholding Agency: GSA collection request describes the nature Erie PA 16506 Property Number: 54201230005 of the information collection and the Landholding Agency: GSA Status: Excess expected burden and cost. Property Number: 54200820011 GSA Number: 1–D–OH–846 Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or DATES: OMB has up to 60 days to Status: Surplus approve or disapprove the information GSA Number: 4–D–PA–0810 explosive material Comments: Triad Hunter Co. located within collection request, but may respond Comments: Vacant land 2,000 ft. of property; company is in the oil after 30 days; therefore, public Marienville Lot and gas exploration business; 300–500 gal comments should be submitted to OMB USDA Forest Service above ground tanks on co. grounds contain by September 24, 2012, in order to be Marienville PA diesel fuel for their off road vehicles Landholding Agency: GSA assured of consideration. Property Number: 54201140005 Tennessee ADDRESSES: Submit comments to the Status: Excess 9 Buildings Office of Information and Regulatory GSA Number: 4–A–PA–807AD Y–12 Nat’l Security Complex Affairs, Office of Management and Comments: 2.42 acres; current use: unknown Oak Ridge TN 37831 Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the South Carolina Landholding Agency: Energy Department of Interior (1094–0001), by Property Number: 41201230002 Marine Corps Air Station telefax at (202) 395–5806 or via email to Status: Unutilized _ 3481 TRASK Parkway Directions: 9416–24, 9949–04, 9949–29, OIRA [email protected]. Also, Beaufort SC 29904 9949–35, 9949–49, 9949–89, 9720–12, please send a copy of your comments to Landholding Agency: GSA 9720–18, 9949–47 Shawn Alam, Office of Environmental Property Number: 54201140009 Reasons: Secured Area Policy and Compliance, U.S. Status: Excess Comments: Public access denied; no Department of the Interior, MS 2462– GSA Number: 4–N–SC–0608AA alternative method to gain access to allow MIB, 1849 C Street NW., Washington, Comments: 18,987.60 sq. ft. (.44 acres); public access w/out comprising nat’l DC 20240, or send an email to physical features: swamp, periodic security [email protected]. Additionally, flooding, 5 ft. off Land you may telefax them to him at (202) Unsuitable Properties Indiana 208–6970. Individuals providing comments should reference Alternatives Building Vacant Land Process in Hydropower Licensing. California Naval Support Activity Crane IN 47522 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 2 Buildings receive a copy of the information 401 & 405 14th St. Landholding Agency: Navy Edwards AFB CA 93524 Property Number: 77201230009 collection request, contact Dr. Shawn Landholding Agency: Air Force Status: Underutilized Alam at (202) 208–5465. You may also Property Number: 18201230002 Reasons: Secured Area contact Dr. Shawn Alam electronically Status: Unutilized Comments: Located on restricted military at [email protected]. To see a Directions: 7177, 7179 explosive handling & classified electronic copy of the entire ICR submitted to development installation; only authorized Reasons: Secured Area OMB, go to: http://www.reginfo.gov and Comments: Public access not allowed; no personnel; no alternative method for public access w/out comprising nat’l security select Information Collection Review, alternative method to allow public access Currently Under Review. w/out comprising nat’l security [FR Doc. 2012–20585 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 4259 BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 741 Circle I. Abstract Edwards AFB CA 93524 The OMB regulations at 5 CFR part Landholding Agency: Air Force DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Property Number: 18201230003 1320, which implement the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 Status: Unutilized Office of the Secretary Reasons: Secured Area et seq., require that interested members Comments: Public access not allowed; no Proposed Renewal of Information of the public and affected agencies have alternative method to allow public access Collection: Alternatives Process in an opportunity to comment on w/out comprising nat’l security Hydropower Licensing information collection and Maryland recordkeeping activities (see 5 CFR AGENCY: North Beach Ranger Station Office of the Secretary, Office 1320.8(d)). 6610 Bayberry Dr. of Environmental Policy and On November 14, 2005, the Berlin MD 21811 Compliance, Interior. Departments of Agriculture, the Interior, Landholding Agency: Interior ACTION: Notice and request for and Commerce published regulations at Property Number: 61201230002 comments. 7 CFR part 1, 43 CFR part 45, and 50 Status: Excess CFR part 221, to implement section 241 Reasons: Floodway SUMMARY: In compliance with section of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 Extensive deterioration 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork (EPAct), Public Law 109–58, which the Comments: Documented deficiencies; Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of President signed into law on August 8, extensive water damage; orginal structure Environmental Policy and Compliance, 2005. Section 241 of the EPAct added wash into sea; located in 100 yr. floodplain; massive roof damage due to Office of the Secretary, Department of section 33 to the Federal Power Act flooding; unstable foundation; unsound the Interior is announcing its intention (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 823d, that allowed the floors; relocation improbable; movement of to request renewal approval for the license applicant or any other party to bldg. will likely result in complete of collection of information for the license proceeding to propose an property Alternatives Process in Hydropower alternative to a condition or prescription
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51552 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
that one or more of the Departments OMB Control Number: 1094–0001. personnel and to be able to respond to develop for inclusion in a hydropower Current Expiration Date: September a collection of information, to search license issued by the Federal Energy 30, 2012. data sources, to complete and review Regulatory Commission (FERC) under Type of Review: Information the collection of information; and to the FPA. This provision required that Collection Renewal. transmit or otherwise disclose the the Departments of Agriculture, the Affected Entities: Business or for- information. Interior, and Commerce to collect the profit entities. All written comments, with names information covered by 1094–0001. Estimated annual number of and addresses, will be available for Under FPA section 33, the Secretary respondents: 5. public inspection. If you wish us to of the Department involved must accept Frequency of responses: Once per withhold your personal information, the proposed alternative if the Secretary alternative proposed. you must prominently state at the determines, based on substantial (2) Annual reporting and beginning of your comment what evidence provided by a party to the recordkeeping burden: personal information you want us to license proceeding or otherwise Total annual reporting per response: withhold. We will honor your request to available to the Secretary, (a) that the 500 hours. the extent allowable by law. If you wish alternative condition provides for the Total number of estimated responses: to view any comments received, you adequate protection and utilization of 5. may do so by scheduling an the reservation, or that the alternative Total annual reporting: 2,500 hours. appointment with the Office of prescription will be no less protective (3) Description of the need and use of Environmental Policy and Compliance than the fishway initially proposed by the information: The purpose of this by calling (202) 208–3891. A valid the Secretary, and (b) that the information collection is to provide an picture identification is required for alternative will either cost significantly opportunity for license parties to entry into the Department of the less to implement or result in improved propose an alternative condition or Interior. operation of the project works for prescription to that imposed by the An agency may not conduct or electricity production. Federal Government in the hydropower sponsor, and a person is not required to In order to make this determination, licensing process. respond to, a collection of information the regulations require that all of the As required under 5 CFR 1320.8(d), a unless it displays a currently valid following information be collected: (1) Federal Register notice soliciting Office of Management and Budget A description of the alternative, in an comments on the collection of control number. equivalent level of detail to the information was published on May 22, Dated: August 16, 2012. Department’s preliminary condition or 2012 (77 FR 30308). No comments were prescription; (2) an explanation of how received. This notice provides the Willie R. Taylor, the alternative: (i) If a condition, will public with an additional 30 days in Director, Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance. provide for the adequate protection and which to comment on the proposed utilization of the reservation; or (ii) if a information collection activity. [FR Doc. 2012–20925 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] prescription, will be no less protective BILLING CODE 4310–79–P III. Request for Comments than the fishway prescribed by the bureau; (3) an explanation of how the The Departments invite comments on: DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR alternative, as compared to the (a) Whether the collection of preliminary condition or prescription, information is necessary for the proper Fish and Wildlife Service will: (i) Cost significantly less to performance of the functions of the implement; or (ii) result in improved agencies, including whether the [FWS–R3–R–2012–N122; operation of the project works for information will have practical utility; FXRS1265030000S3–123–FF03R06000] (b) The accuracy of the agencies’ electricity production; (4) an The Great Lakes Islands National explanation of how the alternative or estimate of the burden of the collection and the validity of the methodology and Wildlife Refuges in Michigan and revised alternative will affect: (i) Energy Wisconsin supply, distribution, cost, and use; (ii) assumptions used; flood control; (iii) navigation; (iv) water (c) Ways to enhance the quality, AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, supply; (v) air quality; and (vi) other utility, and clarity of the information to Interior. aspects of environmental quality; and be collected; and ACTION: Notice of availability; request (5) specific citations to any scientific (d) Ways to minimize the burden of for comments. studies, literature, and other the collection of information on those documented information relied on to who are to respond, including through SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and support the proposal. the use of appropriate automated, Wildlife Service (Service), announce the This notice of proposed renewal of an electronic, mechanical, or other availability of a draft comprehensive existing information collection is being collection techniques or other forms of conservation plan (CCP) and published by the Office of information techniques. environmental assessment (EA) for the Environmental Policy and Compliance, ‘‘Burden’’ means the total time, effort, Great Lakes Islands National Wildlife Department of the Interior, on behalf of and financial resources expended by Refuges (NWR) for public review and all three Departments, and the data persons to generate, maintain, retain, comment. The group of five national provided below covers anticipated disclose, or provide information to or wildlife refuges includes Gravel Island responses (alternative conditions/ for a Federal agency. This includes the and Green Bay National Wildlife prescriptions and associated time needed to review instructions; to Refuges, Door County, Wisconsin; information) for all three Departments. develop, acquire, install, and utilize Harbor Island National Wildlife Refuge, technology and systems for the purpose Chippewa County, Michigan; Huron II. Data of collecting, validating, and verifying National Wildlife Refuge, Marquette (1) Title: 7 CFR Part 1; 43 CFR Part 45; information, processing and County, Michigan; and Michigan Islands 50 CFR Part 221; the Alternatives maintaining information, and disclosing National Wildlife Refuge, Charlevoix, Process in Hydropower Licensing. and providing information; to train Arenac, and Alpena Counties, Michigan.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51553
In this draft CCP/EA we describe how SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: planning process, refuge, issues, and we propose to manage these refuges for Introduction management alternatives considered the next 15 years. and proposed. The EA includes DATES: To ensure consideration, we With this notice, we continue the discussions of three alternative refuge must receive your written comments by process for developing a comprehensive management options. The Service’s September 24, 2012. We will hold open conservation plan (CCP) for the Great preferred alternative is reflected in the Lakes Islands National Wildlife Refuges. house-style meetings during the draft CCP. We began this process by publishing a comment period to receive comments The alternatives analyzed in detail and provide information on the draft notice of intent in the Federal Register include: plan. In addition, we will use special (73 FR 76677) on December 17, 2008. mailings, newspaper articles, internet For more about the initial process and • Alternative A: Current Direction To postings, and other media the history of this refuge, see that notice. Maintain Natural Integrity—The current announcements to inform people of Background management direction of the Great Lakes Islands NWRs would be opportunities for input. The National Wildlife Refuge System ADDRESSES: Send your comments or Administration Act of 1966, as amended maintained under this alternative. For requests for more information by any by the National Wildlife Refuge System NEPA purposes, this is referred to as the one of the following methods: Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. ‘‘No Action’’ alternative. • Email: [email protected]. Include 668dd–668ee) (Administration Act), • Alternative B: Minimal ‘‘Great Lakes Islands Draft CCP/EA’’ requires us to develop a CCP for each Management To Preserve Wilderness in the subject line of the message. national wildlife refuge. The purpose in Qualities—Management actions would • Fax: developing a CCP is to provide refuge be focused to retain the wilderness Æ Attention: Refuge Manager, Gravel/ managers with a 15-year strategy for character of each island to the extent Green Bay NWRs, 920–387–2973. achieving refuge purposes and practical. Public access and visitor Æ Attention: Refuge Manager, Huron/ contributing toward the mission of the services would be kept to a minimal Harbor Island/MI Islands (N) NWRs, National Wildlife Refuge System level in order to reduce visual and 906–586–3800. (NWRS), consistent with sound Æ Attention: Refuge Manager, habitat impacts. principles of fish and wildlife • Michigan Islands (S) NWR, 989– management, conservation, legal Alternative C (Preferred 777–9200. mandates, and Service policies. In Alternative): Enhanced Management To • U.S. Mail: Promote Natural Integrity and Public Æ addition to outlining broad management Attention: Steve Lenz, Refuge direction on conserving wildlife and Stewardship—This option would Manager, Gravel Island/Green Bay their habitats, CCPs identify wildlife- provide for the growth of the island National Wildlife Refuges (managed dependent recreational opportunities refuges and more opportunities for by Horicon NWR), W4279 available to the public, including compatible recreational use. Headquarters Road, Mayville, WI opportunities for hunting, fishing, Public Involvement 53050; 920–387–2658. wildlife observation and photography, Æ Attention: Mark Vaniman, Refuge and environmental education and Manager, Harbor Island/Huron/ We will give the public an interpretation. We will review and Michigan Islands National Wildlife opportunity to provide input at a public update the CCP at least every 15 years Refuges (northern section managed meeting. You can obtain the schedule in accordance with the Administration by Seney NWR), 1674 Refuge from the address or web site listed in Act. this notice (see ADDRESSES). You may Entrance Rd., Seney, MI 49883; Each unit of the NWRS was also submit comments anytime during 906–586–9851. established for specific purposes. We Æ Attention: Steve Kahl, Refuge the comment period. use these purposes as the foundation for Manager, Michigan Islands National developing and prioritizing the Public Availability of Comments Wildlife Refuge (southern section management goals and objectives for managed by Shiawassee NWR), each refuge within the NWRS mission, Before including your address, phone 6975 Mower Road, Saginaw, MI and to determine how the public can number, email address, or other 48601; 989–777–5930. use each refuge. The planning process is personal identifying information in your • In-Person Drop Off: You may drop off a way for us and the public to evaluate comment, you should be aware that comments during regular business management goals and objectives that your entire comment—including your hours at the above addresses. will ensure the best possible approach personal identifying information—may You will find the draft CCP/EA, as to wildlife, plant, and habitat be made publicly available at any time. well as information about the planning conservation, while providing for While you can ask us in your comment process and a summary of the CCP, on wildlife-dependent recreation to withhold your personal identifying the planning Web site: http:// opportunities that are compatible with information from public review, we www.fws.gov/midwest/planning/ each refuge’s establishing purposes and GreatLakesIslands/index.html. cannot guarantee that we will be able to the mission of the NWRS. do so. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Lenz, Gravel Island or Green Bay Additional Information Richard D. Schultz, National Wildlife Refuges, 920–387– The draft CCP/EA may be found at Acting Regional Director, Midwest Region, 2658; Mark Vaniman, Harbor Island, http://www.fws.gov/midwest/planning/ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Huron, or the northern section of GreatLakesIslands/index.html. That [FR Doc. 2012–20847 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Michigan Islands National Wildlife document incorporates an EA, prepared BILLING CODE 4310–55–P Refuges, 906–586–9851; Steve Kahl, in accordance with the National southern section of Michigan Islands Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (43 National Wildlife Refuge, 989–777– U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The draft CCP/EA 5930. includes detailed information about the
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51554 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Processing, Attn: FWS–R5–ES–2012– Kanawha County Public Library, 123 0059; Division of Policy and Directives Capitol Street, Charleston, WV; and (3) Fish and Wildlife Service Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Rupert Public Library, 602 Nicholas [FWS–R5–ES–2012–0059; 50120–1112– Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS Street, Rupert, WV. Those who do not 0000–F2] 2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. have access to the Internet or cannot We request that you send comments visit our office or local libraries can Draft Environmental Impact Statement by only the methods described above. request CD–ROM copies of the and Habitat Conservation Plan; We will post all information received on documents by telephone at 304–636– Receipt of Application for Incidental http://www.regulations.gov. This 6586 or by letter to the West Virginia Take Permit; Beech Ridge Energy generally means that we will post any Field Office (see the address under FOR personal information you provide us FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, (see the Public Comments section below Interior. Background for more information). ACTION: Notice of availability, receipt of Section 9 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. application. et seq.) and its implementing Laura Hill, Assistant Field Supervisor, regulations prohibit the ‘‘take’’ of SUMMARY: West Virginia Field Office, 694 Beverly Pursuant to the Endangered animal species listed as endangered or Pike, Elkins, WV 26241; telephone 304– Species Act (ESA) and the National threatened. Take is defined under the 636–6586, ext. 18. Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), we, ESA as to ‘‘harass, harm, pursue, hunt, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or (Service), announce the availability of received an application from Beech collect listed animal species, or to an application for an Incidental Take Ridge Energy for an ITP for the attempt to engage in such conduct’’ (16 Permit (ITP) and the associated Habitat operation, and maintenance of 67 U.S.C. 1538). However, under section Conservation Plan (HCP) from Beech existing turbines in the project area; the 10(a) of the ESA, we may issue permits Ridge Energy, LLC, as well as the construction, operation and to authorize incidental take of listed Service’s draft Environmental Impact maintenance of up to 33 additional species. ‘‘Incidental take’’ is defined by Statement (EIS), for public review and turbines and associated infrastructure in the ESA as take that is incidental to, and comment. the project area; the implementation of not the purpose of, carrying out an We provide this notice to (1) seek the HCP during the life of the permit; otherwise lawful activity. Regulations public comments on the proposed HCP; and the decomissioning of the entire governing incidental take permits for (2) seek public comments on the draft 100-turbine project and associated threatened and endangered species, EIS; and (3) advise other Federal and infrastructure at the end of its respectively, are found in the Code of State agencies, affected Tribes, and the operational life. If approved, the permit Federal Regulations (50 CFR 17.22; 50 public of our intent to prepare a final would be for a 25-year period and CFR 17.32). EIS. would authorize incidental take of the Beech Ridge Energy has been working DATES: We will accept comments endangered Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) with staff from the West Virginia Field received or postmarked on or before and Virginia big-eared bat Office since a January 2010 consent October 23, 2012. Comments submitted (Corynorhinus townsendii virginianus) decree was signed, following a court electronically using the Federal (covered species). A conservation order ruling that construction and eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES) program to minimize and mitigate for operation of the project would violate must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern the impacts of the incidental take would section 9 of the ESA ‘‘unless and until Time on the closing date. be implemented by Beech Ridge Energy [Beech Ridge Energy] obtains an ITP’’ We will consider all requests for as described in the proposed Beech for the Indiana bat. Beech Ridge Energy public meetings. To accommodate Ridge Wind Energy Project HCP. To is now seeking a permit for the scheduling of meetings and allow comply with the NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 incidental take of the Covered Species sufficient time to publicize them, you et seq.), we prepared a draft EIS that for a term of 25 years. Incidental take of must contact Laura Hill no later than describes the proposed action and these bat species may occur due to September 14, 2012 (see FOR FURTHER possible alternatives and analyzes the injury and mortality from collision with INFORMATION CONTACT). effects of alternatives on the human turbine blades and towers and from ADDRESSES: environment. barotrauma (sudden changes in air pressure near the tips of spinning blades Document availability: You may Availability of Documents obtain copies of the documents on the that cause decompression of the bats’ Internet at http://www.regulations.gov at The proposed HCP and draft EIS are lungs). Adverse effects to suitable Docket Number FWS–R5–ES–2012– available on the West Virginia Field Indiana bat habitat may occur from 0059, or by any of the methods Office’s Web site at: http://www.fws.gov/ forest clearing and fragmentation. described in Availability of Documents westvirginiafieldoffice/ The proposed HCP was developed to _ _ _ (under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). beech ridge wind power.html or at address operation of 67 existing Comment submission: You may http://www.regulations.gov under turbines, construction and operation of submit written comments by one of the Docket Number FWS–R5–ES–2012– an additional 33 turbines, and following methods: 0059. Copies of the proposed HCP and decommissioning of all 100 turbines by • Electronically: Go to the Federal draft EIS will also be available for the end of the permit term (covered eRulemaking Portal: http:// public review during regular business activities). The 6,860-acre (2,744- www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, hours at the West Virginia Field Office, hectare) project planning area in enter FWS–R5–ES–2012–0059, which is 694 Beverly Pike, Elkins, WV 26241. Greenbrier and Nicholas Counties, West the docket number for this notice. Click Paper copies of the proposed HCP and Virginia, is located on private land on the appropriate link to locate this draft EIS may also be viewed at the managed primarily for timber document and submit a comment. following public libraries: (1) Greenbrier production. • By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail County Public Library, 152 Robert W. The HCP’s proposed conservation or hand-delivery to: Public Comments McCormick Drive, Lewisburg, WV; (2) strategy is designed to avoid, minimize,
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51555
and mitigate the impacts of covered through publication of a notice of intent HCP and EIS may change in response to activities on the covered species. The to prepare an EIS in the Federal public comments. We will prepare biological goals and objectives are to (1) Register on July 22, 2010 (75 FR 42767). responses to public comments and significantly minimize mortality of all That notice also announced a public publish a notice of availability of the bat species consistent with the best scoping period, during which we final HCP and final EIS. We also will available scientific information; (2) invited interested parties to provide evaluate whether issuance of a section avoid and minimize take of covered written comments expressing their 10(a)(1)(B) permit would comply with species by implementing turbine issues or concerns related to the section 7 of the ESA by conducting an operational protocols learned through a proposal and to attend a public scoping intra-Service section 7 consultation. We research and adaptive management meeting held in Rupert, West Virginia. will use the results of this consultation, strategy; and (3) mitigate unavoidable Based on public scoping comments, in combination with the above findings, impacts to covered species by we have prepared a draft EIS for the in our final analysis to determine implementing habitat protection or proposed action and have made it restoration measures in key habitats for available for public inspection (see whether to issue a permit. If the both species. ADDRESSES). NEPA requires that a range requirements are met, we will issue the The HCP that Beech Ridge Energy of reasonable alternatives to the permit to the applicant. We will issue a included with its application for an ITP proposed action be described. The draft record of decision and issue or deny the includes a series of conservation EIS analyzes four alternatives, which permit no sooner than 30 days after measures to avoid, minimize, mitigate, were derived in response to scoping publication of the notice of availability and monitor the effects of project comments on alternatives and from of the final EIS. construction and operation on the discussions with Beech Ridge Energy Public Comments covered species. These measures during the development of the HCP. The include: (1) Constructing fewer turbines; alternatives are as follows: The Service invites the public to (2) relocating turbines greater distances Alternative 1: No action; do not issue comment on the proposed HCP and from bat hibernacula; (3) reducing risk a permit; status quo; draft EIS during a 60-day public to bats when they are active at low wind Alternative 2: The proposed Federal comment period (see DATES). You may speeds by raising turbine cut-in speeds action of issuance of the associated ITP submit comments by one of the methods (the wind speed at which turbines begin and implementation of the proposed shown under ADDRESSES. generating electricity) during bat fall HCP for 100 turbines and two covered migration; (4) further reducing risk to species; Public Availability of Comments bats by fully feathering turbine blades so Alternative 3: Issuance of an ITP and that they barely move at wind speeds implementation of an HCP for 100 We will post all public comments and below the cut-in speed; (5) turbines and 5 covered species; and information received electronically or implementing turbine feathering and Alternative 4: Issuance of an ITP and via hardcopy on http://regulations.gov. cut-in speed research to determine implementation of an HCP for 67 All comments received, including effectiveness of the changes in turbines and 2 covered species. names and addresses, will become part operational protocols; (6) monitoring bat We are seeking public input on the of the administrative record and will be mortality for the life of the project to draft EIS to determine whether we available to the public. Before including ensure that biological goals are being reviewed an appropriate list of your address, phone number, email met and that take limits are not reasonable alternatives, whether there address, or other personal identifying exceeded; and (7) implementing off-site are additional alternatives that we information in your comment, you conservation projects designed to should consider, there is additional should be aware that your entire benefit the covered species by information that could better inform the comment—including your personal EIS, and whether we appropriately protecting and managing key habitats in identifying information—will be perpetuity. anticipated the environmental effects of publicly available. If you submit a The proposed action consists of the the various alternatives. issuance of an ITP and implementation hardcopy comment that includes of the proposed HCP. Beech Ridge Public Meetings personal identifying information, you Energy considered four alternatives to We will consider all requests for may request at the top of your document the proposed action in its HCP: No public meetings. To accommodate that we withhold this information from action (no ITP); alternate project scheduling of meetings and allow public review. However, we cannot locations; alternate technologies (such sufficient time to publicize them, all guarantee that we will be able to do so. requests for meetings must be received as coal and natural gas) to generate Authority electricity; and reduced conservation within 21 days after publication of this measures. notice (see DATES, ADDRESSES, and FOR This notice is provided pursuant to Beech Ridge Energy has developed an FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Please section 10(c) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 implementation agreement (IA) that indicate the reasons why a meeting is et seq.) and NEPA regulations (40 CFR ensures proper implementation of each desired (desired outcomes), desired 1506.6). of the terms and conditions of the HCP format of the meeting, who is requesting and describes the applicable remedies the meeting (an individual, group, or Dated: July 30, 2012. and recourse should any party fail to groups) and desired meeting location(s). Spencer Simon, perform its obligations, responsibilities, Next Steps Acting Assistant Regional Director, Northeast and tasks, as set forth in the agreement. Region. The IA is being included as an appendix We will evaluate the permit [FR Doc. 2012–20223 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] application, associated documents, and to the proposed HCP for public review. BILLING CODE 4310–55–P public comments in reaching a final National Environmental Policy Act decision on whether the application We formally initiated an meets the requirements of section 10(a) environmental review of the project of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51556 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR raptors, and numerous passerines and the baseline for comparing the other invertebrates. Habitat types found on management alternatives. Under Fish and Wildlife Service the Refuge are primarily shrub-steppe Alternative 1 our management focus [FWS–R1–R–2012–N123: 1265–0000–10137– uplands, and springs and spring brooks, would be on maintaining habitats S3] basalt cliffs and canyons, and emergent throughout the Refuge in their current marshes; juniper, mountain mahogany, conditions and preventing further Sheldon National Wildlife Refuge, and aspen woodlands; and desert degradation. We would continue to Humboldt County and Washoe County, greasewood flats. roundup and adopt out feral horses and NV; Lake County, OR; Final We announce the availability of the burros, to maintain a population of Comprehensive Conservation Plan and final CCP/EIS in accordance with approximately 800 horses and 80 Environmental Impact Statement National Environmental Policy Act burros. Wildland fire suppression, and (NEPA) 40 CFR 1506.6(b), requirements. mechanical cutting and thinning of AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, We completed a thorough analysis of encroaching juniper, would continue, to Interior. impacts on the human environment in maintain sagebrush habitats in the late ACTION: Notice of availability. the final CCP/EIS. stages of succession, and avoid potential The CCP will guide us in managing widespread growth of invasive annual SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and and administering the Refuge for the grasses. We would continue to use Wildlife Service (Service), announce the next 15 years. Alternative 2, as we prescribed fire to maintain wet meadow availability of the final comprehensive described in the Final CCP/EIS, is our and grassland habitats in their early-to- conservation plan and environmental preferred alternative. mid-stages of succession. Public uses impact statement (CCP/EIS) for Sheldon such as wildlife observation, National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge). In the Background photography, hunting, and fishing final CCP/EIS, we describe how we The CCP Process would continue on existing ponds, propose to manage the Refuge for the reservoirs, fishing docks, primary roads, next 15 years. The National Wildlife Refuge System and various primitive, semi-primitive, DATES: We will sign a record of decision Administration Act of 1966, 16 U.S.C. and developed campgrounds. Fish no sooner than 30 days after publication 668dd–668ee (Refuge Administration stocking in Refuge reservoirs would of this notice. Act), as amended by the National continue, as would the limited Wildlife Refuge System Improvement ADDRESSES: You may view, obtain, or collection of rocks and minerals. The Act of 1997, requires us to develop a request printed or CD–ROM copies of existing wilderness proposal would not CCP for each national wildlife refuge. the Final CCP/EIS by any of the change. The purpose for developing a CCP is to following methods. provide refuge managers with a 15-year Alternative 2 Intensive Habitat Agency Web Site: Download the final plan for achieving refuge purposes and Management (Preferred Alternative) CCP/EIS at www.fws.gov/pacific/ contributing toward the mission of the planning/main/docs/NV/ Under Alternative 2, our preferred National Wildlife Refuge System, docssheldon.htm. alternative, we would focus on consistent with sound principles of fish Mail: Sheldon National Wildlife improving habitat for fish and wildlife, and wildlife management, conservation, Refuge, P.O. Box 111, Lakeview, OR with an emphasis on supporting healthy legal mandates, and our policies. In populations of sagebrush-obligate 97630. addition to outlining broad management wildlife species such as American In-Person Viewing or Pickup: Sheldon direction on conserving wildlife and pronghorn and greater sage-grouse. National Wildlife Refuge, 20995 Rabbit their habitats, CCPs identify wildlife- Actions to improve the Refuge’s habitats Hill Road, Lakeview, OR 97630. dependent recreational opportunities would include removing all feral horses FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: available to the public, including and burros from the Refuge within 5 Aaron Collins, Planning Team Leader, opportunities for hunting, fishing, years, relocating campgrounds away (541) 947–3315 ext. 223 (phone). wildlife observation and photography, from sensitive riparian habitats, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and environmental education and reducing western juniper encroachment, Introduction interpretation. We will review and and, where feasible, increasing the update the CCP at least every 15 years frequency of fire to restore more natural With this notice, we announce the in accordance with the Refuge habitat conditions, diversity, and plant availability of the Refuge’s final CCP/ Administration Act. community succession. Removing EIS. We started this process through a abandoned livestock developments and notice in the Federal Register (73 FR CCP Alternatives We Are Considering reducing invasive plants along roads 27003; May 12, 2008). We released the We evaluated three alternatives for would be emphasized. Opportunities for draft CCP/EIS to the public, announcing managing the Refuge for the next 15 hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, and requesting public comments in a years in the Final CCP/EIS. Based on photography, and environmental notice of availability in the Federal our analysis, we identified Alternative 2 education and interpretation would be Register (76 FR 55937; September 9, as our preferred alternative; it was maintained or improved. Limited rock 2011). modified in the Final CCP/EIS to and mineral collecting would continue, The Refuge encompasses address the comments we received on with improved visitor information. approximately 575,000 acres, located the Draft CCP/EIS. We summarized the Nevada’s fish stocking program would primarily in northwestern Nevada, with comments and our responses in continue, using fish species naturally a small area in south-central Oregon. Appendix N of the Final CCP/EIS. occurring within the local area. Our The Refuge was established to protect Summaries of our alternatives follow. wilderness recommendation would the American pronghorn; it also differ from the existing proposal by provides important habitat for greater Alternative 1 Current Management (No including some but not all of the lands sage-grouse, pygmy rabbit, American Action Alternative) identified in the existing proposal, and pika, mule deer, California bighorn Alternative 1 reflects current recommending areas not previously sheep, Sheldon tui chub, various management of the Refuge and serves as identified. Contingent upon approval of
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51557
the wilderness recommendation, we Dated: June 21, 2012. this information collection request at would propose reopening some Richard R. Hannan, www.reginfo.gov. primitive routes for motorized vehicle Acting Regional Director, Pacific Region, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: use. Several segments of existing and Portland, Oregon. Title: National Cooperative Geologic recommended routes would be [FR Doc. 2012–20843 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Mapping Program (EDMAP and realigned to reduce erosion and impacts BILLING CODE 4310–55–P STATEMAP). to riparian habitats. Alternative 2 would OMB Control Number: 1028–0088. result in the greatest improvements to Abstract: EDMAP is the educational native habitat conditions throughout the DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR component of the NCGMP that is Refuge, would best meet the policy and intended to train the next generation of Geological Survey directives of the Service, is compatible geologic mappers. The primary objective with the Refuge’s purposes, and would [GX12GC009PLSG00] of the STATEMAP component of the maintain balance among the Refuge’s NCGMP is to establish the geologic varied management needs and Agency Information Collection framework of areas that are vital to the programs. Activity; National Cooperative welfare of individual States. Geologic Mapping Program (EDMAP The NCGMP EDMAP program Alternative 3 Less Intensive and STATEMAP) allocates funds to colleges and Management universities in the United States and AGENCY: United States Geological Puerto Rico through an annual Under Alternative 3, we would restore Survey (USGS), Interior. competitive cooperative agreement natural processes, to maintain, enhance, ACTION: Notice of an extension of a process. Every federal dollar that is and where possible, increase the currently approved collection (1028– awarded is matched with university Refuge’s native fish, wildlife, and plant 0088). funds. diversity, representative of historical SUMMARY: To comply with the Geology professors who are skilled in conditions in the Great Basin. Emphasis geologic mapping request EDMAP would be placed on improving shrub- Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), we are notifying the public that funding to support undergraduate and steppe habitats, and restoring modified graduate students at their college or and/or degraded habitats to more we have submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a university in a one-year mentored natural conditions, while using less geologic mapping project that focuses intensive management actions where request for an extension of a currently approved information collection (IC) for on a specific geographic area. appropriate. Habitat management the National Cooperative Geologic Only State Geological Surveys are actions would include removing all feral Mapping Program (NCGMP). The eligible to apply to the STATEMAP horses and burros from the Refuge NCGMP has two components: component of the National Cooperative within 10 years, and creating conditions Educational (EDMAP) and State Geologic Mapping Program pursuant to where natural processes, such as fire, (STATEMAP). This notice provides the the National Geologic Mapping Act could be allowed, with less dependence public an opportunity to comment on (Pub. L. 106–148). Since many State on intensive management actions. the paperwork burden of this collection Geological Surveys are organized under Opportunities for wildlife observation, which is scheduled to expire on August a State university system, such photography, hunting, and fishing 31, 2012. universities may submit a proposal on would continue at most current sites, behalf of the State Geological Survey. DATES: You must submit comments on Each fall, the program announcements except that fish stocking at Big Spring or before September 24, 2012. Reservoir would not occur. are posted to the Grants.gov Web site ADDRESSES: Campgrounds would be consolidated Please submit comments on and respondents are required to submit this information collection directly to into fewer but larger developed applications (comprising of Standard the Office of Management and Budget, campgrounds, with better amenities. We Form 424, 424A, 424B, Proposal Office of Information and Regulatory would recommend a smaller number of Summary Sheet, the Proposal, and Affairs, Attention: Desk Officer for the acres for wilderness designation under Budget Sheets. Additionally, EDMAP Department of the Interior, via email ( Alternative 3. As part of our wilderness proposal must include a Negotiated Rate [email protected]) or fax Agreement, and a Support letter from a proposal, we would recommend (202) 395–5806; and identify your reopening some primitive routes for State Geologist or USGS Project Chief). submission as 1028–0088. Since 1996, more than $5 million motorized vehicle use, which would not Please also submit a copy of your require intensive restoration or from the NCGMP has supported comments to the USGS Information geologic mapping efforts of more than management to minimize adverse Collection Clearance Officer, U.S. 1,000 students working with more than impacts. Geological Survey, 12201 Sunrise Valley 244 professors at 148 universities in 44 Comments Drive, MS 807, Reston, VA 20192 (mail); states, the District of Columbia, and 703–648–7199 (fax); or smbaloch@usgs. Puerto Rico. Funds for graduate projects We solicited comments on the Draft gov (email). Please reference are limited to $17,500 and CCP/EIS in a Federal Register notice (76 Information Collection 1028–0088 in the undergraduate project funds limited to FR 55937; September 9, 2011). We subject line. $10,000. These funds are used to cover received comments from 1,709 agencies, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: field expenses and student salaries, but organizations, and individuals. We Douglas A. Howard, Associate Program not faculty salaries or tuition. The addressed the comments in the Final Coordinator NCGMP (STATEMAP and authority for both programs is listed in CCP/EIS by making minor changes and EDMAP), USGS Geological Survey, the National Geologic Mapping Act clarifications as appropriate. These 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, MS 908, (Pub. L. 106–148). changes are explained in our responses 20192 (mail); at 703–648–6978 Frequency of Collection: Annually. to public comments in Appendix N of (telephone); or [email protected] Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary the Final CCP/EIS. (email). You may also find details on (necessary to receive funding).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51558 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
Estimated Number and Description of number, email address or other personal and the Tribe. You may mail, hand Respondents: Approximately 50 identifying information in your deliver, or telefax written comments to University or College faculty annually comment, you should be aware that Diane Rosen, Regional Director, and approximately 45 State Geological your entire comment including your Midwest Regional Office, Bureau of Surveys. personal identifying information, may Indian Affairs, 5600 West American Annual Burden Hours: 5,220 hours. be made publically available at any Boulevard, Suite 500, Bloomington, MN Estimated Annual Reporting and time. While you can ask OMB in your 55437; Telefax (612) 713–4401. Please Recordkeeping ‘‘Hour’’ Burden: We comment to withhold your personal include your name, return address and expect to receive approximately 50 identifying information from public the caption specifying ‘‘Scoping applications for EDMAP and 45 review, we cannot guarantee that will be Comments for Proposed Pokagon Band applications for STATEMAP each year done. Tribal Village’’ on the first page of your which takes each applicant Dated: August 20, 2012. written comments. approximately 36 hours to complete, Douglas A. Howard, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: totaling 3,420 hours. This includes the Scott Doig, Regional Environmental time for project conception and Associate Program Coordinator, National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program. Protection Specialist, Midwest Regional development, proposal writing and Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 5600 reviewing, and submitting a project [FR Doc. 2012–20878 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4311–AM–P West American Boulevard, Suite 500, narrative through Grants.gov. We expect Bloomington, MN 55437; telephone: to issue 45 EDMAP and 45 STATEMAP (612) 725–4514; email: grants per year. The grant recipients are DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR [email protected]. also required to submit a final technical SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Tribe report which takes each grant recipient Bureau of Indian Affairs approximately 20 hours to complete, proposes to take into trust 164.22 acres totaling 1,800 hours. Notice of Intent To Prepare an of land located within the municipal Estimated Annual Reporting and Environmental Impact Statement for limits of the City of South Bend, Indiana Recordkeeping ‘‘Non-Hour Cost’’: We the Proposed Pokagon Band Tribal pursuant to Section 6 of the Pokagon have not identified any ‘‘non-hour cost’’ Village Fee-to-Trust Acquisition and Restoration Act (25 U.S.C. 1300j–5). The burdens associated with this collection Casino Project in the City of South proposed trust acquisition of the of information. Bend, St. Joseph County, IN property is for the development of a Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA Tribal Village, which will include 44 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) provides that an AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, housing units, a multi-purpose facility, agency may not conduct or sponsor and Interior. health service and other tribal you are not required to respond to, a ACTION: Notice. government facilities. Proposed collection of information unless it development for the property also displays a currently valid OMB control SUMMARY: This notice advises the public includes a Class III gaming facility with number. that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), a hotel, restaurants, meeting space, and Comments: To comply with the in cooperation with the Pokagon Band a parking garage. public consultation process, on of Potawatomi Indians (Tribe), intends The property is located approximately February 27, 2012, we published a to gather the information necessary for 5.25 miles from Interstate 80/90 and Federal Register notice (77 FR 11565) preparing an Environmental Impact approximately 2.5 miles southwest of announcing our intent to submit this Statement (EIS) for the conveyance into downtown South Bend and consists of information collection to OMB for trust of 164.22 acres of land currently 17 contiguous parcels of land that are approval. In that notice we solicited held by the Tribe in the City of South bounded on the northwest by Indiana public comments for 60 days, ending on Bend, Indiana. The purpose of the State Road 23, on the southwest by U.S. April 27, 2012. The USGS received one proposed action is to help create a tribal Highway 31/20, and on the east by comment. The comment was a general land base and to meet the Tribe’s Locust Street. The site of the gaming invective about the Federal government. economic development needs in facility is proposed to be accessible from It did not address, and was not germane Indiana. The Tribe is federally Indiana State Road 23 and the Tribal to, this information collection. recognized, but does not currently have Village is proposed to be accessible from Therefore, we have not changed the a federally protected reservation or have Locust Road. collection in response to the comment. land that is held in trust for the Tribe The purpose of the proposed action is We again invite comments concerning by the United States in the State of to improve access to essential tribal this IC on: (a) Whether the proposed Indiana. government services, provide housing, collection of information is necessary This notice also announces a public economic development, and for the agency to perform its duties, scoping meeting to identify potential employment opportunities for the including whether the information is issues, alternatives, and content for Pokagon Band tribal community useful; (b) the accuracy of the agency’s inclusion in the EIS. residing in northern Indiana. Areas of estimate of the burden of the proposed DATES: The public scoping meeting will environmental concern so far identified collection of information; (c) ways to be held on September 27, 2012, and will that the EIS will address include soils enhance the quality, usefulness, and begin at 6 p.m. and last until the last and geology, air quality, water supply, clarity of the information to be public comment is received. Written wastewater and storm water, biological collected; and (d) ways to minimize the comments on the scope of the EIS or resources, traffic and transportation, burden on the respondents, including implementation of the proposal must cultural and historic resources, the use of automated collection arrive by October 9, 2012. socioeconomics, public health and techniques or other forms of information ADDRESSES: The public scoping meeting safety, noise, and visual resources/ technology. Please note that any will be held at the South Bend Century aesthetics. Alternatives identified for comments submitted in response to this Center, 120 South Saint Joseph Street, analysis include the proposed action, a notice are a matter of public record. South Bend, Indiana 46601. The no-action alternative, a non-gaming Before including your address, phone meeting will be co-hosted by the BIA alternative, and an alternate gaming site
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51559
alternative. The range of issues DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Cedar City Field Office, 176 East DL addressed in the EIS may also be revised Sargent Drive, Cedar City, Utah; email based on comments received at the Bureau of Land Management [email protected]. Persons who use a public scoping meeting and in response [LLUTC010000–L51010000–ER0000– telecommunications device for the deaf to this notice. The Tribe consists of LVRWJ10J4080; UTU–044897] (TDD) may call the Federal Information approximately 4,400 members and is Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 governed by a Tribal Council under a Notice of Intent To Prepare an to contact the above individual during constitution. The United States Environmental Assessment for the normal business hours. The FIRS is presently holds approximately 2,883 Proposed Cameron to Milford—138 kV available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, acres of land in the lower peninsula of Transmission Line Project and to leave a message or question with the the State of Michigan in trust for the Possible Amendment to the Cedar above individual. You will receive a Tribe. Beaver Garfield Antimony Resource reply during normal business hours. Management Plan for the Cedar City SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Public Comment Availability Field Office, Cedar City, UT applicant PacifiCorp, doing business as Rocky Mountain Power, has requested a Comments, including names and AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. right-of-way (ROW) authorization to addresses of respondents, will be construct, operate, maintain, and available for public review at all of the ACTION: Notice of Intent. decommission a 138 kV single-circuit mailing addresses shown in the SUMMARY: In compliance with the overhead transmission line on Federal ADDRESSES section (except those for the lands. The project would provide an public meetings) during business hours, National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), and the additional 27 megawatts of reliable 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Federal Land Policy and Management electrical capacity by 2014 to resolve Friday, except holidays. Before Act of 1976, as amended (FLPMA), the current system constraints and respond including your address, phone number, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to anticipated load growth in western email address, or other personal Cedar City Field Office, Cedar City, Beaver County, Utah. The proposed identifying information in your Utah, intends to prepare an project would begin at the existing comment, you should be aware that Environmental Assessment (EA) and Cameron Substation near Beaver, Utah, your entire comment—including your possible Resource Management Plan and terminate at the existing Milford personal identifying information—may (RMP) amendment and by this notice is Substation near the town of Milford, be made publicly available at any time. announcing the beginning of the Utah. The project area would span While you can request your comment to scoping process to solicit public approximately 19 miles, about 12 of exclude personal identifying comments and identify issues. which would be on BLM-administered lands, depending on the route selected. information from public review, BIA DATES: This notice initiates the public Rocky Mountain Power has identified cannot guarantee our ability to do so scoping process for the EA and possible alternative routes between the two under the guidelines of the Freedom of RMP amendment. Comments on issues substations. These routes would affect Information Act. may be submitted in writing until Federal, State, and private lands. The September 24, 2012. The date(s) and Authority requested ROW width on Federal lands location(s) of any scoping meetings will is 60 feet except for a portion of one be announced at least 15 days in This notice is published in alternative route. The requested width advance through local media, accordance with section 1503.1 of the for that portion is 100 feet where it newspapers and the BLM Web site at: Council of Environmental Quality passes over steep terrain. Rocky https://www.ut.blm.gov/enbb/ regulations (40 CFR parts 1500 through Mountain Power proposes to use index.php. In order to be included in 1508) and Sec. 46.305 of the Department predominately single wood pole the EA, all comments must be received of Interior Regulations (43 CFR part 46) structures, approximately 55 to 90 feet prior to the close of the scoping period implementing the procedural in height with average spans between or 15 days after the last public meeting, requirements of the National poles of 350 to 500 feet. No new whichever is later. Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as permanent roads would be constructed. amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Temporary spur routes approximately Department of the Interior Manual (516 related to the Cameron to Milford—138 12 feet wide and temporary workspace DM 1–6), and is in the exercise of kV Transmission Line Project by any of would be needed during construction the following methods: authority delegated to the Assistant for material storage, conductor- • Web site: https://www.ut.blm.gov/ Secretary—Indian Affairs by 209 DM 8. tensioning sites, and to accommodate enbb/index.php. • vehicles and equipment. Dated: August 9, 2012. Email: [email protected]. Authorization of this proposal may Donald E. Laverdure, • Fax: 435–865–3058. • require amending the Cedar Beaver Acting Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. Mail: Bureau of Land Management, Garfield Antimony RMP, approved in Cedar City Field Office, 176 East DL [FR Doc. 2012–20833 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] 1986, by changing approximately 594 Sargent Drive, Cedar City, Utah 84721, BILLING CODE 4310–W7–P acres of an existing 27,494-acre Visual ATTN: Karen McAdams-Kunze. Resource Management (VRM) Class II to Documents pertinent to this proposal Class III or IV. This would occur in the may be examined at the Cedar City Field Mineral Mountains along the existing Office. Pass Road, which is a Beaver County, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For Utah, recorded Class B Road. By this further information and/or to have your notice, the BLM is complying with name added to our mailing list, contact requirements in 43 CFR 1610.2(c) to Karen McAdams-Kunze, telephone 435– notify the public of potential 865–3073; Bureau of Land Management, amendments to land use plans,
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51560 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
predicated on the finding of the EA. Order 13175 and other policies. Tribal Persons who use a telecommunications Should an RMP amendment be concerns, including impacts on Indian device for the deaf (TDD) may call the necessary, it will be based on the trust assets and potential impacts to Federal Information Relay Service following preliminary planning criteria: cultural resources, will be given due (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 to contact the • The RMP amendment will focus consideration. Federal, State, and local above individual during normal only on VRM class designations; agencies, along with tribes and other business hours. The FIRS is available 24 • The RMP amendment will comply stakeholders that may be interested in or hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a with NEPA, FLPMA, and other affected by the proposed project that the message or question with the above applicable laws, executive orders, BLM is evaluating, are invited to individual. You will receive a reply regulations and policy; participate in the scoping process and, during normal business hours. • The RMP amendment will if eligible, may request or be requested SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This recognize valid existing rights; by the BLM to participate in the survey was executed at the request of • The BLM will use a collaborative development of the environmental the Regional Director, Bureau of Indian and multi-jurisdictional approach, analysis as a cooperating agency. Affairs, Great Plains Region, Aberdeen, where possible to determine the desired Before including an address, phone South Dakota, and was necessary to future condition of the public lands; number, email address, or other determine individual and tribal trust • The BLM will consider the personal identifying information in your lands. management prescriptions on adjoining comment, be aware that your entire The lands we surveyed are: lands to minimize inconsistent comment—including your personal Fifth Principal Meridian, North Dakota management; and identifying information—may be made • Management prescriptions will publicly available at any time. While T. 151 N., R. 64 W. focus on the relative values of resources you can ask us to withhold personal The plat, in three sheets, representing the and not necessarily the combination of identifying information from public dependent resurvey of a portion of the uses that will give the greatest economic review, we cannot guarantee that we subdivisional lines, a portion of the subdivision of section 15, and a portion of return or economic output. will be able to do so. the adjusted 1885 meanders of Wood Lake in The purpose of the public scoping Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 43 CFR section 15, the subdivision of section 15, and process is to determine relevant issues 1610.2. the survey of the partition of Lot 5 of section and planning criteria that will influence 15 into two parcels, in Township 151 North, Shelley J. Smith, the scope of the environmental analysis, Range 64 West, Fifth Principal Meridian, including alternatives, and guide the Acting Associate State Director. North Dakota, was accepted August 13, 2012. process for developing the EA. At [FR Doc. 2012–20892 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] We will place a copy of the plat, in present, the BLM has identified the BILLING CODE 4310–DQ–P three sheets, and related field notes we following preliminary issues: cultural described in the open files. They will be resources; crucial deer, elk, greater sage- available to the public as a matter of DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR grouse and upland game habitat, information. If the BLM receives a migratory bird habitat; special status Bureau of Land Management protest against this survey, as shown on species; surface water quality; this plat, in three sheets, prior to the recreation; socioeconomics; soil erosion; [LLMT926000–L19100000–BJ0000– date of the official filing, we will stay riparian areas; forestry; vegetation LRCME1G05121] the filing pending our consideration of management; wilderness character; and the protest. visual resources. Notice of Filing of Plats of Survey; We will not officially file this plat, in You may submit comments on issues North Dakota three sheets, until the day after we have and planning criteria in writing to the AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, accepted or dismissed all protests and BLM at any public scoping meeting, or Interior. they have become final, including you may submit them to the BLM using decisions or appeals. ACTION: Notice of filing of plats of one of the methods listed in the survey. Authority: 43 U.S.C. Chap. 3. ADDRESSES section above. To be most Josh Alexander, helpful, comments should be submitted SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land by the close of the 30-day scoping Management (BLM) will file the plat of Acting Chief Cadastral Surveyor, Division of period or within 15 days after the last survey of the lands described below in Resources. public meeting, whichever is later. the BLM Montana State Office, Billings, [FR Doc. 2012–20902 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] The BLM will use NEPA public Montana, on September 24, 2012. BILLING CODE 4310–DN–P participation requirements to assist the DATES: Protests of the survey must be agency in satisfying the public filed before September 24, 2012 to be DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR involvement requirements under considered. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (16 U.S.C. ADDRESSES: Protests of the survey Bureau of Land Management 470(f)) pursuant to 36 CFR 800.2(d)(3). should be sent to the Branch of [LLWYD10000.L14300000.EU0000; WYW– The information about historic and Cadastral Survey, Bureau of Land 161972; WYW–176935; WYW–163855] cultural resources within the area Management, 5001 Southgate Drive, potentially affected by the proposed Billings, Montana 59101–4669. Notice of Realty Action: Termination of project will assist the BLM in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Recreation and Public Purposes Act identifying and evaluating impacts to Marvin Montoya, Cadastral Surveyor, Classifications and Opening of Lands; such resources in the context of both Branch of Cadastral Survey, Bureau of Wyoming NEPA and Section 106 of the NHPA. Land Management, 5001 Southgate AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, The BLM will consult with Indian Drive, Billings, Montana 59101–4669, Interior. tribes on a government-to-government telephone (406) 896–5124 or (406) 896– ACTION: Notice. basis in accordance with Executive 5009, [email protected].
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51561
SUMMARY: This notice terminates the entirety for the subject land, which is Authority: 43 CFR 2461.5(c)(2); 43 CFR existing classifications in their entirety described as follows: 2091.2–2. or in part for public lands at three 6th Principal Meridian Donald A. Simpson, locations that were classified as suitable State Director. for lease/disposal under the Recreation T. 33 N., R. 109 W., Sec. 5, lots 5 to 9, inclusive; [FR Doc. 2012–20895 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] and Public Purposes (R&PP) Act. Sec. 6, lots 9 and 12. Additionally, this notice opens these BILLING CODE 4310–22–P The area described contains 283.17 acres in public lands to the operation of the Sublette County. public land laws generally, including DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR the 1872 Mining Law. The classification In the Federal Register on August 23, termination and opening order will 2006 (71 FR 49472), the BLM classified Bureau of Land Management affect a total of 333.17 acres of public 40 acres of public land under its lands within Sublette County, jurisdiction as suitable for lease/ [LLIDB00100 LF1000000.HT0000 Wyoming. disposal pursuant to the R&PP Act (44 LXSS020D0000 4500034792] DATES: The effective date is August 24, Stat. 741), as amended, and 43 CFR Notice of Temporary Restriction Order 2012. 2741.5. Upon classification, the BLM for Skinny Dipper Hot Springs, Boise patented 30 of the 40 acres to Sublette FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: County, ID County for the construction, operation, Tracy Hoover, Realty Specialist, BLM and maintenance of a county shop AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Pinedale Field Office, 1625 West Pine under BLM Serial Number WYW– Interior. Street, P.O. Box 768, Pinedale, 163855. Wyoming 82941, 307–367–5342. ACTION: Notice of Temporary Restriction. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On Pursuant to 43 CFR 2091.2–2 and October 26, 1999, the Bureau of Land 2461.5(c), and upon publication of this notice in the Federal Register, the BLM SUMMARY: This serves as notice of a Management (BLM) published a notice sunset-to-sunrise recreational use in the Federal Register announcing that is terminating the classification of the remaining 10 acres in its entirety for the restriction of Skinny Dipper Hot Springs it had classified 40 acres of public land is in effect on public lands administered under its jurisdiction as suitable for subject land, which is described as follows: by the Four Rivers Field Office, Bureau lease pursuant to the R&PP Act (44 Stat. of Land Management. 741), as amended, and 43 CFR 2741.5 6th Principal Meridian DATES: The restriction will be in effect (64 FR 57649). Upon classification, the T. 30 N., R. 111 W., on the date this notice is published in BLM leased the land to Sublette County Sec. 17, SE1⁄4NE1⁄4SE1⁄4; the Federal Register and will remain in for the construction, operation, and The area contains 10 acres in Sublette effect for two years or until rescinded or maintenance of a recreation site under County. modified by the authorized officer or BLM Serial Number WYW–82504. This The three areas described aggregate 333.17 designated Federal officer. lease expired at Sublette County’s acres in Sublette County. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: request on June 20, 2011. Pursuant to 43 CFR 2091.2–2 and At 8:30 a.m. on September 24, 2012, Terry Humphrey, Four Rivers Field 2461.5(c), and upon publication of this the 333.17 acres of public lands Manager, at 3948 Development Avenue, described above will be opened to Boise, Idaho 83705, via email at notice in the Federal Register, the BLM _ is terminating the classification in its operation of public land laws generally, terry [email protected], or phone entirety for the subject land, which is subject to valid existing rights, the 208–384–3430. Persons who use a described as follows: provisions of existing withdrawals, and telecommunications device for the deaf the requirements of applicable law. All (TDD) may call the Federal Information 6th Principal Meridian valid existing applications received at or Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 T. 34 N., R. 110 W., prior to 8:30 a.m. on September 24, to contact the above individuals during Sec. 24, NE1⁄4NE1⁄4. 2012, will be considered as normal business hours. The FIRS is The area described contains 40 acres in simultaneously filed at that time. Those available 24 hours a day, seven days a Sublette County. received thereafter will be considered in week, to leave a message or question In the Federal Register on August 23, the order of filing. with the above individuals. You will 2006 (71 FR 49472), as corrected on At 8:30 a.m. on September 24, 2012, receive a reply during normal hours. October 13, 2006 (71 FR 60566), the the 333.17 acres of public lands SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The BLM classified 283.17 acres of public described above will be opened to parking area adjacent to the Banks- land under its jurisdiction as suitable location and entry under the United Lowman Highway near mile post 4, the for lease pursuant to the R&PP Act (44 States mining laws. Appropriation trail from the parking area to Skinny Stat. 741), as amended, and 43 CFR under the general mining laws prior to Dipper Hot Springs, and the public 2741.5. Upon classification, the BLM the date and time of restoration is lands in Lot 3, Section 25, T. 9 N., R.3 leased the land to Sublette County for unauthorized. Any such attempted E., Boise Meridian, Boise County, Idaho, the construction, operation, and appropriation, including attempted are closed from sunset to sunrise each maintenance of a public golf course adverse possession under 30 U.S.C. Sec. day. The restriction will help provide under BLM Serial Number WYW– 38, shall vest no rights against the for public safety, which is currently at 163849. On December 12, 2011, Sublette United States. Acts required to establish high risk. Between 2004 and present County requested the lease be a location and to initiate a right of there have been at least two fatalities, terminated, and the BLM accepted the possession are governed by State law several assaults, and numerous injuries termination. where not in conflict with Federal law. associated with nighttime use of the Pursuant to 43 CFR 2091.2–2 and The BLM will not intervene in disputes area. Due to its location, public safety 2461.5(c), and upon publication of this between rival locators over possessory officers and the public do not have notice in the Federal Register, the BLM rights since Congress has provided for cellular phone or radio access, which is terminating the classification in its such determination in local courts. adds to concerns regarding night-time
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51562 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
use. In addition, bio-hazardous SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Sinagua site, comprised of a pueblo, materials (e.g., discarded hypodermic Agriculture (USDA), Forest Service, pithouses, and outlier pueblos, which needles, human feces) are commonly Coconino National Forest, in were occupied in the second half of the found in the area. The hot springs flow consultation with the appropriate 13th and the first quarter of the 14th into the South Fork Payette River, Indian tribe, has determined that the centuries A.D. The records at the which creates the potential for cultural items meet the definition of Natural History Museum of Utah and environmental contamination. Many unassociated funerary objects and the Smithsonian Institution indicate secondary effects associated with the repatriation to the Indian tribe stated that these four cultural items were primary activities are causing direct below may occur if no additional removed from a burial context and that resource harm. These impacts include claimants come forward. the human remains were either left in trash (glass, cans, food), construction of Representatives of any Indian tribe that the ground or are not locatable at the unauthorized structures, and damage/ believes itself to be culturally affiliated present time. Continuities among the removal of vegetation. with the cultural items may contact the ethnographic materials in the Flagstaff The BLM will post signs at main entry USDA, Forest Service, Southwestern area of north central Arizona indicate points to the closed area and/or other Region. that the Northern Sinagua sites in that locations on-site. This restriction will be DATES: Representatives of any Indian area are affiliated with the Hopi Tribe, posted in the Four Rivers Field Office, tribe that believes it has a cultural Arizona. In addition, oral traditions Boise District BLM. Maps of the affected affiliation with the cultural items presented by representatives of the Hopi area and other documents associated should contact the USDA, Forest Tribe support their claims of cultural with this restriction are available at Service, Southwestern Region at the affiliation with Northern Sinagua sites 3948 Development Avenue, Boise, Idaho address below by September 24, 2012. in this portion of north central Arizona. 83705. Under the authority of Section ADDRESSES: Dr. Frank E. Wozniak, Determinations Made by the USDA, 303(a) of the Federal Land Policy and NAGPRA Coordinator, Southwestern Forest Service, Southwestern Region Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. Region, USDA, Forest Service, 333 1733(a)), 43 CFR 8360.0–7, and 43 CFR Broadway Blvd. SE., Albuquerque, NM Officials of the USDA, Forest Service, 8364.1, the Bureau of Land Management 87102, telephone (505) 842–3238. Southwestern Region and the Coconino will enforce the following rule within SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is National Forest have determined that: the Skinny Dipper Hot Springs use • restriction: here given in accordance with the Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(B), You must not be in the closed area Native American Graves Protection and the four cultural items described above between sunset and sunrise. Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. are reasonably believed to have been Exemptions: The following persons 3005, of the intent to repatriate cultural placed with or near individual human are exempt from this order: Federal, items located at the Natural History remains at the time of death or later as State, and local officers and employees Museum of Utah and under the control part of the death rite or ceremony and in the performance of their official of the Coconino National Forest that are believed, by a preponderance of the duties; members of organized rescue or meet the definition of unassociated evidence, to have been removed from a firefighting forces in the performance of funerary objects under 25 U.S.C. 3001. specific burial site of a Native American This notice is published as part of the their official duties; and persons with individual. National Park Service’s administrative written authorization from the Bureau of • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 Land Management. is a relationship of shared group U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in Penalties: Any person who violates identity that can be reasonably traced this notice are the sole responsibility of the above rule may be tried before a between the unassociated funerary the museum, institution, or Federal United States Magistrate and fined no objects and the Hopi Tribe, Arizona. agency that has control of the Native more than $1,000, imprisoned for no American cultural items. The National Additional Requestors and Disposition more than 12 months, or both. Violators Park Service is not responsible for the may also be subject to the enhanced determinations in this notice. Representatives of any other Indian fines provided for in 18 U.S.C. 3571. tribe that believes itself to be culturally Authority: 43 CFR 8364.1. History and Description of the Cultural affiliated with the unassociated funerary Items objects should contact Dr. Frank E. Steven A. Ellis, In 1926, four unassociated funerary Wozniak, NAGPRA Coordinator, Idaho State Director. objects [Catalogue #s 10876, 10877, Southwestern Region, USDA, Forest [FR Doc. 2012–20893 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] 10878 and 10879] were removed from Service, 333 Broadway Blvd. SE., BILLING CODE 4310–GG–P Elden Pueblo (site NA 142) in Coconino Albuquerque, NM 87102, (505) 842– County, AZ, during legally authorized 3238 before September 24, 2012. archaeological excavations conducted Repatriation of the unassociated DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR by Jesse W. Fewkes of the Smithsonian funerary objects to the Hopi Tribe, Arizona may proceed after that date if National Park Service Institution. The Elden Pueblo (site NA 142) is on the Coconino National Forest. no additional claimants come forward. [NPS–WASO–NAGPRA–10923; 2200–1100– These four objects have been curated at The Coconino National Forest is 665] the Natural History Museum of Utah responsible for notifying the Hopi Tribe, since 1932, when the Smithsonian Notice of Intent To Repatriate Cultural Arizona that this notice has been Institution transferred the objects to the published. Items: U.S. Department of Agriculture, museum. The four unassociated Dated: July 24, 2012. Forest Service, Coconino National funerary objects are three ceramic bowls Forest, Flagstaff, AZ and one ceramic jar. Sherry Hutt, Manager, National NAGPRA Program. AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. Based on archaeological evidence and material culture, Elden Pueblo (site NA [FR Doc. 2012–20964 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] ACTION: Notice. 142) has been identified as a Northern BILLING CODE 4312–50–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51563
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Washington, Department of nullified by the Federal Government Anthropology and the Burke Museum stating that the State did not have National Park Service professional staff in consultation with authority to enter into this agreement. In [NPS–WASO–NAGPRA–10892; 2200–1100– representatives of Catawba Indian 1993, the Catawba settled with the 665] Nation (aka Catawba Tribe of South Federal Government and the State of Carolina); Cherokee Nation, Oklahoma; South Carolina. Congress ratified this Notice of Inventory Completion: Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians of settlement. University of Washington, Department North Carolina; and the United • of Anthropology, Seattle, WA Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the Oklahoma. human remains described in this notice AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. represent the physical remains of seven ACTION: Notice. History and Description of the Remains individuals of Native American At unknown date, human remains ancestry. SUMMARY: The University of representing, at minimum, seven Washington, Department of • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), individuals were removed from an Anthropology, has completed an the object described above is reasonably unknown location in South Carolina. It inventory of human remains and believed to have been placed with or is believed that they were collected by associated funerary objects, in near individual human remains at the Dr. Daris Swindler prior to his consultation with the appropriate time of death or later as part of the death appointment at the University of Indian tribes, and has determined that rite or ceremony. there is no cultural affiliation between Washington in 1968. No known individuals were identified. The one • Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(1), the the remains and any present-day Indian disposition of the human remains is to tribe. Representatives of any Indian tribe associated funerary object is a bag Catawba Indian Nation (aka Catawba that believes itself to be culturally containing non-human bone fragments, affiliated with the human remains may soil, seven shell fragments, charcoal, Tribe of South Carolina); Cherokee contact the Burke Museum acting on and unmodified stones. Nation, Oklahoma; Eastern Band of behalf of the University of Washington, Determinations Made by the University Cherokee Indians of North Carolina; and Department of Anthropology. of Washington, Department of the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Disposition of the human remains and Anthropology Indians in Oklahoma. associated funerary objects to the Indian Officials of the University of Additional Requestors and Disposition tribes stated below may occur if no Washington, Department of additional requestors come forward. Anthropology have determined that: Representatives of any Indian tribe DATES: Representatives of any Indian • Based on the cranial morphology that believes itself to be culturally tribe that believes it has a cultural and documentation records, the human affiliated with the human remains or affiliation with the human remains remains are Native American. any other Indian tribe that believes it should contact the University of • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), a satisfies the criteria in 43 CFR Washington at the address below by relationship of shared group identity 10.11(c)(1) should contact Peter Lape, September 24, 2012. cannot be reasonably traced between the Burke Museum, University of ADDRESSES: Peter Lape, Burke Museum, Native American human remains and Washington, Box 353010, Seattle, WA University of Washington, Box 353010, any present-day Indian tribe. 98195, telephone (206) 685–3849, before • Seattle, WA 98195, telephone (206) According to final judgments of the September 24, 2012. Disposition of the 685–3849. Indian Claims Commission, the land human remains to the Catawba Indian SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is from which the Native American human Nation (aka Catawba Tribe of South here given in accordance with the remains and associated funerary objects Carolina); Cherokee Nation, Oklahoma; Native American Graves Protection and were removed is the aboriginal land of Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians of Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. the Cherokee. The Cherokee are North Carolina; and the United represented by the modern day 3003, of the completion of an inventory Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Cherokee Nation, Oklahoma; Eastern of human remains and associated Oklahoma may proceed after that date if Band of Cherokee Indians of North funerary objects under the control of the no additional requestors come forward. University of Washington, Department Carolina; and the United Keetoowah of Anthropology. The human remains Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma. The University of Washington, • and associated funerary objects were Multiple lines of evidence, Department of Anthropology is removed from an unknown location in including treaties, Acts of Congress, and responsible for notifying the Catawba South Carolina. Executive Orders, indicate that the land Indian Nation (aka Catawba Tribe of This notice is published as part of the from which the Native American human South Carolina); Cherokee Nation, National Park Service’s administrative remains and associated funerary objects Oklahoma; Eastern Band of Cherokee responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 were removed is also the aboriginal land Indians of North Carolina; and the U.S.C. 3003(d)(3) and 43 CFR 10.11(d). of the Catawba Indian Nation (aka United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee The determinations in this notice are Catawba Tribe of South Carolina). The Indians in Oklahoma that this notice has the sole responsibility of the museum, Catawba and the King of England been published. institution, or Federal agency that has entered into the Treaty of Fort Augusta Dated: July 23, 2012. control of the Native American human in 1763. This treaty guaranteed the remains. The National Park Service is Catawba 144,000 acres of land in South Melanie O’Brien, not responsible for the determinations Carolina, while ceding the remaining Acting Manager, National NAGPRA Program. in this notice. portion of their claim to South Carolina. [FR Doc. 2012–20963 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Later in 1840, the Catawba attempted to BILLING CODE 4312–50–P Consultation sell these 144,000 acres to the State of A detailed assessment of the human South Carolina in the Treaty of Nation remains was made by the University of Ford. The Treaty of Nation Ford was
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51564 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Alaskan nonprofit organization, that this Indian Tribes; Petersburg Indian notice has been published. National Park Service Association; Wrangell Cooperative Dated: July 23, 2012. Association; and Sealaska Heritage [NPS–WASO–NAGPRA–10912; 2200–1100– Melanie O’Brien, Institute, a regional Native Alaskan 665] Acting Manager, National NAGPRA Program. nonprofit organization. [FR Doc. 2012–20960 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Notice of Inventory Completion: History and Description of the Remains Thomas Burke Memorial Washington BILLING CODE 4312–50–P State Museum, University of In 1918, human remains representing, Washington, Seattle, WA at minimum, one individual were removed from the further out of two DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. stone cairns on a point in Wrangell, National Park Service ACTION: Notice. Alaska. These remains were collected by Ernest P. Walker, who donated them to [NPS–WASO–NAGPRA–10949; 2200–1100– SUMMARY: The Thomas Burke Memorial the Burke Museum in November of 1918 665] Washington State Museum (Burke (Burke Accn. #1508). No known Museum), University of Washington, individuals were identified. No funerary Notice of Inventory Completion: has completed an inventory of human objects are present. Herrett Center for Arts and Science, remains, in consultation with the The human remains are consistent College of Southern Idaho, Twin Falls, appropriate Indian tribes, and has with Native American morphology, as ID determined that there is a cultural evidenced through tooth wear as well as AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. affiliation between the human remains the presence of wormian bones. The ACTION: Notice. and a present-day Indian tribe. town of Wrangell, located on Wrangell Representatives of any Indian tribe that Island, was aboriginally within the SUMMARY: The Herrett Center for Arts believes itself to be culturally affiliated southern Tlingit tribal group of the and Science, College of Southern Idaho, with the human remains may contact Stikine (De Laguna 1990, Goldschmidt has completed an inventory of human the Burke Museum. Repatriation of the and Haas 1998, Smythe 1994). Wrangell remains and associated funerary objects human remains to the tribe named was the site of a village of the Stikine in consultation with the appropriate below may occur if no additional (Smythe 1994). The Stikine people are Indian tribes, and has determined that claimants come forward. now represented by the modern-day there is a cultural affiliation between the DATES: Representatives of any Indian Wrangell Cooperative Association. human remains and associated funerary tribe that believes it has a cultural Determinations Made by the Burke object and present-day Indian tribes. affiliation with the human remains and Museum Representatives of any Indian tribe that associated funerary objects should believes itself to be culturally affiliated contact the Burke Museum at the Officials of the Burke Museum have with the human remains and associated address below by September 24, 2012. determined that: funerary object may contact the Herrett • Based on anthropological and ADDRESSES: Center for Arts and Science, College of Peter Lape, Burke Museum, biological evidence, the human remains University of Washington, Box 35101, Southern Idaho. Repatriation of the are determined to be Native American. human remains and associated funerary Seattle, WA 98195, telephone (206) • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the 685–3849. object to the Indian tribes stated below human remains described above may occur if no additional claimants SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is represent the physical remains of one come forward. here given in accordance with the individual of Native American ancestry. DATES: Representatives of any Indian Native American Graves Protection and • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there tribe that believes it has a cultural Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. is a relationship of shared group affiliation with the human remains and 3003, of the completion of an inventory identity that can be reasonably traced associated funerary object should of human remains under the control of between the Native American human contact the Herrett Center for Arts and the Thomas Burke Memorial remains and the Wrangell Cooperative Science at the address below by Washington State Museum (Burke Association. Museum), University of Washington, September 24, 2012. Seattle, WA. The human remains were Additional Requestors and Disposition ADDRESSES: Phyllis Oppenheim, removed from Wrangell, in Southeast Representatives of any other Indian Collections Manager, Herrett Center for Alaska. tribe that believes itself to be culturally Arts and Science, College of Southern This notice is published as part of the affiliated with the human remains Idaho, P.O. Box 1238, Twin Falls, ID National Park Service’s administrative should contact Peter Lape, Burke 83303–1238, telephone (208) 732–6660. responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 Museum, University of Washington, Box SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in 35101, Seattle, WA 98195, telephone here given in accordance with the this notice are the sole responsibility of (206) 685–9364, before September 24, Native American Graves Protection and the museum, institution, or Federal 2012. Repatriation of the human Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. agency that has control of the Native remains to the Wrangell Cooperative 3003, of the completion of an inventory American human remains. The National Association may proceed after that date of human remains and associated Park Service is not responsible for the if no additional claimants come funerary object in the possession of the determinations in this notice. forward. Herrett Center for Arts and Science. The The Burke Museum is responsible for human remains and associated funerary Consultation notifying the Central Council of Tlingit object were removed from an unknown A detailed assessment of the human and Haida Indian Tribes; Petersburg location in Arizona. remains was made by the Burke Indian Association; Wrangell This notice is published as part of the Museum professional staff in Cooperative Association; and Sealaska National Park Service’s administrative consultation with representatives of the Heritage Institute, a regional Native responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51565
U.S.C. 3003(d)(3). The determinations in River Indian Reservation, Arizona; Salt DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR this notice are the sole responsibility of River Pima-Maricopa Indian the museum, institution, or Federal Community of the Salt River National Park Service agency that has control of the Native Reservation, Arizona; and the Tohono [NPS–WASO–NAGPRA–11017; 2200–1100– American human remains and O’odham Nation of Arizona. The 665] associated funerary object. The National descendants of the Puebloan peoples of Park Service is not responsible for the the area described above are members of Notice of Inventory Completion: determinations in this notice. the Hopi Tribe of Arizona and the Zuni Southern Oregon Historical Society, Consultation Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, New Medford, OR Mexico. A detailed assessment of the human AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. remains was made by the Herrett Center Determinations Made by the Herrett ACTION: Notice. for Arts and Science professional staff in Center for Arts and Science, College of consultation with representatives of the Southern Idaho SUMMARY: The Southern Oregon Gila River Indian Community of the Gila Historical Society has completed an River Indian Reservation, Arizona (on Officials of the Herrett Center for Arts inventory of human remains and behalf of themselves and the Ak-Chin and Science, College of Southern Idaho, associated funerary objects, in Indian Community of the Maricopa (Ak have determined that: consultation with the appropriate Chin) Indian Reservation, Arizona; Salt • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the Indian tribes, and has determined that River Pima-Maricopa of the Salt River there is no cultural affiliation between human remains described in this notice Reservation, Arizona; and the Tohono the remains and any present-day Indian represent the physical remains of one O’odham Nation of Arizona); Hopi Tribe tribe. Representatives of any Indian tribe of Arizona; and the Zuni Tribe of the individual of Native American ancestry. that believes itself to be culturally Zuni Reservation, New Mexico • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), affiliated with the human remains may (hereafter referred to as ‘‘The Tribes’’). the one object described above is contact the Southern Oregon Historical History and Description of the Remains reasonably believed to have been placed Society. Disposition of the human with or near individual human remains remains and associated funerary objects At an unknown date, human remains at the time of death or later as part of to the Indian tribe stated below may representing, at minimum, one the death rite or ceremony. occur if no additional requestors come individual were removed from an • forward. unknown location in Arizona. In 1975, Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), there DATES: the human remains and associated is a relationship of shared group Representatives of any Indian funerary object were donated to the identity that can be reasonably traced tribe that believes it has a cultural Herrett Center for Arts and Science, between the Native American human affiliation with the human remains College of Southern Idaho, by the family remains and associated funerary object should contact the Southern Oregon of James H. Berkley. No known and The Tribes. Historical Society at the address below individuals were identified. The one by September 24, 2012. associated funerary object is a ceramic Additional Requestors and Disposition ADDRESSES: Tina Reuwsaat, Southern Oregon Historical Society, 106 N. cremation vessel with a lid. The human Representatives of any Indian tribe Central Ave., Medford, OR 97501, remains are a cremation, which together that believes itself to be culturally telephone (541) 858–1724 ext. 1001. with the ceramic cremation vessel, is affiliated with the human remains and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: associated with the Sedentary Period of associated funerary object should Notice is the Sacaton Phase, dating from A.D. here given in accordance with the contact Phyllis Oppenheim, Collections 900–1100. The evidence provided by Native American Graves Protection and Manager, Herrett Center for Arts and this burial practice, the associated Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), 25 U.S.C. funerary object, and the geographical Science, College of Southern Idaho, PO 3003, of the completion of an inventory provenience of the human remains and Box 1238, Twin Falls, ID 83303–1238, of human remains and associated associated funerary object supports a telephone (208) 732–6660, before funerary objects in the possession of the cultural affiliation to the Hohokam September 24, 2012. Repatriation of the Southern Oregon Historical Society, culture. human remains and associated funerary Medford, OR. The human remains and Cultural continuity between the object to The Tribes may proceed after associated funerary objects were prehistoric occupants of the region and that date if no additional claimants removed from a site near the village of present-day O’odham and Puebloan come forward. Buncom, in Jackson County, OR. peoples is supported by continuities in The Herrett Center for Arts and This notice is published as part of the settlement patterns, architectural Science is responsible for notifying The National Park Service’s administrative technologies, basketry, textiles, ceramic Tribes that this notice has been responsibilities under NAGPRA, 25 technology, ritual practices, and oral published. U.S.C. 3003(d)(3) and 43 CFR 10.11(d). traditions. Documentation submitted by The determinations in this notice are representatives of the Gila River Indian Dated: July 26, 2012. the sole responsibility of the museum, Community of the Gila River Indian Melanie O’Brien, institution, or Federal agency that has Reservation, Arizona establishes Acting Manager, National NAGPRA Program. control of the Native American human cultural continuities between the [FR Doc. 2012–20959 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] remains. The National Park Service is ancient Hohokam and present-day BILLING CODE 4312–50–P not responsible for the determinations O’odham tribes. The descendants of the in this notice. O’odham peoples of the area described above are members of the Ak-Chin Consultation Indian Community of the Maricopa (Ak A detailed assessment of the human Chin) Indian Reservation, Arizona; Gila remains was made by the Southern River Indian Community of the Gila Oregon Historical Society professional
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51566 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
staff in consultation with American human remains and nominated properties under the representatives of the Confederated associated funerary objects were National Register criteria for evaluation. Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community removed is the aboriginal land of the Comments may be forwarded by United of Oregon and the Cow Creek Band of Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde States Postal Service, to the National Umpqua Indians of Oregon. The Community of Oregon. Register of Historic Places, National following tribes were contacted without • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the Park Service, 1849 C St. NW., MS 2280, response: Confederated Tribes of Coos, human remains described in this notice Washington, DC 20240; by all other Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians of represent the physical remains of two carriers, National Register of Historic Oregon; Confederated Tribes of Siletz individuals of Native American Places, National Park Service, 1201 Eye Indians of Oregon (previously listed as ancestry. St. NW., 8th floor, Washington, DC • the Confederated Tribes of the Siletz Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(A), 20005; or by fax, 202–371–6447. Written Reservation); Coquille Tribe of Oregon; the 387 objects described above are or faxed comments should be submitted and the Quartz Valley Indian reasonably believed to have been placed by September 10, 2012. Before including Community of the Quartz Valley with or near individual human remains your address, phone number, email Reservation of California. at the time of death or later as part of address, or other personal identifying the death rite or ceremony. History and Description of the Remains • information in your comment, you Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(1), the should be aware that your entire Sometime prior to 1952, human disposition of the human remains is to comment—including your personal remains representing, at minimum, two the Confederated Tribes of the Grand identifying information—may be made individuals, were collected by O.N. Ronde Community of Oregon. publicly available at any time. While Snavely from a site near the village of Additional Requestors and Disposition you can ask us in your comment to Buncom, in Jackson County, OR. Mr. Representatives of any Indian tribe withhold your personal identifying Snavely ‘‘found this grave while information from public review, we mining’’ on private land along the Little that believes itself to be culturally affiliated with the human remains or cannot guarantee that we will be able to Applegate River, two miles from the do so. confluence with the Big Applegate river any other Indian tribe that believes it at the mouth of Carberry Creek. In 1952, satisfies the criteria in 43 CFR Dated: August 1, 2012. Mr. Snavely donated the human 10.11(c)(1) should contact Tina J. Paul Loether, remains and associated funerary objects Reuwsaat at the Southern Oregon Chief, National Register of Historic Places/ to the Southern Oregon Historical Historical Society, 106 N. Central National Historic Landmarks Program. Society. The collection includes ten Avenue, Medford, OR 97520, telephone human teeth. No known individuals (541) 858–1724 ext. 1001, before DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA September 24, 2012. Disposition of the were identified. The 387 associated District of Columbia funerary objects include 1 metate; 1 human remains and associated funerary metal cowbell; 1 small metal cow bell; objects to the Grand Ronde Community Peyser Building—Security Savings and 1 metal powder flask; 1 rusted frying of Oregon may proceed after that date if Commercial Bank, (Banks and Financial pan; 1 copper cooking pan; 1 piece of no additional requestors come forward. Institutions MPS), 1518 K St. NW., a broken china saucer; 1 white saucer; The Southern Oregon Historical Washington, 12000777 4 fragments of a broken cup; 3 pieces of Society is responsible for notifying the Westory Building, 607 14th St. NW., an inkwell; 1 wood knife handle; 1 Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Washington, 12000778 metal knife handle; 2 rusted Community of Oregon and the Cow IOWA tablespoons; 2 pieces of a pocket watch; Creek Band of Umpqua Indians of Monona County 2 rusted bullet molds; 7 small bells; 2 Oregon that this notice has been pieces of a pair of scissors; 1 metal part published. Ingemann Danish Evangelical Lutheran with rings; 1 large knife with a curved Dated: August 6, 2012. Church and Cemetery, 32044 Cty. Rd. E54, blade; 1 knife blade with beads Sherry Hutt, Moorhead, 12000779 attached; 2 gold rings; 8 shells; 97 Manager, National NAGPRA Program. Pottawattamie County dentalia shells; 4 uniform buttons; 5 [FR Doc. 2012–20885 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] McCormick Harvesting Machine Company separate bags of beads; 96 thimbles; 17 BILLING CODE 4312–50–P Building, 1001 S. 6th St., Council Bluffs, buttons of various sizes; 8 rusted metal 12000780 rings; 1 elk tooth with a drilled hole; 86 white shell beads; 22 pine nut beads; DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MASSACHUSETTS and 6 small glass medicine bottles. Hampden County National Park Service Determinations Made by the Southern Hampden Park Historic District, Roughly Oregon Historical Society [NPS–WASO–NRNHL–10980; 2200–3200– bounded by Hampden, Chestnut, Maple, & 665] Officials of the Southern Oregon Dwight Sts., Holyoke, 12000781 Historical Society have determined that: National Register of Historic Places; School Street Barn, 551 School St., Agawam, • Based on collection records and Notification of Pending Nominations 12000782 analysis by archaeologist Dr. Ted and Related Actions Suffolk County Goebel, the human remains are Native American. Nominations for the following Saint Mark’s Episcopal Church, 73 Columbia • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), a properties being considered for listing Rd., Boston, 12000783 relationship of shared group identity or related actions in the National MONTANA cannot be reasonably traced between the Register were received by the National Native American human remains and Park Service before July 28, 2012. Lewis and Clark County any present-day Indian tribe. Pursuant to § 60.13 of 36 CFR Part 60, Western Life Insurance Company Helena • Credible lines of evidence indicate written comments are being accepted Branch Office, 600 N. Park Ave., Helena, that the land from which the Native concerning the significance of the 12000784
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51567
NEBRASKA 42Cb0702, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0780, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000630 Address Restricted, Price, 12000673 Lancaster County 42Cb0703, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0781, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Lincoln Veterans Administration Hospital Address Restricted, Price, 12000631 Address Restricted, Price, 12000674 Historic District, (United States Second 42Cb0704, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0783, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Generation Veterans Hospitals MPS) 600 S. Address Restricted, Price, 12000632 Address Restricted, Price, 12000675 70th St., Lincoln, 12000785 42Cb0705, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0787, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) OKLAHOMA Address Restricted, Price, 12000633 Address Restricted, Price, 12000676 42Cb0707, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0788, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Oklahoma County Address Restricted, Price, 12000634 Address Restricted, Price, 12000677 Mayfair, The, (Midtown Brick Box 42Cb0708, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0790, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Apartments 1910–1935, Oklahoma City Address Restricted, Price, 12000640 Address Restricted, Price, 12000678 MPS), 1315 N. Broadway Pl., Oklahoma 42Cb0709, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0791, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) City, 12000786 Address Restricted, Price, 12000641 Address Restricted, Price, 12000679 42Cb0712, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0792, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) TEXAS Address Restricted, Price, 12000642 Address Restricted, Price, 12000680 Bexar County 42Cb0713, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0794, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000643 Address Restricted, Price, 12000681 Hays Street Bridge, (Historic Bridges of Texas 42Cb0714, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0802, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) MPS) Hays St. over UPRR, N. Cherry, & Address Restricted, Price, 12000644 Address Restricted, Price, 12000682 Chestnut Sts., San Antonio, 12000787 42Cb0715, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0803, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Travis County Address Restricted, Price, 12000645 Address Restricted, Price, 12000683 42Cb0718, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0806, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) East Main Street Historic District, 111, 113, Address Restricted, Price, 12000646 Address Restricted, Price, 12000684 115, & 117 E. Main St., Pflugerville, 42Cb0734, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0807, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 12000788 Address Restricted, Price, 12000647 Address Restricted, Price, 12000685 UTAH 42Cb0735, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0808, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000648 Address Restricted, Price, 12000686 Carbon County 42Cb0742, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0810, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0680, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000649 Address Restricted, Price, 12000687 Address Restricted, Price, 12000624 42Cb0747, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0812, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0138, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000650 Address Restricted, Price, 12000688 Address Restricted, Price, 12000611 42Cb0749, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0813, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0144, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000651 Address Restricted, Price, 12000689 Address Restricted, Price, 12000639 42Cb0750, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0814, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0146, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000652 Address Restricted, Price, 12000690 Address Restricted, Price, 12000612 42Cb0751, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0825, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0230, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000653 Address Restricted, Price, 12000691 Address Restricted, Price, 12000638 42Cb0752, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0829, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0240, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000654 Address Restricted, Price, 12000692 Address Restricted, Price, 12000613 42Cb0753, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0831, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0264, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000655 Address Restricted, Price, 12000693 Address Restricted, Price, 12000614 42Cb0754, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0832, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0593, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000656 Address Restricted, Price, 12000695 Address Restricted, Price, 12000615 42Cb0755, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0834, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0594, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000657 Address Restricted, Price, 12000694 Address Restricted, Price, 12000616 42Cb0859, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0628, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0756, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000617 Address Restricted, Price, 12000658 Address Restricted, Price, 12000696 42Cb0629, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0757, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0863, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000619 Address Restricted, Price, 12000659 Address Restricted, Price, 12000697 42Cb0630, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0758, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0866, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000620 Address Restricted, Price, 12000660 Address Restricted, Price, 12000698 42Cb0632, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0759, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0867, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000621 Address Restricted, Price, 12000661 Address Restricted, Price, 12000699 42Cb0637, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0760, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0868, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000637 Address Restricted, Price, 12000662 Address Restricted, Price, 12000700 42Cb0641, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0761, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0869, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000622 Address Restricted, Price, 12000663 Address Restricted, Price, 12000701 42Cb0668, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0766, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0870, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000618 Address Restricted, Price, 12000666 Address Restricted, Price, 12000702 42Cb0676, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0767, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0872, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000623 Address Restricted, Price, 12000664 Address Restricted, Price, 12000703 42Cb0678, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0769, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0875, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000636 Address Restricted, Price, 12000665 Address Restricted, Price, 12000706 42Cb0693, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0771, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0877, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000625 Address Restricted, Price, 12000667 Address Restricted, Price, 12000704 42Cb0695, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0775, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0880, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000626 Address Restricted, Price, 12000668 Address Restricted, Price, 12000707 42Cb0696, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0776, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0881, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000627 Address Restricted, Price, 12000669 Address Restricted, Price, 12000708 42Cb0698, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0777, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0882, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000628 Address Restricted, Price, 12000670 Address Restricted, Price, 12000709 42Cb0700, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0778, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0883, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000635 Address Restricted, Price, 12000671 Address Restricted, Price, 12000710 42Cb0701, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0779, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb0884, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000629 Address Restricted, Price, 12000672 Address Restricted, Price, 12000711
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51568 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
42Cb0885, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb1046, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Authority: This scoping comment period Address Restricted, Price, 12000712 Address Restricted, Price, 12000750 is published pursuant to the regulations (40 42Cb0886, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb1047, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) CFR 1501.7) implementing the provisions of Address Restricted, Price, 12000713 Address Restricted, Price, 12000751 the National Environmental Policy Act of 42Cb0888, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb1048, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) Address Restricted, Price, 12000714 Address Restricted, Price, 12000752 (NEPA). 42Cb0889, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb1049, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000715 Address Restricted, Price, 12000753 SUMMARY: Pursuant to the regulations 42Cb0890, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb1050, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) implementing the procedural provisions Address Restricted, Price, 12000716 Address Restricted, Price, 12000754 of NEPA, on July 9, 2012, BOEM 42Cb0891, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb1051, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) announced its intent to prepare a Address Restricted, Price, 12000717 Address Restricted, Price, 12000755 Supplemental EIS for proposed Western 42Cb0892, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb1379, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Planning Area (WPA) Lease Sale 233 Address Restricted, Price, 12000718 Address Restricted, Price, 12000756 and Central Planning Area (CPA) Lease 42Cb0894, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb1466, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Sale 231 (WPA/CPA Supplemental EIS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000719 Address Restricted, Price, 12000757 42Cb0895, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb1756, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) (77 FR 40380). Due to a BOEM email Address Restricted, Price, 12000720 Address Restricted, Price, 12000759 address incorrectly noted in the July 9, 42Cb0896, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb1757, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 2012, Federal Register notice and out of Address Restricted, Price, 12000721 Address Restricted, Price, 12000760 an abundance of caution to ensure that 42Cb0898, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb2006, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) BOEM receives all scoping comments, Address Restricted, Price, 12000722 Address Restricted, Price, 12000761 BOEM is reopening the scoping 42Cb0899, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb2007, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) comment period. Address Restricted, Price, 12000723 Address Restricted, Price, 12000762 DATES: Scoping comments for this Draft 42Cb0900, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb2008, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000724 Address Restricted, Price, 1200763 WPA/CPA Supplemental EIS will now 42Cb0911, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb2009, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) be accepted until September 10, 2012. Address Restricted, Price, 12000725 Address Restricted, Price, 12000764 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: BOEM is 42Cb0912, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb2018, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) announcing the re-opening of the Address Restricted, Price, 12000726 Address Restricted, Price, 12000765 scoping process for the WPA/CPA 42Cb0919, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb2019, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Supplemental EIS. Throughout the Address Restricted, Price, 12000727 Address Restricted, Price, 12000766 scoping process, Federal, State, tribal, 42Cb0920, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb2023, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000728 Address Restricted, Price, 12000767 and local government agencies, and 42Cb0921, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb2025, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) other interested parties have the Address Restricted, Price, 12000729 Address Restricted, Price, 12000768 opportunity to aid BOEM in 42Cb0922, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb2028, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) determining the significant issues, Address Restricted, Price, 12000730 Address Restricted, Price, 12000769 reasonable alternatives, and potential 42Cb0923, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb2031, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) mitigation measures to be analyzed in Address Restricted, Price, 12000731 Address Restricted, Price, 12000770 the WPA/CPA Supplemental EIS, as 42Cb0924, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Cb2766, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) well as providing additional Address Restricted, Price, 12000732 Address Restricted, Price, 12000771 42Cb0955, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) information. BOEM will use the NEPA Address Restricted, Price, 12000733 Duchesne County commenting process to satisfy the 42Cb0956, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Dc0331, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) public involvement process for Section Address Restricted, Price, 12000734 Address Restricted, Price, 12000772 106 of the National Historic 42Cb0970, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Dc0530, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f), as Address Restricted, Price, 12000735 Address Restricted, Price, 12000773 provided for in 36 CFR 800.2(d)(3). 42Cb0971, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Dc0645, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000736 Address Restricted, Price, 12000774 Comments 42Cb0972, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Dc1302, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) All interested parties, including Address Restricted, Price, 12000737 Address Restricted, Price, 12000775 Federal, State, and local government 42Cb0973, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Dc1618, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000738 Address Restricted, Price, 12000776 agencies, and the general public, may 42Cb0975, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) 42Dc1619, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) submit written comments on the scope Address Restricted, Price, 12000739 Address Restricted, Price, 12000758 of the WPA/CPA Supplemental EIS, 42Cb0976, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) significant issues that should be [FR Doc. 2012–20815 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Address Restricted, Price, 12000740 addressed, alternatives that should be 42Cb0977, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) BILLING CODE 4312–51–P considered, potential mitigation Address Restricted, Price, 12000741 measures, and the types of oil and gas 42Cb0981, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR activities of interest in the proposed Address Restricted, Price, 12000742 lease sale areas. 42Cb0982, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000743 Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Written scoping comments may be 42Cb0983, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) submitted in one of the following two Address Restricted, Price, 12000744 Outer Continental Shelf, Gulf of ways: 42Cb0984, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Mexico, Oil and Gas Lease Sales, (1.) In an envelope labeled ‘‘Scoping Address Restricted, Price, 12000745 Western Planning Area Lease Sale 233 for the WPA/CPA Supplemental 42Cb0985, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) and Central Planning Area Lease Sale EIS’’ and mailed (or hand delivered) Address Restricted, Price, 12000746 231 to Mr. Gary D. Goeke, Chief, 42Cb0986, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Address Restricted, Price, 12000747 AGENCY: Bureau of Ocean Energy Regional Assessment Section, 42Cb0994, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Management (BOEM), Interior. Office of Environment (GM 623E), Bureau of Ocean Energy Address Restricted, Price, 12000748 ACTION: Notice of Reopening of Scoping Management, Gulf of Mexico OCS 42Cb1045, (Nine Mile Canyon, Utah MPS) Comment Period. Address Restricted, Price, 12000749 Region, 1201 Elmwood Park
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51569
Boulevard, New Orleans, Louisiana phase of countervailing duty For further information concerning 70123–2394; or investigation no. 701–TA–488 (Final) the conduct of this phase of the (2.) BOEM email address: Ls_233– under section 705(b) of the Tariff Act of investigations, hearing procedures, and [email protected]. 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b)) (the Act) and rules of general application, consult the Petitions, although accepted, do not the final phase of antidumping Commission’s Rules of Practice and generally provide relevant information investigation nos. 731–TA–1199–1200 Procedure, part 201, subparts A through at this stage to assist in scoping. BOEM (Final) under section 735(b) of the Act E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, does not consider anonymous (19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)) to determine subparts A and C (19 CFR part 207). comments. Before including your whether an industry in the United DATES: Effective Date: August 3, 2012. address, phone number, email address, States is materially injured or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: or other personal identifying threatened with material injury, or the Edward Petronzio (202–205–3176), information in your comment, you establishment of an industry in the Office of Investigations, U.S. should be aware that your entire United States is materially retarded, by International Trade Commission, 500 E comment—including your personal reason of subsidized imports from Korea Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. identifying information—may be made and less-than-fair-value imports from Hearing-impaired persons can obtain publicly available at any time. While Korea and Mexico of large residential information on this matter by contacting you can ask us in your comment to washers, provided for in subheading the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– withhold your personal identifying 8450.20.00 of the Harmonized Tariff 205–1810. Persons with mobility 1 information from public review, we Schedule of the United States. impairments who will need special cannot guarantee that we will be able to assistance in gaining access to the 1 For purposes of these investigations, the Commission should contact the Office do so. If you wish for your name and/ Department of Commerce has defined the subject or address to be withheld, you must merchandise as: ‘‘all automatic clothes washing of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. state your preference prominently at the machines, regardless of the orientation of the General information concerning the beginning of your comment. rotational axis, except as noted below, with a Commission may also be obtained by All submissions from organizations or cabinet width (measured from its widest point) of accessing its internet server (http:// at least 24.5 inches (62.23 cm) and no more than businesses and from individuals 32.0 inches (81.28 cm). Also covered are certain www.usitc.gov). The public record for identifying themselves as subassemblies used in large residential washers, these investigations may be viewed on representatives or officials of namely: (1) All assembled cabinets designed for use the Commission’s electronic docket organizations or businesses will be in large residential washers which incorporate, at (EDIS) at http://edis.usitc.gov. a minimum: (a) At least three of the six cabinet made available for public inspection in surfaces; and (b) a bracket; (2) all assembled tubs SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: their entirety. designed for use in large residential washers which Background. The final phase of these FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For incorporate, at a minimum: (a) A tub; and (b) a seal; investigations is being scheduled as a information on the WPA/CPA (3) all assembled baskets designed for use in large result of affirmative preliminary residential washers which incorporate, at a determinations by the Department of Supplemental EIS, scoping process, the minimum: (a) A side wrapper; (b) a base; and (c) submission of comments, or BOEM’s a drive hub; and (4) any combination of the Commerce that certain benefits which policies associated with this notice, foregoing subassemblies. constitute subsidies within the meaning please contact Mr. Gary D. Goeke, Chief, Excluded from the scope are stacked washer- of section 703 of the Act (19 U.S.C. dryers and commercial washers. The term ‘stacked 1671b) are being provided to Regional Assessment Section, Office of washer-dryers’ denotes distinct washing and drying Environment (GM 623E), Bureau of machines that are built on a unitary frame and share manufacturers, producers, or exporters Ocean Energy Management, Gulf of a common console that controls both the washer in Korea of large residential washers, Mexico OCS Region, 1201 Elmwood and the dryer. The term ‘commercial washer’ and that imports of such products from denotes an automatic clothes washing machine Korea and Mexico are being sold in the Park Boulevard, New Orleans, Louisiana designed for the ‘pay per use’ market meeting either 70123–2394, telephone (504) 736–3233. of the following two definitions: (1)(a) It contains United States at less than fair value payment system electronics; (b) it is configured within the meaning of section 733 of the Dated: August 2, 2012. with an externally mounted steel frame at least six Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b). The Tommy P. Beaudreau, inches high that is designed to house a coin/token investigations were requested in a Director, Bureau of Ocean Energy operated payment system (whether or not the actual petition filed on December 30, 2011, by Management. coin/token operated payment system is installed at the time of importation); (c) it contains a push Whirlpool Corporation, Benton Harbor, [FR Doc. 2012–20876 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] button user interface with a maximum of six MI. BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P manually selectable wash cycle settings, with no Participation in the investigations and ability of the end user to otherwise modify water public service list. Persons, including temperature, water level, or spin speed for a selected wash cycle setting; and (d) the console industrial users of the subject INTERNATIONAL TRADE containing the user interface is made of steel and merchandise and, if the merchandise is COMMISSION is assembled with security fasteners; or (2)(a) it sold at the retail level, representative contains payment system electronics; (b) the consumer organizations, wishing to [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–488 (Final) and payment system electronics are enabled (whether or 731–TA–1199–1200 (Final)] not the payment acceptance device has been participate in the final phase of these installed at the time of importation) such that, in Large Residential Washers From Korea normal operation, the unit cannot begin a wash as certified to the U.S. Department of Energy and Mexico cycle without first receiving a signal from a pursuant to 10 CFR 429.12 and 10 CFR 429.20, and bonafide payment acceptance device such as an in accordance with the test procedures established Scheduling of the final phase of electronic credit card reader; (c) it contains a push in 10 CFR Part 430. The products subject to these button user interface with a maximum of six investigations are currently classifiable under countervailing duty and antidumping manually selectable wash cycle settings, with no subheading 8450.20.0090 of the Harmonized Tariff investigations. ability of the end user to otherwise modify water System of the United States (HTSUS). Products AGENCY: United States International temperature, water level, or spin speed for a subject to these investigations may also enter under Trade Commission. selected wash cycle setting; and (d) the console HTSUS subheadings 8450.11.0040, 8450.11.0080, containing the user interface is made of steel and 8450.90.2000, and 8450.90.6000. Although the ACTION: Notice. is assembled with security fasteners. HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience Also excluded from the scope are automatic and customs purposes, the written description of SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives clothes washing machines with a vertical rotational the merchandise subject to this scope is notice of the scheduling of the final axis and a rated capacity of less than 3.7 cubic feet, dispositive.’’
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51570 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
investigations as parties must file an hearing testimony in camera no later Authority: These investigations are being entry of appearance with the Secretary than 7 business days prior to the date of conducted under authority of title VII of the to the Commission, as provided in the hearing. Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published section 201.11 of the Commission’s Written submissions. Each party who pursuant to section 207.21 of the rules, no later than 21 days prior to the is an interested party shall submit a Commission’s rules. hearing date specified in this notice. A prehearing brief to the Commission. Issued: August 20, 2012. party that filed a notice of appearance Prehearing briefs must conform with the By order of the Commission. during the preliminary phase of the provisions of section 207.23 of the Lisa R. Barton, investigations need not file an Commission’s rules; the deadline for Acting Secretary to the Commission. additional notice of appearance during filing is December 4, 2012. Parties may [FR Doc. 2012–20836 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] also file written testimony in connection this final phase. The Secretary will BILLING CODE 7020–02–P maintain a public service list containing with their presentation at the hearing, as the names and addresses of all persons, provided in section 207.24 of the or their representatives, who are parties Commission’s rules, and posthearing INTERNATIONAL TRADE to the investigations. briefs, which must conform with the COMMISSION Limited disclosure of business provisions of section 207.25 of the proprietary information (BPI) under an Commission’s rules. The deadline for [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–442–443 and administrative protective order (APO) filing posthearing briefs is December 18, 731–TA–1095–1097 (Review)] and BPI service list. Pursuant to section 2012. In addition, any person who has Certain Lined Paper School Supplies 207.7(a) of the Commission’s rules, the not entered an appearance as a party to From China, India, and Indonesia Secretary will make BPI gathered in the the investigations may submit a written final phase of these investigations statement of information pertinent to Determination available to authorized applicants under the subject of the investigations, On the basis of the record 1 developed the APO issued in the investigations, including statements of support or in the subject five-year reviews, the provided that the application is made opposition to the petition, on or before United States International Trade no later than 21 days prior to the December 18, 2012. On January 11, Commission (Commission) determines, hearing date specified in this notice. 2013, the Commission will make pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Authorized applicants must represent available to parties all information on interested parties, as defined by 19 which they have not had an opportunity Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)), that U.S.C. 1677(9), who are parties to the to comment. Parties may submit final revocation of the countervailing duty investigations. A party granted access to comments on this information on or order on certain lined paper school BPI in the preliminary phase of the before January 15, 2013, but such final supplies from India and the investigations need not reapply for such comments must not contain new factual antidumping duty orders on certain access. A separate service list will be information and must otherwise comply lined paper school supplies from China maintained by the Secretary for those with section 207.30 of the Commission’s and India would be likely to lead to parties authorized to receive BPI under rules. All written submissions must continuation or recurrence of material the APO. conform with the provisions of section injury to an industry in the United Staff report. The prehearing staff 201.8 of the Commission’s rules; any States within a reasonably foreseeable 2 report in the final phase of these submissions that contain BPI must also time. The Commission also determines investigations will be placed in the conform with the requirements of that revocation of the countervailing nonpublic record on November 27, sections 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the duty order and antidumping duty order 2012, and a public version will be Commission’s rules. Please be aware on certain lined paper school supplies issued thereafter, pursuant to section that the Commission’s rules with from Indonesia would not be likely to 207.22 of the Commission’s rules. respect to electronic filing have been lead to continuation or recurrence of Hearing. The Commission will hold a amended. The amendments took effect material injury to an industry in the hearing in connection with the final on November 7, 2011. See 76 FR 61937 United States within a reasonably phase of these investigations beginning (Oct. 6, 2011) and the newly revised foreseeable time.3 at 9:30 a.m. on December 11, 2012, at Commission’s Handbook on E-Filing, Background the U.S. International Trade available on the Commission’s web site Commission Building. Requests to at http://edis.usitc.gov. The Commission instituted these appear at the hearing should be filed in Additional written submissions to the reviews on August 1, 2011 (76 FR writing with the Secretary to the Commission, including requests 45851) and determined on November 4, Commission on or before December 6, pursuant to section 201.12 of the 2011 that it would conduct full reviews 2012. A nonparty who has testimony Commission’s rules, shall not be (76 FR 72213, November 22, 2011). that may aid the Commission’s accepted unless good cause is shown for Notice of the scheduling of the deliberations may request permission to accepting such submissions, or unless Commission’s reviews and of a public present a short statement at the hearing. the submission is pursuant to a specific hearing to be held in connection All parties and nonparties desiring to request by a Commissioner or therewith was given by posting copies appear at the hearing and make oral Commission staff. of the notice in the Office of the presentations should attend a In accordance with sections 201.16(c) Secretary, U.S. International Trade prehearing conference to be held at 9:30 and 207.3 of the Commission’s rules, Commission, Washington, DC, and by a.m. on December 8, 2012, at the U.S. each document filed by a party to the publishing the notice in the Federal International Trade Commission investigations must be served on all Register on February 1, 2012 (77 FR Building. Oral testimony and written other parties to the investigations (as materials to be submitted at the public identified by either the public or BPI 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 hearing are governed by sections service list), and a certificate of service CFR 207.2(f)). 201.6(b)(2), 201.13(f), and 207.24 of the must be timely filed. The Secretary will 2 Commissioners Okun, Pearson, and Johanson Commission’s rules. Parties must submit not accept a document for filing without dissent with respect to India. any request to present a portion of their a certificate of service. 3 Chairman Williamson dissenting.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51571
5055). The hearing was held in General information concerning the potentially subject to the requested Washington, DC, on June 12, 2012, and Commission may also be obtained by exclusion order and/or a cease and all persons who requested the accessing its Internet server (http:// desist order within a commercially opportunity were permitted to appear in www.usitc.gov). The public record for reasonable time; and person or by counsel. this investigation may be viewed on the (v) explain how the requested The Commission transmitted its Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) remedial orders would impact United determinations in these reviews to the at http://edis.usitc.gov. Hearing- States consumers. Secretary of Commerce on August 17, impaired persons are advised that 2012. The views of the Commission are information on this matter can be Written submissions must be filed no contained in USITC Publication 4344 obtained by contacting the later than by close of business, eight (August 2012), entitled Certain Lined Commission’s TDD terminal on (202) calendar days after the date of Paper School Supplies from China, 205–1810. publication of this notice in the Federal India, and Indonesia: Investigation Nos. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Register. There will be further 701–TA–442–443 and 731–TA–1095– Commission has received a complaint opportunities for comment on the 1097 (Review). and a submission pursuant to section public interest after the issuance of any Issued: August 20, 2012. 210.8(b) of the Commission’s Rules of final initial determination in this By order of the Commission. Practice and Procedure filed on behalf investigation. Lisa R. Barton, of Motorola Mobility LLC; Motorola Persons filing written submissions Acting Secretary to the Commission. Mobility Ireland; and Motorola Mobility must file the original document International Limited on August 17, electronically on or before the deadlines [FR Doc. 2012–20834 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] 2012. The complaint alleges violations BILLING CODE 7020–02–P stated above and submit 8 true paper of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 copies to the Office of the Secretary by (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into noon the next day pursuant to section the United States, the sale for INTERNATIONAL TRADE 210.4(f) of the Commission’s Rules of COMMISSION importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR certain wireless communication 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to [Docket No. 2910] devices, portable music and data the docket number (‘‘Docket No. 2910’’) in a prominent place on the cover page Certain Wireless Communication processing devices, computers, and and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Devices, Portable Music and Data components thereof. The complaint Electronic Filing Procedures, http:// Processing Devices, Computers, and names as respondent Apple, Inc. of CA. Components Thereof; Notice of Proposed respondents, other www.usitc.gov/secretary/ interested parties, and members of the fed_reg_notices/rules/ Receipt of Complaint; Solicitation of _ _ _ Comments Relating to the Public public are invited to file comments, not handbook on electronic filing.pdf). Interest to exceed five (5) pages in length, Persons with questions regarding filing inclusive of attachments, on any public should contact the Secretary (202–205– AGENCY: U.S. International Trade interest issues raised by the complaint 2000). Commission. or section 210.8(b) filing. Comments Any person desiring to submit a ACTION: Notice. should address whether issuance of the document to the Commission in relief specifically requested by the SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that confidence must request confidential complainant in this investigation would treatment. All such requests should be the U.S. International Trade affect the public health and welfare in directed to the Secretary to the Commission has received a complaint the United States, competitive Commission and must include a full entitled Wireless Communication conditions in the United States Devices, Portable Music and Data economy, the production of like or statement of the reasons why the Processing Devices, Computers, and directly competitive articles in the Commission should grant such Components Thereof, DN 2910; the United States, or United States treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents Commission is soliciting comments on consumers. for which confidential treatment by the any public interest issues raised by the In particular, the Commission is Commission is properly sought will be complaint or complainant’s filing under interested in comments that: treated accordingly. All nonconfidential section 210.8(b) of the Commission’s (i) Explain how the articles written submissions will be available for Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR potentially subject to the requested public inspection at the Office of the 210.8(b)). remedial orders are used in the United Secretary and on EDIS. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa States; This action is taken under the R. Barton, Acting Secretary to the (ii) identify any public health, safety, authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act Commission, U.S. International Trade or welfare concerns in the United States of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), Commission, 500 E Street SW., relating to the requested remedial and of sections 201.10 and 210.8(c) of Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) orders; the Commission’s Rules of Practice and 205–2000. The public version of the (iii) identify like or directly Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)). complaint can be accessed on the competitive articles that complainant, Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) its licensees, or third parties make in the Issued: August 20, 2012. at http://edis.usitc.gov, and will be United States which could replace the By order of the Commission. available for inspection during official subject articles if they were to be Lisa R. Barton, business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) excluded; Acting Secretary to the Commission. in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. (iv) indicate whether complainant, International Trade Commission, 500 E complainant’s licensees, and/or third [FR Doc. 2012–20821 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, party suppliers have the capacity to BILLING CODE 7020–02–P telephone (202) 205–2000. replace the volume of articles
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51572 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
INTERNATIONAL TRADE U.S. International Trade Commission, Barnes & Noble, Inc., 122 Fifth Avenue, COMMISSION telephone (202) 205–2560. New York, NY 10011. Authority: The authority for Garmin Ltd., Mu¨ hlentalstrasse 2, 8200 [Investigation No. 337–TA–853] institution of this investigation is Schaffhausen, Switzerland. contained in section 337 of the Tariff Garmin International, Inc., 1200 East Certain Wireless Consumer Act of 1930, as amended, and in section 151st Street, Olathe, KS 66062. Electronics Devices and Components 210.10 of the Commission’s Rules of Garmin USA, Inc., 1200 East 151st Thereof; Institution of Investigation Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 Street, Olathe, KS 66062. Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337 (2012). HTC Corporation, 23 Xinghua Road, Scope of Investigation: Having Taoyuan 330, Taiwan. AGENCY: U.S. International Trade considered the complaint, the U.S. HTC America, 13920 SE Eastgate Way, Commission. International Trade Commission, on Suite #200, Bellevue, WA 98005. ACTION: Notice. August 20, 2012, Ordered That— Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., Huawei (1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of Industrial Base, Bantian Longgang, SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as Shenzhen 518129, China. complaint was filed with the U.S. amended, an investigation be instituted Huawei North America, 5700 Tennyson International Trade Commission on July to determine whether there is a Parkway, Suite 500, Plano, TX 75024. 24, 2012, under section 337 of the Tariff violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of Kyocera Corporation, 6 Takeda Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. section 337 in the importation into the Tobadono-cho, Fushmi-ku, Kyoto 1337, on behalf of Technology United States, the sale for importation, 612–8501, Japan. Properties Limited LLC of Cupertino, or the sale within the United States after Kyocera Communications, Inc., 9520 California, Phoenix Digital Solutions importation of certain wireless Towne Centre Drive, San Diego, CA LLC of Cupertino, California, and Patriot consumer electronics devices and 92121. Scientific Corporation of Carlsbad, components thereof that infringe one or LG Electronics, Inc., LG Twin Towers, California. The complaint alleges more of claims 1, 6, 7, 9–11, and 13–16 20 Yeouido-dong, Yeongdeungpo-gu, violations of section 337 based upon the of the ’336 patent, and whether an Seoul 150–721, Republic of Korea. importation into the United States, the industry in the United States exists as LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc., 1000 Sylvan sale for importation, and the sale within required by subsection (a)(2) of section Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632. the United States after importation of 337; Nintendo Co., Ltd., 11–1 Kamitoba certain wireless consumer electronics (2) Pursuant to Commission Rule Hokotate-Cho, Minami-Ku, Kyoto devices and components thereof by 210.50(b)(1), 19 CFR 210.50(b)(1), the 601–8501, Japan. reason of infringement of certain claims presiding administrative law judge shall Nintendo of America, Inc., 4600 150th of U.S. Patent No. 5,809,336 (‘‘the ’336 take evidence or other information and Avenue NE., Redmond, WA 98052. patent’’). The complaint further alleges hear arguments from the parties and Novatel Wireless, Inc., 9645 Scranton that an industry in the United States other interested persons with respect to Road Suite #205, San Diego, CA exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of the public interest in this investigation, 92121. section 337. as appropriate, and provide the Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung The complainants request that the Commission with findings of fact and a Main Building, 250, Taepyeongno 2- Commission institute an investigation recommended determination on this ga, Jung-gu, Seoul 100–742, Republic and, after the investigation, issue an issue, which shall be limited to the of Korea. exclusion order and cease and desist statutory public interest factors, 19 Samsung Electronics America, Inc., 105 orders. U.S.C. 1337(d)(1), (f)(1), (g)(1); Challenger Road, Ridgefield Park, NJ ADDRESSES: The complaint, except for (3) For the purpose of the 07660. any confidential information contained investigation so instituted, the following Sierra Wireless, Inc., 13811 Wireless therein, is available for inspection are hereby named as parties upon which Way, Richmond, British Columbia during official business hours (8:45 a.m. this notice of investigation shall be V6V 3A4, Canada. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the served: Sierra Wireless America, Inc., 2200 Secretary, U.S. International Trade (a) The complainants are: Faraday Avenue, Suite 150, Carlsbad, Commission, 500 E Street SW., Room Technology Properties Limited LLC, CA 92008. 112, Washington, DC 20436, telephone 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd., Suite 100, ZTE Corporation, ZTE Plaza, Keji South (202) 205–2000. Hearing impaired Cupertino, CA 95014. Road, Hi & New Tech Industrial Park, individuals are advised that information Phoenix Digital Solutions LLC, 20883 Nanshan District, Shenzhen 518057, on this matter can be obtained by Stevens Creek Blvd., Suite 100, China. contacting the Commission’s TDD Cupertino, CA 95014. ZTE (USA) Inc., 2425 N. Central terminal on (202) 205–1810. Persons Patriot Scientific Corporation, 701 Expressway, Suite 323, Richardson, with mobility impairments who will Palomar Airport Rd., Suite 170, TX 75080. need special assistance in gaining access Carlsbad, CA 92011. (c) The Office of Unfair Import to the Commission should contact the (b) The respondents are the following Investigations, U.S. International Trade Office of the Secretary at (202) 205– entities alleged to be in violation of Commission, 500 E Street SW., Suite 2000. General information concerning section 337, and are the parties upon 401, Washington, DC 20436; and the Commission may also be obtained which the complaint is to be served: (4) For the investigation so instituted, by accessing its internet server at Acer Inc., 8F, No. 88, Section 1, Hsin the Chief Administrative Law Judge, http://www.usitc.gov. The public record Tai Wu Road, Hsichih 221, Taipei U.S. International Trade Commission, for this investigation may be viewed on Hsien, Taiwan. shall designate the presiding the Commission’s electronic docket Acer America Corporation, 333 West Administrative Law Judge. (EDIS) at http://edis.usitc.gov. San Carlos Street, San Jose, CA 95110. Responses to the complaint and the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Amazon.com, Inc., 410 Terry Avenue notice of investigation must be Office of Unfair Import Investigations, North, Seattle, WA 98109–5210. submitted by the named respondents in
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51573
accordance with section 210.13 of the documents filed in connection with this BDT Respondents’’) remain as Commission’s Rules of Practice and investigation are or will be available for respondents in the investigation. Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to inspection during official business On June 20, 2012, the ALJ issued his 19 CFR 201.16(d)–(e) and 210.13(a), hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the final ID, finding no violation of section such responses will be considered by Office of the Secretary, U.S. 337 by the BDT Respondents with the Commission if received not later International Trade Commission, 500 E respect to any of the asserted claims. than 20 days after the date of service by Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, Specifically, the ALJ found no violation the Commission of the complaint and telephone (202) 205–2000. General of section 337 by the BDT Respondents the notice of investigation. Extensions of information concerning the Commission in connection with claims 1–3 and 7–9 time for submitting responses to the may also be obtained by accessing its of the ’766 patent and claims 1–2, 5–7, complaint and the notice of Internet server at http://www.usitc.gov. 9–10, 12 and 15–16 of the ’581 patent. investigation will not be granted unless The public record for this investigation The ALJ also found that the asserted good cause therefor is shown. may be viewed on the Commission’s claims were not shown to be invalid Failure of a respondent to file a timely electronic docket (EDIS) at http:// except for claim 15 of the ’581 patent. response to each allegation in the edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired The ALJ further found that a domestic complaint and in this notice may be persons are advised that information on industry in the United States exists that deemed to constitute a waiver of the this matter can be obtained by practices the ’766 patent. The ALJ, right to appear and contest the contacting the Commission’s TDD however, found that a domestic industry allegations of the complaint and this terminal on (202) 205–1810. in the United States does not exist that practices the ’581 patent. The ALJ also notice, and to authorize the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This found that the BDT Respondents are not administrative law judge and the investigation was instituted on Commission, without further notice to entitled to a patent exhaustion defense. November 24, 2010, based upon a On July 5, 2012, Overland and the the respondent, to find the facts to be as complaint filed by Overland Storage of alleged in the complaint and this notice BDT Respondents each filed a petition San Diego, California (‘‘Overland’’) on for review of the ID. On July 13, 2012, and to enter an initial determination October 19, 2010, and supplemented on and a final determination containing Overland and the BDT Respondents November 9, 2010. 75 FR 71735 (Nov. each filed a response. such findings, and may result in the 24, 2010). The complaint alleged issuance of an exclusion order or a cease Having examined the record of this violations of section 337 of the Tariff investigation, including the ALJ’s final and desist order or both directed against Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) by reason the respondent. ID, the petitions for review, and the of infringement of certain claims of U.S. responses thereto, the Commission has Issued: Tuesday, August 21, 2012. Patent No. 6,328,766 and U.S. Patent determined to review the ALJ’s final ID By order of the Commission. No. 6,353,581 (collectively, ‘‘the in part. Specifically, with respect to the Lisa R. Barton, Asserted Patents’’). The notice of ’766 patent, the Commission has Secretary to the Commission. investigation named as respondents determined to review the ALJ’s findings [FR Doc. 2012–20835 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] BDT AG of Rottweil, Germany; BDT on contributory infringement, validity BILLING CODE 7020–02–P Solutions GmbH & Co. KG of Rottweil, and patent exhaustion. With respect to Germany; BDT Automation Technology the ’581 patent, the Commission has (Zhuhai FTZ), Co., Ltd. of Zhuhai determined to review the ALJ’s INTERNATIONAL TRADE Guandang, China; BDT de Mexico, S. de construction of the claim term ‘‘linear COMMISSION R.L. de C.V., of Jalisco, Mexico; BDT array,’’ and the ALJ’s findings on Products, Inc., of Irvine, California; Dell [Investigation No. 337–TA–746] infringement, validity, domestic Inc. of Round Rock, Texas (‘‘Dell’’); and industry and patent exhaustion. Certain Automated Media Library International Business Machines Corp. The parties are requested to brief their Devices; Determination To Review in of Armonk, New York (‘‘IBM’’). The positions on the issues under review Part a Final Initial Determination; Office of Unfair Import Investigations with reference to the applicable law and Schedule for Filing Written was not named as a party. the evidentiary record. In connection Submissions The ALJ granted BDT Solutions with its review, the Commission is only GmbH & Co. KG’s motion for summary interested in responses to the following AGENCY: U.S. International Trade determination of no violation on questions. Each party’s brief responding Commission. September 2, 2011. See Notice of to the following questions should be no ACTION: Notice. Commission Determination Not to more than 50 pages. Review an Initial Determination 1. The ALJ found that the BDT SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Granting BDT Solutions’ Motion for Respondents did not prove by clear and the U.S. International Trade Summary Determination of No Violation convincing evidence that the IBM 3570, Commission has determined to review of Section 337 (Sep. 21, 2011). On 3575, 7331, 7336 and 3494 documents in part the final initial determination December 5, 2011, the ALJ granted a qualify as printed publications under 35 (‘‘ID’’) issued by the presiding joint motion to terminate IBM and Dell U.S.C. 102. For each respective IBM administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) on from the investigation. See Notice of document, please identify all evidence June 20, 2012, finding no violation of Commission Determination to Affirm an in the record that supports a finding that section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as Initial Determination Granting a Joint the document was publicly accessible amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in this Motion For Termination of the before the filing date of the ’766 patent. investigation. Investigation by Settlement as to 2. To the extent the IBM 3570, 7331, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Respondents International Business 7336 and 3494 documents qualify as Cathy Chen, Esq., Office of the General Machines Corp. and Dell Inc. (Jan. 27, printed publications under 35 U.S.C. Counsel, U.S. International Trade 2012). BDT AG, BDT Automation 102, how does each document either Commission, 500 E Street SW., Technology (Zhuhai FTZ), Co., Ltd., alone or in combination with other prior Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) BDT de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V., and art of record anticipate or render 205–2392. Copies of non-confidential BDT Products, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘the obvious the asserted claims of the ’766
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51574 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
patent? Please specify what prior art, if engaging in unfair acts in the requested to state the date that the any, allegedly combines with the importation and sale of such articles. patents expire and the HTSUS numbers respective IBM document(s) to render Accordingly, the Commission is under which the accused products are obvious the asserted claims, and why. interested in receiving written imported. The written submissions and We are particularly interested in how submissions that address the form of proposed remedial orders must be filed the respective IBM documents, either remedy, if any, that should be ordered. no later than close of business on alone or in combination with other prior If a party seeks exclusion of an article Tuesday, September 4, 2012. Reply art, expressly or inherently disclose or from entry into the United States for submissions must be filed no later than suggest the features of ‘‘said controller purposes other than entry for the close of business on Wednesday, consumption, the party should so is configured such that a subset of said September 12, 2012. No further plurality of media elements and a subset indicate and provide information submissions on these issues will be of said plurality of media element drives establishing that activities involving are available for read/write access by a other types of entry either are adversely permitted unless otherwise ordered by first one of said plurality of host affecting it or likely to do so. For the Commission. computers and are unavailable for read/ background, see In the Matter of Certain Persons filing written submissions write access by a second one of said Devices for Connecting Computers via must file the original document plurality of host computers’’ in claim 1 Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337–TA–360, electronically on or before the deadlines and the ‘‘queuing’’ and ‘‘sequentially USITC Pub. No. 2843 (December 1994) stated above and submit 8 true paper performing’’ steps in claim 2. Please cite (Commission Opinion). copies to the Office of the Secretary by only record evidence and relevant legal If the Commission contemplates some noon the next day pursuant to section authority to support your position. form of remedy, it must consider the 210.4(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Arguments not made before the ALJ will effects of that remedy upon the public Practice and Procedure (19 CFR not be considered. interest. The factors the Commission 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to 3. The ALJ found that Overland did will consider include the effect that an the investigation number (‘‘Inv. No. not prove that the BDT Respondents exclusion order and/or cease and desist 337–TA–746’’) in a prominent place on possessed the requisite knowledge that orders would have on (1) the public the acts of IBM and Dell constituted health and welfare, (2) competitive the cover page and/or the first page. (See patent infringement. Please identify all conditions in the U.S. economy, (3) U.S. Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, http://www.usitc.gov/ evidence in the record that supports a production of articles that are like or _ _ finding of contributory infringement of directly competitive with those that are secretary/fed reg notices/rules/ _ _ _ the ’766 patent. subject to investigation, and (4) U.S. handbook on electronic filing.pdf ). 4. Please comment on Overland’s consumers. The Commission is Persons with questions regarding filing assertion that its evidence and analysis therefore interested in receiving written should contact the Secretary (202–205– for domestic industry with respect to its submissions that address the 2000). NEO 2000, 2000e, 4000 and 4000e tape aforementioned public interest factors Any person desiring to submit a libraries were undisputed. Please cite all in the context of this investigation. document to the Commission in evidence in the record that supports If the Commission orders some form confidence must request confidential your position. of remedy, the U.S. Trade treatment. All such requests should be 5. The BDT Respondents raise the Representative, as delegated by the directed to the Secretary to the question of whether the settlement President, has 60 days to approve or Commission and must include a full agreement and the license agreement disapprove the Commission’s action. statement of the reasons why the between Overland and IBM exhaust See Presidential Memorandum of July Commission should grant such Overland’s rights in the Asserted 21, 2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005). Patents as to an upstream, unlicensed During this period, the subject articles treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents supplier. Please address the ALJ’s would be entitled to enter the United for which confidential treatment by the finding that the license agreement itself, States under bond, in an amount Commission is properly sought will be as opposed to a sale of the patented determined by the Commission. The treated accordingly. A redacted non- goods, constitutes a ‘‘first authorized Commission is therefore interested in confidential version of the document sale’’ for purposes of patent exhaustion receiving submissions concerning the must also be filed simultaneously with in view of pertinent legal authorities amount of the bond that should be the any confidential filing. All non- (e.g., Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG imposed if a remedy is ordered. confidential written submissions will be Elecs., Inc., 553 U.S. 617 (2008); LG available for public inspection at the Elecs., Inc. v. Bizcom Elecs., Inc., 453 Written Submissions Office of the Secretary and on EDIS. F.3d 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2006); Excelsior The parties to the investigation are The authority for the Commission’s Tech. Inc. v. Pabst Licensing GMBH & requested to file written submissions on determination is contained in section Co., KG, 541 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2008); the issues identified in this notice. 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as Parties to the investigation, interested LG Elecs. Inc. v. Hitachi Ltd., 655 F. amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in government agencies, and any other Supp. 2d 1036 (N.D. Cal. 2009); and sections 210.42–46 and 210.50 of the Tessera, Inc. v. Intl. Trade Comm’n, 646 interested parties are encouraged to file Commission’s Rules of Practice and F.3d 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2011)). written submissions on the issues of In connection with the final remedy, the public interest, and Procedure (19 CFR 210.42–46 and disposition of this investigation, the bonding. Such submissions should 210.50). Commission may (1) issue an order that address the recommended By order of the Commission. could result in the exclusion of the determination by the ALJ on remedy Issued: August 20, 2012. subject articles from entry into the and bonding with respect to the United States, and/or (2) issue one or Asserted Patents. Complainant is also Lisa R. Barton, more cease and desist orders that could requested to submit proposed remedial Acting Secretary to the Commission. result in the respondent(s) being orders for the Commission’s [FR Doc. 2012–20795 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] required to cease and desist from consideration. Complainant is further BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51575
INTERNATIONAL TRADE 76435–36. The complaint alleges a DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE COMMISSION violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree [Investigation No. 337–TA–818] of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the importation into the United States, Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Certain Devices With Secure the sale for importation, and the sale Compensation and Liability Act Communication Capabilities, within the United States after Components Thereof, and Products importation of certain devices with In accordance with 28 CFR 50.7, Containing the Same Decision Not To secure communication capabilities, notice is hereby given that on August Review an Initial Determination components thereof, and products 20, 2012, a Consent Decree in United Terminating the Investigation Due To containing the same by reason of States v. Exxon Mobil Corporation, et Lack of Standing and Order No. 14 infringement of certain claims of U.S. al., C.A. No. 1–08–cv–124–IMK (N.D. Denying Complainant’s Renewed Patent No. 8,051,181 (‘‘the ’181 patent’’). W.Va.) was lodged with the United Motion To Amend the Complaint and The complaint further alleges the States District Court for the Northern Notice of Investigation; Termination of existence of a domestic industry. The District of West Virginia. The Consent the Investigation Commission’s notice of investigation Decree resolves the United States’ claims, pursuant to Sections 106 and AGENCY: U.S. International Trade named Apple Inc. (‘‘Apple’’) of 107(a) of the Comprehensive Commission. Cupertino, California as the sole Environmental Response, ACTION: Notice. respondent. No Commission investigative attorney is participating in Compensation, and Liability Act SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that this investigation. (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. 9606 and the U.S. International Trade 9607(a), against Exxon Mobil On April 30, 2012, Apple moved to Corporation, Vertellus Specialities Inc. Commission has determined not to terminate the investigation based on review an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) and CBS Corporation related to the Big VirnetX’s lack of standing pursuant to (Order No. 15) of the presiding John’s Salvage Site (‘‘Site’’), located in Commission rule 210.21(a)(1). VirnetX administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) Fairmont, West Virginia. The State of filed an opposition to the motion. terminating the above-captioned West Virginia is a signatory to the investigation due to lack of standing of The ALJ issued the subject ID on July Consent Decree. The BJS Site became complainant VirnetX, Inc. (‘‘VirnetX’’) 18, 2012, granting Apple’s motion for contaminated with various hazardous of Zephyr Cove, Nevada. The termination of the investigation. He substances as the result of the Commission has also determined not to found that VirnetX does not possess all operations and related waste disposal review the ALJ’s Order No. 14 denying substantial rights in the ’181 patent, and practices of a coal refinery that operated complainant’s renewed motion to therefore lacks standing to assert the there between approximately 1933 and 1973, and a scrap and salvage facility amend the complaint and notice of patent in this investigation. On the same that operated there from 1973 to the investigation to add Science date, the ALJ issued Order No. 14 early 1980s. Under the Consent Decree, Applications International Corporation denying VirnetX’s renewed motion to (‘‘SAIC’’) as a complainant. The the three settling parties will pay a amend the complaint and notice of portion of the United States’ response Commission has terminated the investigation to add SAIC as a investigation. costs in the amount of $11 million, complainant. VirnetX petitioned for perform/finance the removal activities FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: review of the ALJ’s ID and Order No. 14 selected by the Environmental Clint Gerdine, Esq., Office of the on July 27, 2012, and Apple filed a Protection Agency in its Action General Counsel, U.S. International response in opposition on August 3, Memorandum issued on September 30, Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., 2012. 2010, and pay EPA’s and the State’s Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) Having reviewed the record including future response costs, as defined in the 708–2310. Copies of non-confidential the parties’ briefing, the Commission Consent Decree. documents filed in connection with this has determined not to review the ALJ’s The Department of Justice will receive investigation are or will be available for comments relating to the proposed inspection during official business ID or Order No. 14, and has terminated the investigation. Consent Decree for a period of thirty hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the (30) days from the date of this Office of the Secretary, U.S. The authority for the Commission’s publication. Comments should be International Trade Commission, 500 E determination is contained in section addressed to the Assistant Attorney Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as General, Environment and Natural telephone (202) 205–2000. General amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and in Resources Division, and either emailed information concerning the Commission sections 210.21 and 210.42(h) of the to [email protected], or may also be obtained by accessing its Commission’s Rules of Practice and mailed to P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Internet server at http://www.usitc.gov. Procedure, 19 CFR 210.21, 210.42(h). Department of Justice, Washington, DC The public record for this investigation Issued: August 20, 2012. 20044–7611, and should refer to United may be viewed on the Commission’s States v. Exxon Mobil Corporation, et By order of the Commission. electronic docket (EDIS) at http:// al., Department of Justice No. 90–11–3– edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired Lisa R. Barton, 08499. persons are advised that information on Acting Secretary to the Commission. During the comment period, the this matter can be obtained by [FR Doc. 2012–20803 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] proposed Consent Decree, with contacting the Commission’s TDD BILLING CODE 7020–02–P Appendices A–H, may be examined on terminal on (202) 205–1810. the following Department of Justice Web SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The site, http://www.usdoj/enrd/Consent_ Commission instituted this investigation Decrees.html. A copy of the Consent on December 7, 2011, based on a Decree may also be obtained from the complaint filed by VirnetX. 76 FR Consent Decree Library, P.O. Box 7611,
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51576 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, permanent shut down of the Marcus the Consent Decree Library at the DC 20044–7611, or by faxing or Hook Refinery (to the extent the address given above. emailing a request to ‘‘Consent Decree Philadelphia and Marcus Hook Robert D. Brook, Copy’’ ([email protected]), Refineries are determined to be a single fax no. (202) 514–0097, phone source) to be used as credits or offsets Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and confirmation number (202) 514–5271. In in any PSD, major non-attainment and Natural Resources Division. requesting a copy of the Consent Decree or minor NSR permits provided that the [FR Doc. 2012–20806 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] from the Consent Decree Library, please new or modified units meet BACT; and enclose a check in the amount of $23.25 (4) a requirement to install, operate and BILLING CODE 4410–15–P (25 cents per page production cost) for maintain fence line monitoring of the Consent Decree without the refinery pollutants. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE appendices. Several of the appendices Sunoco has completed the installation are voluminous and the same cost (25 of the WGS and SCR at the Philadelphia Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms cents per page) will apply. If one or 1232 FCCU as required under the and Explosives more of the appendices are requested, Consent Decree. PES R&M LLC will step [OMB Number 1140–0020] fax or email the request to ‘‘Consent into the shoes of Sunoco for all Decree Copy’’ as indicated above and injunctive relief requirements that have Agency Information Collection provide the requester’s contact not yet been fulfilled or that are Activities; Proposed Collection; information to receive the cost of the ongoing. The amendment changes Comments Request: Firearms requested appendices. Make checks references from ‘‘Sunoco’’ where Transaction Record, Part 1, Over-the- payable to the U.S. Treasury or, if by appropriate to ‘‘PES R&M LLC’’, and Counter email or fax, forward a check in that changes other references, where there amount to the Consent Decree Library at are similar requirements across all ACTION: 30-Day Notice of Information the stated address. refineries, to ‘‘PES R&M LLC (with Collection. regard to the Philadelphia refinery).’’ Maureen Katz, The Department of Justice (DOJ), The publication of this notice opens Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms a period for public comment on the Section, Environment and Natural Resources and Explosives (ATF) will be submitting Division. Fourth Amendment to the Consent the following information collection [FR Doc. 2012–20883 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Decree. Comments should be addressed request to the Office of Management and BILLING CODE 4410–15–P to the Assistant Attorney General, Budget (OMB) for review and approval Environment and Natural Resources in accordance with the Paperwork Division, and should refer to United Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE States of America; Commonwealth of information collection is published to Pennsylvania; City of Philadelphia; Notice of Lodging of Proposed Fourth obtain comments from the public and State of Oklahoma; and State of Ohio v. affected agencies. This proposed Amendment to the Consent Decree Sunoco, Inc., Civil Action 05–02866, Under the Clean Air Act information collection was previously Department of Justice No. 90–5–2–1– published in the Federal Register, Notice is hereby given that on August 1744/1. All comments must be Volume 77, Number 122, page 37920 on 17, 2012, a proposed Fourth submitted no later than thirty (30) days June 25, 2012, allowing for a 60 day Amendment to Consent Decree was after the publication date of this notice. comment period. lodged with the United States District Comments may be submitted by email The purpose of this notice is to allow Court for the Eastern District of to [email protected] or for an additional 30 days for public Pennsylvania in United States of mailed to the Assistant Attorney comment until September 24, 2012. America; Commonwealth of General, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box This process is conducted in accordance Pennsylvania; City of Philadelphia; 7611, Washington, DC 20044–7611. with 5 CFR 1320.10. State of Oklahoma; and State of Ohio v. During the public comment period, Written comments concerning this Sunoco, Inc., Civil Action 05–02866. the Proposed Fourth Amendment to the information collection should be sent to The Court entered the Original Consent Decree may be examined and the Office of Information and Regulatory Consent Decree in this case on March downloaded for free at the following Affairs, Office of Management and 21, 2006. The Court entered the First Department of Justice Web site: http:// Budget, Attn: DOJ Desk Officer. The best Amendment to the Consent Decree on www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ way to ensure your comments are June 3, 2009. On August 31, 2011, the Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the received is to email them to Court entered and approved the Second Proposed Fourth Amendment to the [email protected] or fax and Third Amendments to the Consent Consent Decree may also be obtained by them to 202–395–7285. All comments Decree. mail from the Consent Decree Library, should reference the eight digit OMB This Fourth Amendment to the P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Department of number or the title of the collection. Consent Decree proposes four revisions Justice, Washington, DC 20044–7611 or Written comments and suggestions to the consent decree. They are: (1) A by faxing or emailing a request to from the public and affected agencies transfer of uncompleted or ongoing ‘‘Consent Decree Copy’’ concerning the proposed collection of responsibilities for the Philadelphia ([email protected]), fax no. information are encouraged. Your Refinery to PES R&M LLC; (2) an (202) 514–0097, phone confirmation comments should address one or more extension of the time for achieving final number (202) 514–5271. If requesting a of the following four points: SO2 and NOx emissions limits at copy from the Consent Decree Library —Evaluate whether the proposed Philadelphia’s 868 FCCU from 2014 by mail, please enclose a check in the collection of information is necessary until 2016; (3) allowance of the amount of $8.00 (25 cents per page for the proper performance of the emissions reductions achieved by reproduction cost) payable to the U.S. functions of the agency, including reaching the final SO2 and NOx limits Treasury or, if requesting by email or whether the information will have on the 868 FCCU or achieved from the fax, forward a check in that amount to practical utility;
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51577
—Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s NE., Room 2E–508, Washington, DC —Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the 20530. estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, Dated: August 21, 2012. proposed collection of information, including the validity of the Jerri Murray, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; methodology and assumptions used; Department Clearance Officer, PRA, United —Enhance the quality, utility, and States Department of Justice. —Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be [FR Doc. 2012–20856 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] clarity of the information to be collected; and BILLING CODE 4410–FY–P collected; and —Minimize the burden of the collection —Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms and Explosives collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., [OMB Number 1140–0091] of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of permitting electronic submission of responses. Agency Information Collection responses. Activities; Proposed Collection; Summary of Information Collection Summary of Information Collection Comments Requested: National (1) Type of Information Collection: Response Team Customer Satisfaction Extension without change of a currently (1) Type of Information Collection: Survey approved collection. Reinstatement with change of a previously approved collection. (2) Title of the Form/Collection: ACTION: 30-Day notice of information (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Firearms Transaction Record, Part 1, collection under review. Over-the-Counter. National Response Team Customer (3) Agency form number, if any, and The Department of Justice (DOJ), Satisfaction Survey. the applicable component of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms (3) Agency form number, if any, and Department of Justice sponsoring the and Explosives (ATF) will be submitting the applicable component of the collection: Form Number: ATF F 4473 the following information collection Department of Justice sponsoring the (5300.9) Part 1, Bureau of Alcohol, request to the Office of Management and collection: Form Number: None. Bureau Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Budget (OMB) for review and approval of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and (4) Affected public who will be asked in accordance with the Paperwork Explosives. or required to respond, as well as a brief Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed (4) Affected public who will be asked abstract: Primary: Individuals or information collection is published to or required to respond, as well as a brief households. Other: Business or other obtain comments from the public and abstract: Primary: State, Local or Tribal for-profit. affected agencies. This proposed Government. Other: None. information collection was previously Need for Collection published in the Federal Register Need for Collection The form is used to determine the Volume 77, Number 122, page 37919 on The Arson and Explosives Programs eligibility, under the Gun Control Act June 25, 2012, allowing for a 60-day Division (AEPD) of the Bureau of (GCA), of a person to receive a firearm comment period. Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and from a Federal firearms licensee and to The purpose of this notice is to allow Explosives distributes a program- establish the identity of the buyer/ for an additional 30 days for public specific customer satisfaction survey to transferee. It is also used in law comment until September 24, 2012. more effectively capture customer enforcement investigations/inspections This process is conducted in accordance perception/satisfaction of services. to trace firearms and confirm that with 5 CFR 1320.10. AEPD’s strategy is based on a Written comments concerning this licensees are complying with their commitment to provide the kind of information collection should be sent to recordkeeping obligations under the customer service that will better the Office of Information and Regulatory GCA. accomplish ATF’s mission. (5) An estimate of the total number of Affairs, Office of Management and respondents and the amount of time Budget, Attn: DOJ Desk Officer. The best (5) An estimate of the total number of estimated for an average respondent to way to ensure your comments are respondents and the amount of time respond: It is estimated that 14,409,616 received is to email them to estimated for an average respondent to respondents will respond to the [email protected] or fax respond: It is estimated that 20 collection each year and that the total them to 202–395–7285. All comments respondents will complete a 15-minute amount of time to read the instructions should reference the eight digit OMB survey. and complete the form on average is 30 number or the title of the collection. (6) An estimate of the total public minutes. Written comments and suggestions burden (in hours) associated with the (6) An estimate of the total public from the public and affected agencies collection: There are an estimated 5 burden (in hours) associated with the concerning the proposed collection of annual total burden hours associated collection: ATF estimates 7,204,808 information are encouraged. Your with this collection. annual total burden hours associated comments should address one or more If additional information is required with this collection. of the following four points: contact: Jerri Murray, Department If additional information is required —Evaluate whether the proposed Clearance Officer, Policy and Planning contact: Jerri Murray, Department collection of information is necessary Staff, Justice Management Division, Clearance Officer, Policy and Planning for the proper performance of the United States Department of Justice, Staff, Justice Management Division, functions of the agency, including Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street United States Department of Justice, whether the information will have NE., Room 2E–508, Washington, DC Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street practical utility; 20530.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51578 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
Dated: August 21, 2012. —Enhance the quality, utility, and • First and last names Jerri Murray, clarity of the information to be • Demographic information: Sex; race; Department Clearance Officer, PRA, United collected; and Hispanic origin; education level States Department of Justice. —Minimize the burden of the collection • Offense type and number of counts [FR Doc. 2012–20858 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] of information on those who are to per inmate for a maximum of three BILLING CODE 4410–FY–P respond, including through the use of convicted offenses per inmate appropriate automated, electronic, • Prior time spent in prison and jail, mechanical, or other technological and prior felony convictions DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE collection techniques or other forms • Total sentence length imposed of information technology, e.g., • Additional offenses and sentence time Office of Justice Programs permitting electronic submission of imposed since prison admission • [OMB Number 1121–0065] responses. Type of facility where inmate is serving sentence (for yearend Overview of This Information custody census records only, the Agency Information Collection Collection Activities: Existing Collection; name of the facility is requested) Comments Requested: Extension of a (1) Type of Information Collection: • Type of prison admission Currently Approved Collection; Extension of a currently approved • Type of prison release National Corrections Reporting collection. • Whether inmate was AWOL/escape (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Program during incarceration National Corrections Reporting Program. • Agency assuming custody of inmate ACTION: Correction 30-Day Notice. The collection includes the forms: released from prison (parole records Prisoner Admission Report, Prisoner only) The Department of Justice (DOJ), Release Report, Parole Release Report, • Supervision status prior to discharge Bureau of Justice Statistics, will be Prisoners in Custody at Yearend Report. from parole and type of discharge submitting the following information (3) Agency form number, if any, and In addition, BJS is requesting OMB collection request to the Office of the applicable component of the clearance to add the following items to Management and Budget (OMB) for Department of Justice sponsoring the the NCRP collection, all of which are review and approval in accordance with collection: Form number(s): NCRP–1A, likely available from the same databases the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. NCRP–1B, NCRP–1C, and NCRP–1D. as existing data elements, and should The proposed information collection is Corrections Statistics Unit, Bureau of therefore pose minimal additional published to obtain comments from the Justice Statistics, Office of Justice burden to the respondents, while greatly public and affected agencies. This Programs, United States Department of enhancing BJS’ ability to better proposed information collection was Justice. characterize the corrections systems and previously published in the Federal (4) Affected public who will be asked populations it serves: Register, Volume 77, Number 116, pages or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: The National Corrections • Date and type of parole admission 36002–36003, on June 15, 2012, • allowing for a 60 day comment period. Reporting Program (NCRP) is the only Location of parole discharge or parole The purpose of this notice is to allow national data collection furnishing office • for an additional 30 days for public annual individual-level information for FBI identification number • comment until September 24, 2012. state prisoners at four points in the Prior military service, date and type of This process is conducted in accordance incarceration process: prison admission; last discharge with 5 CFR 1320.10. prison release; annual yearend prison BJS uses the information gathered in If you have comments especially on custody census; and discharge from NCRP in published reports and the estimated public burden or parole/community corrections statistics. The reports will be made associated response time, suggestions, supervision. BJS, the U.S. Congress, available to the U.S. Congress, Executive or need a copy of the proposed researchers, and criminal justice Office of the President, practitioners, information collection instrument with practitioners use these data to describe researchers, students, the media, others instructions or additional information, annual movements of adult offenders interested in criminal justice statistics, please contact Elizabeth Ann Carson, through state correctional systems, as and the general public via the BJS Web Ph.D., Bureau of Justice Statistics, 810 well as to examine long term trends in site. Seventh Street NW., Washington, DC time served in prison, demographic and (5) An estimate of the total number of 20531 (phone: 202–616–3496). offense characteristics of inmates, respondents and the amount of time Written comments and suggestions sentencing practices in the states that estimated for an average respondent to from the public and affected agencies submit data, transitions between respond: BJS anticipates 57 respondents concerning the proposed collection of incarceration and community to NCRP for report year 2012: 50 state information are encouraged. Your corrections, and recidivism. Providers of respondents; the California Juvenile comments should address one or more the data are personnel in the states’ Justice Division; and in six states, of the following four points: Departments of Corrections and Parole, separate state parole departments —Evaluate whether the proposed and all data are submitted on a respond to the NCRP–1C request. Each collection of information is necessary voluntary basis. The NCRP collects the respondent currently submitting NCRP for the proper performance of the following administrative data on each data will require an estimated 28 hours functions of the agency, including inmate in participating states’ custody: of time to supply the information for whether the information will have • County of sentencing their annual caseload and an additional practical utility; • State inmate identification number 3 hours documenting or explaining the —Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies • Dates of: Birth; prison admission; data for a total of 1,200 hours. For the estimate of the burden of the prison release; parole discharge; 14 states which have never submitted proposed collection of information, parole eligibility hearing; projected data or are returning to NCRP including the validity of the prison release; mandatory prison submission following a lapse of several methodology and assumptions used; release years, the total first year’s burden
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51579
estimate is 930 hours, which includes constraints may limit the number of Signed in Washington, DC, this 17th day of the time required for developing or outside participants/presentations. August 2012. modifying computer programs to extract Individuals who will need John K. Moran, the data, performing and checking the accommodations for a disability in order Deputy Assistant Secretary, Veterans’ Employment and Training Service. extracted data, and submitting it to attend the meeting (i.e., interpreting electronically to BJS’ data collection [FR Doc. 2012–20871 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] services, assistive listening devices, agency via SFTP. The total burden for BILLING CODE 4510–79–P and/or materials in alternative format) all 57 NCRP data providers is 2,121 hours for report year 2012. Starting with should notify the Advisory Committee report year 2013, this burden will no later than Wednesday, September 12, 2012 by contacting Mr. Gregory Green NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE decrease to 1,326 hours since all states ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES will have data extract programs created (202) 693–4734. Requests made after and need only make minor this date will be reviewed, but Meetings of Humanities Panel; modifications to obtain report year 2013 availability of the requested Correction data. All states submit data via a secure accommodations cannot be guaranteed. file transfer protocol (SFTP) electronic The meeting site is accessible to AGENCY: National Endowment for the upload. individuals with disabilities. This Humanities, National Foundation on the (6) An estimate of the total public notice also describes the functions of Arts and the Humanities. burden (in hours) associated with the the Advisory Committee. Notice of this ACTION: Notice of meetings; correction. collection: There are an estimated 2,121 meeting is required under Section total burden hours associated with this 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory SUMMARY: The National Endowment for collection for report year 2012. Starting Committee Act. This document is the Humanities published a document in report year 2013, the total estimated intended to notify the general public. in the Federal Register of August 14, burden will be 1,326 hours. The Designated Federal Official is 2012, concerning notice of meetings of the Humanities Panel during the month If additional information is required Areon Kelvington. contact: Jerri Murray, Department of September 2012. Two of the meetings Clearance Officer, United States DATES: Date and Time: Thursday, have been cancelled and rescheduled as Department of Justice, Justice September 19, 2012, beginning at 10:00 one meeting. All other information in Management Division, Policy and a.m. and ending at approximately 4:30 the notice remains the same. Planning Staff, Two Constitution p.m. (E.S.T.). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisette Voyatzis, Committee Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 2E–508, ADDRESSES: Department of Labor, 200 Management Officer, at (202) 606–8322. Washington, DC 20530. Constitution Ave. NW., Room Dated: August 21, 2012. N5437A&B, Washington, DC 20210. ID Correction Jerri Murray, is required to enter the building. In the Federal Register of August 14, Department Clearance Officer, PRA, U.S. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 2012, in FR Doc. 2012–19899, on page Department of Justice. Mr. Gregory Green, Special Assistant to the 48553, in the first and second columns, [FR Doc. 2012–20857 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Designated Federal Official, Advisory remove items 9 and 10 and replace with: BILLING CODE 4410–18–P Committee on Veterans’ Employment, 9. Date: September 24, 2012. Training and Employer Outreach. (202) Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 693–4734. Room: 315. This meeting will DEPARTMENT OF LABOR discuss applications for the Bridging SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ACVETEO Cultures at Community Colleges: Advisory Committee on Veterans’ is a Congressionally mandated Advisory Request for Proposals for a Cooperative Employment, Training and Employer Committee authorized under Title 38, Agreement program, submitted to the Outreach (ACVETEO): Meeting U.S. Code, Section 4110 and subject to Division of Education Programs. AGENCY: Veterans’ Employment and the Federal Advisory Committee Act Dated: August 20, 2012. Training Service, Labor. (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2, as amended. Lisette Voyatzis, The ACVETEO is responsible for: ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting. Committee Management Officer. Assessing employment and training [FR Doc. 2012–20874 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] needs of Veterans; determining the SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the BILLING CODE 7536–01–P schedule and proposed agenda of a extent to which the programs and forthcoming meeting of the Advisory activities of the U.S. Department of Committee on Veterans’ Employment, Labor meet these needs; assisting to Training and Employer Outreach conduct outreach to employers seeking NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (ACVETEO). The ACVETEO will to hire Veterans; making discuss Department of Labor’s Veterans recommendations to the Secretary, Application for a License To Export Employment and Training Services’ through the Assistant Secretary of Labor High-Enriched Uranium (VETS) core programs and new for Veterans’ Employment and Training, initiatives regarding efforts that assist with respect to outreach activities and Pursuant to 10 CFR 110.70 (b) ‘‘Public veterans seeking employment and raise employment and training needs of Notice of Receipt of an Application,’’ employer awareness as to the Veterans; and carrying out such other please take notice that the Nuclear advantages of hiring veterans. There activities necessary to make required Regulatory Commission (NRC) has will be an opportunity for persons or reports and recommendations. received the following request for an organizations to address the committee. ACVETEO meets at least quarterly. export license. Copies of the request are Any individual or organization that available electronically through ADAMS wishes to do so should contact Mr. and can be accessed through the Public Gregory Green (202) 693–4734. Time Electronic Reading Room (PERR) link
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51580 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html at Department of State, Washington, DC calling (301) 415–1677, to request a the NRC Homepage. 20520. digital ID certificate and allow for the A request for a hearing or petition for A request for a hearing or petition for creation of an electronic docket. leave to intervene may be filed within leave to intervene may be filed with the In addition to a request for hearing or thirty days after publication of this NRC electronically in accordance with petition for leave to intervene, written NRC’s E-Filing rule promulgated in comments, in accordance with 10 CFR notice in the Federal Register. Any August 2007, 72 Fed. Reg 49139 (Aug. 110.81, should be submitted within request for hearing or petition for leave 28, 2007). Information about filing thirty (30) days after publication of this to intervene shall be served by the electronically is available on the NRC’s notice in the Federal Register to Office requestor or petitioner upon the public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/ of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear applicant, the office of the General site-help/e-submittals.html. To ensure Regulatory Commission, Washington, Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory timely electronic filing, at least 5 (five) DC 20555, Attention: Rulemaking and Commission, Washington, DC 20555; days prior to the filing deadline, the Adjudications. the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory petitioner/requestor should contact the The information concerning this Commission, Washington, DC 20555; Office of the Secretary by email at application for an export license and the Executive Secretary, U.S. [email protected], or by follows.
NRC EXPORT LICENSE APPLICATION [Description of material]
Name of applicant, date of application, date received, application No., docket Material type Total quantity End use Destination No.
DOE/NNSA—Y–12 National Security High-Enriched Ura- 7.0 kilograms ura- For the export of high-enriched uranium Canada. Complex, July 30, 2012, August 1, nium (93.35%). nium-235 con- in the form of broken metal to the 2012, XSNM3726, 11006037. tained in 7.5 kilo- Atomic Energy of Canada Limited grams uranium. (AECL) laboratories in Canada, for the production of targets for the use in medical isotopes production.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. with representatives of the NRC staff 3:30 p.m.–4:30 p.m.: Assessment of Dated this 20th day of August 2012 at regarding a proposed revision to RG– the Quality of Selected NRC Research Rockville, Maryland. 1.59, ‘‘Design-Basis Floods for Nuclear Projects (Open)—The Members of the Mark R. Shaffer, Power Plants.’’ ACRS panels will hold discussions on Deputy Director, Office of International 10:15 a.m.–12:15 p.m.: Interim Staff the quality assessment of the following Programs. Guidance 8 (ISG–8), Revision 3, NRC research projects: (1) NUREG– [FR Doc. 2012–20912 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] ‘‘Burnup Credit in the Criticality Safety 1953, ‘‘Confirmatory Thermal-Hydraulic BILLING CODE 7590–01–P Analyses of PWR Spent Fuel in Analysis to Support Specific Success Criteria in the Standardized Plant Transport and Storage Casks’’ (Open)— Analysis Risk Models-Surry and Peach The Committee will hear presentations NUCLEAR REGULATORY Bottom,’’ and (2) NUREG/CR–7040, by and hold discussions with COMMISSION ‘‘Evaluation of JNES Equipment representatives of the NRC staff Fragility Tests for Use in Seismic regarding ISG–8, Revision 3, ‘‘Burnup Advisory Committee on Reactor Probabilistic Risk Assessments for U.S. Safeguards; Notice of Meeting Credit in the Criticality Safety Analyses Nuclear Power Plants.’’ of PWR Spent Fuel in Transport and 4:45 p.m.–7 p.m.: Preparation of In accordance with the purposes of Storage Casks.’’ Sections 29 and 182b of the Atomic ACRS Reports (Open/Closed)—The 1:15 p.m.–3:15 p.m.: Selected Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2039, 2232b), the Committee will discuss proposed ACRS Advisory Committee on Reactor Chapters of the Safety Evaluation reports on matters discussed during this Safeguards (ACRS) will hold a meeting Reports (SERs) with Open Items meeting. The Committee will also on September 6–8, 2012, 11545 Associated with the US Advanced discuss a proposed ACRS report on the Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Pressurized Water Reactor (US–APWR) Technical Basis for Regulating Extended Design Certification and the Comanche Storage and Transportation of Spent Thursday, September 6, 2012, Peak Combined License Application Nuclear Fuel. [Note: A portion of this Conference Room T2–B1, 11545 (COLA) (Open/Closed)—The Committee session may be closed in order to Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland will hear presentations by and hold discuss and protect information 8:30 a.m.–8:35 a.m.: Opening discussions with representatives of the designated as proprietary, pursuant to 5 Remarks by the ACRS Chairman NRC staff, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries U.S.C 552b(c)(4)] and Luminant Generation Company (Open)—The ACRS Chairman will make Friday, September 7, 2012, Conference regarding selected chapters of the SERs opening remarks regarding the conduct Room T2–B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, with Open Items associated with the of the meeting. Rockville, Maryland 8:35 a.m.–10 a.m.: Draft Regulatory US–APWR Design Certification and the Guide 1290 (Proposed Revision to Comanche Peak COLA. [Note: A portion 8:30 a.m.–8:35 a.m.: Opening Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.59), ‘‘Design- of this session may be closed in order Remarks by the ACRS Chairman Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants’’ to discuss and protect information (Open)—The ACRS Chairman will make (Open)—The Committee will hear designated as proprietary, pursuant to 5 opening remarks regarding the conduct presentations by and hold discussions U.S.C 552b(c)(4)] of the meeting.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51581
8:35 a.m.–9 a.m.: Meeting with the that were not completed during the meeting to ensure the availability of NRC Chairman (Open)—The Committee previous meetings. this service. Individuals or will hold discussions with the NRC Procedures for the conduct of and organizations requesting this service Chairman to discuss items of mutual participation in ACRS meetings were will be responsible for telephone line interest. published in the Federal Register on charges and for providing the 9:15 a.m.–10:45 a.m.: Future ACRS October 17, 2011, (76 FR 64126–64127). equipment and facilities that they use to Activities/Report of the Planning and In accordance with those procedures, establish the video teleconferencing Procedures Subcommittee (Open/ oral or written views may be presented link. The availability of video Closed)—The Committee will discuss by members of the public, including teleconferencing services is not the recommendations of the Planning representatives of the nuclear industry. guaranteed. and Procedures Subcommittee regarding Persons desiring to make oral statements Dated: August 21, 2012. items proposed for consideration by the should notify Antonio Dias, Cognizant Andrew L. Bates, Full Committee during future ACRS ACRS Staff (Telephone: 301–415–6805, Meetings, and matters related to the Email: [email protected]), five days Advisory Committee Management Officer. conduct of ACRS business, including before the meeting, if possible, so that [FR Doc. 2012–20928 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] anticipated workload and member appropriate arrangements can be made BILLING CODE 7590–01–P assignments. [Note: A portion of this to allow necessary time during the meeting may be closed pursuant to 5 meeting for such statements. In view of NUCLEAR REGULATORY U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6) to discuss the possibility that the schedule for COMMISSION organizational and personnel matters ACRS meetings may be adjusted by the that relate solely to internal personnel Chairman as necessary to facilitate the Request for a License To Export rules and practices of ACRS, and conduct of the meeting, persons Nuclear Grade Graphite information the release of which would planning to attend should check with constitute a clearly unwarranted the Cognizant ACRS staff if such Pursuant to 10 CFR 110.70 (b) ‘‘Public invasion of personal privacy.] rescheduling would result in major Notice of Receipt of an Application,’’ 10:45 a.m.–11 a.m.: Reconciliation of inconvenience. please take notice that the Nuclear ACRS Comments and Thirty-five hard copies of each Regulatory Commission (NRC) has Recommendations (Open)—The presentation or handout should be received the following request for an Committee will discuss the responses provided 30 minutes before the meeting. export license. Copies of the request are from the NRC Executive Director for In addition, one electronic copy of each available electronically through ADAMS Operations to comments and presentation should be emailed to the and can be accessed through the Public recommendations included in recent Cognizant ACRS Staff one day before Electronic Reading Room (PERR) link ACRS reports and letters. meeting. If an electronic copy cannot be http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html at 11 a.m.–12 p.m.: Significant provided within this timeframe, the NRC Homepage. Operating Experience (Open)—The presenters should provide the Cognizant A request for a hearing or petition for Committee will hear a report and hold ACRS Staff with a CD containing each leave to intervene may be filed within discussions with the Chairman of the presentation at least 30 minutes before thirty days after publication of this ACRS Subcommittee on Plant the meeting. notice in the Federal Register. Any Operations and Fire Protection In accordance with Subsection 10(d) request for hearing or petition for leave regarding significant operating Public Law 92–463, and 5 U.S.C. to intervene shall be served by the experience, insights gained from these 552b(c), certain portions of this meeting requestor or petitioner upon the events, and any follow-up actions by the may be closed, as specifically noted applicant, the office of the General Subcommittee and/or the Full above. Use of still, motion picture, and Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Committee. television cameras during the meeting Commission, Washington, DC 20555; 1 p.m.–7 p.m.: Preparation of ACRS may be limited to selected portions of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Reports (Open/Closed)—The Committee the meeting as determined by the Commission, Washington, DC 20555; will continue its discussion on Chairman. Electronic recordings will be and the Executive Secretary, U.S. proposed ACRS reports on matters permitted only during the open portions Department of State, Washington, DC discussed during this meeting. [Note: A of the meeting. 20520. portion of this session may be closed in ACRS meeting agenda, meeting A request for a hearing or petition for order to discuss and protect information transcripts, and letter reports are leave to intervene may be filed with the designated as proprietary, pursuant to 5 available through the NRC Public NRC electronically in accordance with U.S.C 552b(c)(4)] Document Room at NRC’s E-Filing rule promulgated in [email protected], or by calling the August 2007, 72 FR 49139 (Aug. 28, Saturday, September 8, 2012, PDR at 1–800–397–4209, or from the 2007). Information about filing Conference Room T2–B1, 11545 Publicly Available Records System electronically is available on the NRC’s Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland (PARS) component of NRC’s document public Web site at http://www.rnc.gov/ 8:30 a.m.–11:30 a.m.: Preparation of system (ADAMS) which is accessible site-help/e-submittals.html. To ensure ACRS Reports (Open/Closed)—The from the NRC Web site at http:// timely electronic filing, at least 5 (five) Committee will continue its discussion www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html or days prior to the filing deadline, the of proposed ACRS reports. [Note: A http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc- petitioner/requestor should contact the portion of this session may be closed in collections/ACRS/. Office of the Secretary by email at order to discuss and protect information Video teleconferencing service is [email protected], or by designated as proprietary, pursuant to 5 available for observing open sessions of calling (301) 415–1677, to request a U.S.C 552b(c)(4)] ACRS meetings. Those wishing to use digital ID certificate and allow for the 11:30 a.m.–12 p.m.: Miscellaneous this service should contact Mr. Theron creation of an electronic docket. (Open)—The Committee will discuss Brown, ACRS Audio Visual Technician In addition to a request for hearing or matters related to the conduct of (301–415–8066), between 7:30 a.m. and petition for leave to intervene, written Committee activities and specific issues 3:45 p.m. (ET), at least 10 days before comments, in accordance with 10 CFR
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51582 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
110.81, should be submitted within Regulatory Commission, Washington, The information concerning this thirty (30) days after publication of this DC 20555, Attention: Rulemaking and export license application follows. notice in the Federal Register to Office Adjudications of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear
NRC EXPORT LICENSE APPLICATION [Description of material]
Name of applicant, date of applica- tion, date received, application No., Material type Total quantity End use Recipient docket No. country
GrafTech International Inc., June Nuclear grade 40,000.0 kilo- Nuclear grade graphite to the Shanghai Institute of China. 26, 2012, June 27, 2012, graphite for nu- grams of nu- Applied Physics in China to test various types of XMAT424, 11006032. clear end use. clear grade nuclear grade graphite material in a molten salt graphite. type nuclear reactor.
For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. or calling (202) 326–4040 during normal QDROs, and that the decision as to Dated this 20th day of August 2012 in business hours. (TTY and TDD users whether a domestic relations order is a Rockville, Maryland. may call the Federal relay service toll QDRO is made by the plan Mark R. Shaffer, free at 1–800–877–8339 and ask to be administrator. When PBGC is trustee of Deputy Director, Office of International connected to (202) 326–4040.) The a plan, it reviews submitted domestic Programs. request is also available at relations orders to determine whether [FR Doc. 2012–20922 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] www.reginfo.gov. PBGC’s current QDRO the order is qualified before paying BILLING CODE 7590–01–P booklet is available on PBGC’s Web site benefits to an alternate payee. The at www.pbgc.gov. requirements for submitting a QDRO are FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jo established by statute. PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY Amato Burns, Attorney, Legislative and To simplify the process, PBGC has CORPORATION Regulatory Department, Pension Benefit included model QDROs and Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street accompanying guidance in a booklet, Submission of Information Collection NW., Washington, DC 20005–4026, 202– Qualified Domestic Relations Orders & for OMB Review; Comment Request; 326–4024. (TTY and TDD users may call PBGC. The models and guidance assist Qualified Domestic Relations Orders the Federal relay service toll-free at 1– parties by making it easier to comply Submitted to PBGC 800–877–8339 and ask to be connected with ERISA’s QDRO requirements when to 202–326–4024.) drafting orders for plans trusteed by AGENCY: Pension Benefit Guaranty SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PBGC. The booklet does not create any Corporation. PBGC is requesting that OMB extend its approval additional requirements. ACTION: Notice of request for extension of the guidance and model language and PBGC is making the following of OMB approval. forms contained in the PBGC booklet, changes to the QDRO booklet: • For a participant who is already in pay SUMMARY: Pension Benefit Guaranty Qualified Domestic Relations Orders & PBGC. status, PBGC will not suspend benefits upon Corporation (‘‘PBGC’’) is requesting that receipt of a draft domestic relations order or the Office of Management and Budget A defined benefit pension plan that does not have enough money to pay any pleading intended to add PBGC as a (‘‘OMB’’) extend approval, under the party to a domestic relations action, Paperwork Reduction Act, of the benefits may be terminated if the including a request for joinder. PBGC will collection of information in PBGC’s employer responsible for the plan faces suspend benefits only upon receipt of an booklet Qualified Domestic Relations severe financial difficulty, such as original signed domestic relations order or a Orders & PBGC (OMB control number bankruptcy, and is unable to maintain certified or authenticated copy. the plan. In such an event, PBGC • For a participant who is not in pay 1212–0054; expires August 31, 2012). status, but whose application is pending, This notice informs the public of becomes trustee of the plan and pays benefits, subject to legal limits, to plan PBGC will place a hold on putting the PBGC’s request and solicits public participant in pay status’s application for comment on the collection of participants and beneficiaries. benefits upon receipt of a draft order or any information. The benefits of a pension plan pleading intended to add PBGC as a party to participant generally may not be a domestic relations action, including a DATES: Comments should be submitted assigned or alienated. However, Title I request for joinder. by September 24, 2012. of ERISA provides an exception for • If a separate interest order is silent as to ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to domestic relations orders that relate to what happens if an alternate payee dies the Office of Information and Regulatory child support, alimony payments, or the before commencing benefits, PBGC will treat Affairs, Office of Management and marital property rights of an alternate the separate interest as reverting to the participant, not being forfeited to PBGC. Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for payee (a spouse, former spouse, child, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, or other dependent of a plan PBGC is also making other simplifying via electronic mail at participant). The exception applies only and clarifying changes to the QDRO [email protected] or by fax if the domestic relations order meets booklet. to (202) 395–6974. specific legal requirements that make it The collection of information has A copy of PBGC’s request may be a qualified domestic relations order, or been approved through August 31, 2012, obtained without charge by writing to ‘‘QDRO.’’ by OMB under control number 1212– the Disclosure Division of the Office of ERISA provides that pension plans 0054. PBGC is requesting that OMB the General Counsel of PBGC at the are required to comply with only those extend approval of the collection of above address or by visiting that office domestic relations orders which are information for three years. An agency
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51583
may not conduct or sponsor, and a Postal Service asserts that First-Class redacted portions of the contract, person is not required to respond to, a Package Service Contract 15 is a customer-identifying information, and collection of information unless it competitive product ‘‘not of general related financial information should displays a currently valid OMB control applicability’’ within the meaning of 39 remain confidential. Id. at 3. This number. U.S.C. 3632(b)(3). Request at 1. The information includes the price structure, PBGC estimates that it will receive Request has been assigned Docket No. underlying costs and assumptions, 1,361 domestic relations orders MC2012–45. pricing formulas, information relevant annually and that the average annual The Postal Service to the customer’s mailing profile, and burden of this collection of information contemporaneously filed a redacted cost coverage projections. Id. The Postal is 4,138 hours and $870,400. contract related to the proposed new Service asks the Commission to protect Issued in Washington, DC, this 21st day of product under 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and customer-identifying information from August 2012. 39 CFR 3015.5. Id. Attachment B. The public disclosure indefinitely. Id. at 7. instant contract has been assigned Catherine B. Klion, II. Notice of Filings Manager, Regulatory and Policy Division, Docket No. CP2012–53. Legislative and Regulatory Department. Request. To support its Request, the The Commission establishes Docket Postal Service filed six attachments as Nos. MC2012–45 and CP2012–53 to [FR Doc. 2012–20891 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] follows: consider the Request pertaining to the BILLING CODE 7709–01–P • Attachment A—a redacted copy of proposed First-Class Package Service Governors’ Decision No. 11–6, Contract 15 product and the related authorizing the new product; contract, respectively. POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION • Attachment B—a redacted copy of Interested persons may submit the contract; comments on whether the Postal [Docket Nos. MC2012–45 and CP2012–53; • Order No. 1443] Attachment C—proposed changes Service’s filings in the captioned to the Mail Classification Schedule dockets are consistent with the policies New Postal Product competitive product list with the of 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or 3642, 39 CFR addition underlined; AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. • 3015.5, and 39 CFR part 3020, subpart Attachment D—a Statement of B. Comments are due no later than ACTION: Notice. Supporting Justification as required by August 28, 2012. The public portions of 39 CFR 3020.32; SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a these filings can be accessed via the • Attachment E—a certification of recently-filed Postal Service request to Commission’s Web site (http:// compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a); and www.prc.gov). add First-Class Package Service Contract • Attachment F—an application for The Commission appoints Natalie Rea 15 to the competitive product list. This non-public treatment of materials to Ward to serve as Public Representative notice addresses procedural steps maintain redacted portions of the in these dockets. associated with this filing. contract and related financial DATES: Comments are due: August 28, information under seal. III. It is ordered 2012. In the Statement of Supporting It is ordered: Justification, Dennis R. Nicoski, ADDRESSES: Submit comments 1. The Commission establishes Docket Manager, Field Sales Strategy and electronically via the Commission’s Nos. MC2012–45 and CP2012–53 to Contracts, asserts that the contract will Filing Online system at consider the matters raised in each cover its attributable costs, make a http:www.prc.gov. Commenters who docket. positive contribution to covering cannot submit their views electronically 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Natalie institutional costs, and increase should contact the person identified in Rea Ward is appointed to serve as an contribution toward the requisite 5.5 the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT officer of the Commission (Public percent of the Postal Service’s total portion of the preamble for advice on Representative) to represent the institutional costs. Id. Attachment D at alternatives to electronic filing. interests of the general public in these 1. Mr. Nicoski contends that there will FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: proceedings. be no issue of market dominant Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, 3. Comments by interested persons in products subsidizing competitive at 202–789–6824. these proceedings are due no later than products as a result of this contract. Id. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: August 28, 2012. Related contract. The Postal Service 4. The Secretary shall arrange for Table of Contents included a redacted version of the publication of this order in the Federal related contract with the Request. Id. I. Introduction Register. II. Notice of Filings Attachment B. The contract is III. Ordering Paragraphs scheduled to become effective on the By the Commission. date that the Commission issues all Shoshana M. Grove, I. Introduction regulatory approval. Id. at 2. The Secretary. In accordance with 39 U.S.C. 3642 contract will expire 3 years from the [FR Doc. 2012–20852 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] and 39 CFR 3020.30 et seq., the Postal effective date unless, among other BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P Service filed a formal request and things, either party terminates the associated supporting information to agreement upon 30 days’ written notice add First-Class Package Service Contract to the other party. Id. The Postal Service 15 to the competitive product list.1 The represents that the contract is consistent POSTAL SERVICE with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a). Id. Attachment Product Change—First-Class Package 1 Request of the United States Postal Service to D. Add First-Class Package Service Contract 15 to The Postal Service filed much of the Service Negotiated Service Agreement Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of Unredacted Governors’ Decision, supporting materials, including the AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. related contract, under seal. Id. Contract, and Supporting Data, August 17, 2012 ACTION: Notice. (Request). Attachment F. It maintains that the
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51584 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives Each transaction effected under the rule recordkeeping requirement, and the staff notice of filing a request with the Postal is reported on Form N–SAR; (ii) the estimates that it takes a fund Regulatory Commission to add a fund’s directors have approved approximately 20 minutes per domestic shipping services contract to procedures for purchases made in transaction and that annually, in the the list of Negotiated Service reliance on the rule, regularly review aggregate, funds spend approximately Agreements in the Mail Classification fund purchases to determine whether 1,233 hours 4 to comply with this Schedule’s Competitive Products List. they comply with these procedures, and portion of the rule. DATES: Effective Date: August 24, 2012. approve necessary changes to the In addition, fund boards must, no less FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: procedures; and (iii) a written record of than quarterly, examine each of these Elizabeth A. Reed, 202–268–3179. each transaction effected under the rule transactions to ensure that they comply is maintained for six years, the first two with the fund’s policies and procedures. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The of which in an easily accessible place. The information or materials upon United States Postal Service® hereby The written record must state: (i) From which the board relied to come to this gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. whom the securities were acquired; (ii) determination also must be maintained 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on August 17, the identity of the underwriting and the staff estimates that it takes a 2012, it filed with the Postal Regulatory syndicate’s members; (iii) the terms of fund 1 hour per quarter and, in the Commission a Request of the United the transactions; and (iv) the aggregate, approximately 1,200 hours 5 States Postal Service to Add First-Class information or materials on which the annually to comply with this rule Package Service Contract 15 to fund’s board of directors has determined requirement. Competitive Product List. Documents that the purchases were made in The staff estimates that reviewing and are available at www.prc.gov, Docket compliance with procedures established revising as needed written procedures Nos. MC2012–45, CP2012–53. by the board. for rule 10f–3 transactions takes, on Stanley F. Mires, The rule also conditionally allows average for each fund, two hours of a Attorney, Legal Policy & Legislative Advice. managed portions of fund portfolios to compliance attorney’s time per year.6 purchase securities offered in otherwise Thus, annually, in the aggregate, the [FR Doc. 2012–20800 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] off-limits primary offerings. To qualify BILLING CODE 7710–12–P staff estimates that funds spend a total for this exemption, rule 10f–3 requires of approximately 600 hours 7 on that the subadviser that is advising the monitoring and revising rule 10f–3 purchaser be contractually prohibited procedures. Based on an analysis of SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE from providing investment advice to COMMISSION fund filings, the staff estimates that any other portion of the fund’s portfolio approximately 775 fund portfolios enter and consulting with any other of the Submission for OMB Review; into subadvisory agreements each year.8 fund’s advisers that is a principal Comment Request Based on discussions with industry underwriter or affiliated person of a representatives, the staff estimates that Upon Written Request, Copies Available principal underwriter concerning the it will require approximately 3 attorney From: Securities and Exchange fund’s securities transactions. hours to draft and execute additional Commission, Office of Investor These requirements provide a clauses in new subadvisory contracts in Education and Advocacy, mechanism for fund boards to oversee order for funds and subadvisers to be Washington, DC 20549–0213. compliance with the rule. The required able to rely on the exemptions in rule recordkeeping facilitates the Extension: 10f–3. Because these additional clauses Rule 10f–3; SEC File No. 270–237; OMB Commission staff’s review of rule 10f– are identical to the clauses that a fund Control No. 3235–0226. 3 transactions during routine fund would need to insert in their inspections and, when necessary, in Notice is hereby given that, pursuant subadvisory contracts to rely on rules connection with enforcement actions. 12d3–1, 17a–10, and 17e–1, and because to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 The staff estimates that approximately we believe that funds that use one such (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), the Securities 300 funds engage in a total of rule generally use all of these rules, we and Exchange Commission approximately 3,700 rule 10f–3 apportion this 3 hour time burden (‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the transactions each year.1 Rule 10f–3 equally to all four rules. Therefore, we Office of Management and Budget a requires that the purchasing fund create estimate that the burden allocated to request for extension and approval of a written record of each transaction that rule 10f–3 for this contract change the collections of information discussed includes, among other things, from would be 0.75 hours.9 Assuming that all below. whom the securities were purchased 775 funds that enter into new Section 10(f) of the Investment and the terms of the transaction. The subadvisory contracts each year make Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a) staff estimates 2 that it takes an average (the ‘‘Act’’) prohibits a registered fund approximately 30 minutes per investment company (‘‘fund’’) from 4 This estimate is based on the following transaction and approximately 1,850 calculations: (20 minutes × 3,700 transactions = purchasing any security during an hours 3 in the aggregate to comply with 74,000 minutes; 74,000 minutes/60 = 1,233 hours). underwriting or selling syndicate if the this portion of the rule. 5 This estimate is based on the following fund has certain relationships with a The funds also must maintain and calculation: (1 hour per quarter × 4 quarters × 300 principal underwriter for the security. preserve these transactional records in funds = 1,200 hours). Congress enacted this provision in 1940 6 These averages take into account the fact that in accordance with the rule’s most years, fund attorneys and boards spend little to protect funds and their shareholders or no time modifying procedures and in other years, by preventing underwriters from 1 These estimates are based on staff extrapolations they spend significant time doing so. ‘‘dumping’’ unmarketable securities on from filings with the Commission. 7 This estimate is based on the following affiliated funds. 2 Unless stated otherwise, the information calculation: (300 funds × 2 hours = 600 hours). Rule 10f–3 (17 CFR 270.10f–3) collection burden estimates are based on 8 Based on information in Commission filings, we conversations between the staff and representatives estimate that 44.4 percent of funds are advised by permits a fund to engage in a securities of funds. subadvisers. transaction that otherwise would violate 3 This estimate is based on the following 9 This estimate is based on the following section 10(f) if, among other things: (i) calculation: (0.5 hours × 3,700 = 1,850 hours). calculation (3 hours ÷ 4 rules = .75 hours).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51585
the modification to their contract Notice is hereby given that, pursuant plan and, thus, are necessary for required by the rule, we estimate that to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 investor protection. The requirement of the rule’s contract modification (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities quarterly reporting to the board is requirement will result in 581 burden and Exchange Commission (the designed to ensure that the rule 12b–1 hours annually.10 ‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the plan continues to benefit the fund and The staff estimates, therefore, that rule Office of Management and Budget a its shareholders. The recordkeeping 10f–3 imposes an information collection request for extension of the previously requirements of the rule are necessary to burden of 5,665 hours.11 This estimate approved collection of information enable Commission staff to oversee does not include the time spent filing discussed below. compliance with the rule. The transaction reports on Form N–SAR, Rule 12b–1 under the Investment requirement that funds or their advisers which is encompassed in the Company Act of 1940 (17 CFR 270.12b– implement, and fund boards approve, information collection burden estimate 1) permits a registered open-end policies and procedures in order to for that form. investment company (‘‘fund’’ or prevent persons charged with allocating The collection of information required ‘‘mutual fund’’) to bear expenses fund brokerage from taking distribution by rule 10f–3 is necessary to obtain the associated with the distribution of its efforts into account is designed to benefits of the rule. Responses will not shares, provided that the mutual fund ensure that funds’ selection of brokers to be kept confidential. An agency may not complies with certain requirements, effect portfolio securities transactions is conduct or sponsor, and a person is not including, among other things, that it not influenced by considerations about required to respond to, a collection of adopt a written plan (‘‘rule 12b–1 plan’’) the sale of fund shares. information unless it displays a and that it has in writing any Based on information filed with the currently valid OMB control number. agreements relating to the rule 12b–1 Commission by funds, Commission staff The public may view the background plan. The rule in part requires that (i) estimates that there are approximately documentation for this information The adoption or material amendment of 6,771 mutual fund portfolios that have collection at the following Web site, a rule 12b–1 plan be approved by the at least one share class subject to a rule www.reginfo.gov. Comments should be mutual fund’s directors, including its 12b–1 plan.1 However, many of these directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the independent directors, and, in certain portfolios are part of an affiliated group Securities and Exchange Commission, circumstances, its shareholders; (ii) the of funds, or mutual fund family, that is Office of Information and Regulatory board review quarterly reports of overseen by a common board of Affairs, Office of Management and amounts spent under the rule 12b–1 directors. Although the board must Budget, Room 10102, New Executive plan; and (iii) the board, including the review and approve the rule 12b–1 plan Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, independent directors, consider for each fund separately, we have or by sending an email to: continuation of the rule 12b–1 plan and allocated the costs and hourly burden [email protected]; and (ii) any related agreements at least annually. related to rule 12b–1 based on the Thomas Bayer, Director/Chief Rule 12b–1 also requires mutual funds number of fund families that have at Information Officer, Securities and relying on the rule to preserve for six least one fund that charges rule 12b–1 Exchange Commission, c/o Remi Pavlik- years, the first two years in an easily fees, rather than on the total number of Simon, 6432 General Green Way, accessible place, copies of the rule 12b– mutual fund portfolios that individually Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an email 1 plan and any related agreements and have a rule 12b–1 plan.2 Based on to: [email protected]. Comments reports, as well as minutes of board information filed with the Commission, must be submitted to OMB within 30 meetings that describe the factors the staff estimates that there are days of this notice. considered and the basis for adopting or approximately 375 fund families with Dated: August 20, 2012. continuing a rule 12b–1 plan. common boards of directors that have at Rule 12b–1 also prohibits funds from least one fund with a rule 12b–1 plan. Elizabeth M. Murphy, paying for distribution of fund shares Based on previous conversations with Secretary. with brokerage commissions on their fund representatives, Commission staff [FR Doc. 2012–20824 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] portfolio transactions. The rule requires estimates that for each of the 375 mutual BILLING CODE 8011–01–P funds that use broker-dealers that sell fund families with a portfolio that has their shares to also execute their a rule 12b–1 plan, the average annual portfolio securities transactions, to burden of complying with the rule is SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE implement policies and procedures 425 hours. This estimate takes into COMMISSION reasonably designed to prevent: (i) The account the time needed to prepare Submission for OMB Review; persons responsible for selecting broker- quarterly reports to the board of Comment Request dealers to effect transactions in fund directors, the board’s consideration of portfolio securities from taking into those reports, and the board’s initial or Upon Written Request, Copies Available account broker-dealers’ promotional or From: Securities and Exchange sales efforts when making those 1 This estimate is based on information from the Commission, Office of Investor decisions; and (ii) a fund, its adviser or Commission’s NSAR database. Education and Advocacy, principal underwriter, from entering 2 This allocation is based on previous conversations with fund representatives on how Washington, DC 20549–0213. into any agreement under which the fund boards comply with the requirements of rule Extension: fund directs brokerage transactions or 12b–1. Despite this allocation of hourly burdens Rule 12b–1; SEC File No. 270–188; OMB revenue generated by those transactions and costs, the number of annual responses each Control No. 3235–0212. to a broker-dealer to pay for distribution year will continue to depend on the number of fund portfolios with rule 12b–1 plans rather than the of the fund’s (or any other fund’s) number of fund families with rule 12b–1 plans. The 10 These estimates are based on the following shares. staff estimates that the number of annual responses calculations: (0.75 hours × 775 portfolios = 581 The board and shareholder approval per fund portfolio will be four per year (quarterly, burden hours). requirements of rule 12b–1 are designed with the annual reviews taking place at one of the 11 This estimate is based on the following quarterly intervals). Thus, we estimate that funds calculation: (1,850 hours + 1,233 hours + 1,200 to ensure that fund shareholders and will make 27,084 responses (6,771 fund portfolios hours + 600 hours + 581 hours + 201 hours = 5,665 directors receive adequate information × 4 responses per fund portfolio = 27,084 responses) total burden hours). to evaluate and approve a rule 12b–1 each year.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51586 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
annual consideration of whether to Exchange Commission, c/o Remi Pavlik- information collected will continue to continue the plan.3 We therefore Simon, 6432 General Green Way, aid the Commission and SROs in estimate that the total hourly burden per Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an email monitoring compliance with these year for all funds to comply with to: [email protected]. Comments requirements. In addition, the current information collection must be submitted to OMB within 30 information collected will aid those requirements under rule 12b–1, is days of this notice. subject to Rule 204 in complying with × 159,375 hours (375 fund families 425 Dated: August 20, 2012. its requirements. These collections of hours per fund family = 159,375 hours). Elizabeth M. Murphy, information are mandatory. If a currently operating fund seeks to Several provisions under Rule 204 (i) adopt a new rule 12b–1 plan or (ii) Secretary. will impose a ‘‘collection of materially increase the amount it spends [FR Doc. 2012–20825 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] information’’ within the meaning of the for distribution under its rule 12b–1 BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Paperwork Reduction Act. plan, rule 12b–1 requires that the fund obtain shareholder approval. As a I. Allocation Notification consequence, the fund will incur the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Requirement: As of December 31, 2011, cost of a proxy.4 Based on previous COMMISSION there were 4,695 registered broker- conversations with fund representatives, dealers. Each of these broker-dealers Submission for OMB Review; Commission staff estimates that could clear trades through a participant Comment Request approximately three funds per year of a registered clearing agency and, prepare a proxy in connection with the Upon Written Request Copies Available therefore, become subject to the adoption or material amendment of a From: Securities and Exchange notification requirements of Rule rule 12b–1 plan. Funds typically hire Commission, Office of Investor 204(d). If a broker-dealer has been outside legal counsel and proxy Education and Advocacy, allocated a portion of a fail to deliver solicitation firms to prepare, print, and Washington, DC. 20549–0213. position in an equity security and after mail such proxies. The staff further the beginning of regular trading hours Extension: on the applicable close-out date, the estimates that the cost of each fund’s Rule 204; SEC File No. 270–586; OMB proxy is $32,174. Thus the total annual Control No. 3235–0647. broker-dealer has to determine whether cost burden of rule 12b–1 to the fund or not that portion of the fail to deliver industry is $96,522 (3 funds requiring a Notice is hereby given that pursuant position was not closed out in proxy × $32,174 per proxy). to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 accordance with Rule 204(a), we The estimate of average burden hours (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (‘‘PRA’’), the estimate that a broker-dealer will have is made solely for the purposes of the Securities and Exchange Commission to make such determination with Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not (‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the respect to approximately 2.09 equity derived from a comprehensive or even Office of Management and Budget securities per day.1 We estimate a total a representative survey or study of the (‘‘OMB’’) a request for approval of of 2,472,762 notifications in accordance costs of Commission rules and forms. extension of the previously approved with Rule 204(d) across all broker- The collections of information collection of information provided for in dealers (that were allocated required by rule 12b–1 are necessary to Rule 204 (17 CFR 242.204) under the responsibility to close out a fail to obtain the benefits of the rule. Notices Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 deliver position) per year (4,695 broker- to the Commission will not be kept U.S.C. 78a et seq.). dealers notifying participants once per confidential. An agency may not Rule 204 requires that, subject to day 2 on 2.09 securities, multiplied by conduct or sponsor, and a person is not certain limited exceptions, if a 252 trading days in a year). The total required to respond to a collection of participant of a registered clearing estimated annual burden hours per year information unless it displays a agency has a fail to deliver position at will be approximately 395,642 burden currently valid control number. a registered clearing agency it must The public may view the background immediately close out the fail to deliver 1 As stated in the adopting release for Interim documentation for this information position by purchasing or borrowing Final Temporary Rule 204T, the Commission’s collection at the following Web site, securities by no later than the beginning Office of Economic Analysis (‘‘OEA’’) estimates that www.reginfo.gov. Comments should be of regular trading hours on the there are approximately 9,809 fail to deliver directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the settlement day following the day the positions per settlement day. Across 4,695 broker- dealers, the number of securities per broker-dealer Securities and Exchange Commission, participant incurred the fail to deliver per day is approximately 2.09 equity securities. Office of Information and Regulatory position. Rule 204 is intended to help During the period from January to July 2008, Affairs, Office of Management and further the Commission’s goal of approximately 4,321 new fail to deliver positions Budget, Room 10102, New Executive reducing fails to deliver by maintaining occurred per day. The National Securities Clearing Corporation (‘‘NSCC’’) data for this period includes Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, the reductions in fails to deliver only securities with at least 10,000 shares in fails or by sending an email to: achieved by the adoption of temporary to deliver. To account for securities with fails to [email protected]; and (ii) Rule 204T, as well as other actions deliver below 10,000 shares, the figure is multiplied Thomas Bayer, Director/Chief taken by the Commission. In addition, by a factor of 2.27. The factor is estimated from a more complete data set obtained from NSCC during Information Officer, Securities and Rule 204 is intended to help further the the period from September 16, 2008 to September Commission’s goal of addressing 22, 2008. It should be noted that these numbers 3 We do not estimate any costs or time burden potentially abusive ‘‘naked’’ short include securities that were not subject to the close- related to the recordkeeping requirements in rule selling in all equity securities. out requirement of Rule 203(b)(3) of Regulation 12b–1, as funds are either required to maintain SHO. Exchange Act Release No. 58733 (Oct. 14, these records pursuant to other rules or would keep The information collected under Rule 2008), 73 FR 61706, 61718 n.107 (Oct. 17, 2008) these records in any case as a matter of business 204 will continue to be retained and/or (‘‘Rule 204T Adopting Release’’). practice. provided to other entities pursuant to 2 Because failure to comply with the close-out 4 In general, a fund adopts a rule 12b–1 plan the specific rule provisions and will be requirements of Rule 204(a) is a violation of the before it begins operations. Therefore, the fund is rule, we believe that a broker-dealer would make not required to obtain the approval of its public available to the Commission and self- the notification to a participant that it is subject to shareholders because the fund’s shares have not yet regulatory organization (‘‘SRO’’) the borrowing requirements of Rule 204(b) at most been offered to the public. examiners upon request. The once per day.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51587
hours (2,472,762 multiplied by 0.16 deliver position was closed out in purchases or borrows securities in hours/notification). accordance with Rule 204(a), we accordance with the conditions II. Demonstration Requirement for estimate that a participant of a specified in Rule 204(e) and determines Fails to Deliver on Long Sales: As of registered clearing agency will have to that it has a net long position or net flat January 31, 2012, there were 191 make such determination with respect position on the settlement day on which participants of NSCC, the primary to approximately 51 equity securities the broker-dealer purchases or borrows registered clearing agency responsible per day.6 We estimate a total of securities we estimate that a broker- for clearing U.S. transactions that were 2,454,732 notifications in accordance dealer will have to make such registered as broker-dealers.3 If a with Rule 204(c) across all participants determination with respect to participant of a registered clearing per year (191 participants notifying approximately 2.09 securities per day.7 agency has a fail to deliver position in broker-dealers once per day on 51 As of December 31, 2011, there were an equity security at a registered securities, multiplied by 252 trading 4,695 registered broker-dealers. We clearing agency and determines that days in a year). The total estimated estimate that on average, a broker-dealer such fail to deliver position resulted annual burden hours per year will be will have to demonstrate in its books from a long sale, we estimate that a approximately 392,758 burden hours and records that it has a net long participant of a registered clearing (2,454,732 @ 0.16 hours/ position or net flat position on the agency will have to make such documentation). settlement day for which the broker- determination with respect to IV. Certification Requirement: If the dealer is claiming credit, 2,472,762 approximately 35 securities per day.4 broker-dealer determines that it has not times per year (4,695 broker-dealers We estimate a total of 1,684,620 incurred a fail to deliver position on checking for compliance once per day demonstrations in accordance with Rule settlement date in an equity security for on 2.09 securities, multiplied by 252 204(a)(1) across all participants per year which the participant has a fail to trading days in a year). The total (191 participants checking for deliver position at a registered clearing approximate estimated annual burden compliance once per day on 35 agency or has purchased securities in hour per year will be approximately securities, multiplied by 252 trading accordance with the conditions 395,642 burden hours (2,472,762 days in a year). The total approximate specified in Rule 204(e), we estimate multiplied by 0.16 hours/ estimated annual burden hour per year that a broker-dealer will have to make demonstration). will be approximately 269,540 burden such determinations with respect to The total aggregate annual burden for hours (1,684,620 multiplied by 0.16 approximately 2.09 securities per day. the collection of information undertaken hours/documentation). As of December 31, 2011, there were pursuant to all five provisions is thus III. Pre-Borrow Notification 4,695 registered broker-dealers. Each of 1,849,224 hours per year (395,642 + Requirement: As of January 31, 2012, these broker-dealers may clear trades 269,540 + 392,758 + 395,642 + 395,642). through a participant of a registered there were 191 participants of NSCC, The Commission may not conduct or clearing agency. We estimate that on the primary registered clearing agency sponsor a collection of information average, a broker-dealer will have to responsible for clearing U.S. unless it displays a currently valid OMB certify to the participant that it has not transactions that were registered as control number. No person shall be 5 incurred a fail to deliver position on broker-dealers. If a participant of a subject to any penalty for failing to settlement date in an equity security for registered clearing agency has a fail to comply with a collection of information which the participant has a fail to deliver position in an equity security subject to the PRA that does not display deliver position at a registered clearing and after the beginning of regular a valid OMB control number. trading hours on the applicable close- agency or, alternatively, that it is in Background documentation for this out date, the participant has to compliance with the requirements set information collection may be viewed at determine whether or not the fail to forth in Rule 204(e), 2,472,762 times per year (4,695 broker-dealers certifying the following Web site: 3 Those participants not registered as broker- once per day on 2.09 securities, www.reginfo.gov. Comments should be dealers include such entities as banks, U.S.- multiplied by 252 trading days in a directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the registered exchanges, and clearing agencies. year). The total approximate estimated Securities and Exchange Commission, Although these entities are participants of a Office of Information and Regulatory registered clearing agency, generally these entities annual burden hour per year will be do not engage in the types of activities that will approximately 395,642 burden hours Affairs, Office of Management and implicate the close-out requirements of the rule. (2,472,762 multiplied by 0.16 hours/ Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Such activities of these entities include creating and certification). Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, redeeming Exchange Traded Funds, trading in V. Pre-Fail Credit Demonstration or by sending an email to: municipal securities, and using NSCC’s Envelope _ Settlement Service or Inter-city Envelope Requirement: If a broker-dealer Shagufta [email protected]; and (ii) Settlement Service. These activities rarely lead to Thomas Bayer, Director/Chief fails to deliver and, if fails to deliver do occur, they 6 OEA estimates that there are approximately Information Officer, Securities and are small in number and are usually closed out 9,809 fail to deliver positions per day. Across 191 Exchange Commission, c/o Remi Pavlik- within a day. broker-dealer participants of the NSCC, the number Simon, 6432 General Green Way, 4 OEA estimates approximately 68% of trades are of securities per participant per day is Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an email long sales and applies this percentage to the approximately 51 equity securities. During the _ number of fail to deliver positions per day. OEA period from January to July 2008, approximately to: PRA [email protected]. Comments estimates that there are approximately 9,809 fail to 4,321 new fail to deliver positions occurred per day. must be submitted to OMB within 30 deliver positions per settlement day. Across 191 The NSCC data for this period includes only days of this notice. broker-dealer participants of the NSCC, the number securities with at least 10,000 shares in fails to of securities per participant per day is deliver. To account for securities with fails to Dated: August 20, 2012. approximately 51 equity securities. 68% of 51 deliver below 10,000 shares, the figure is grossed- Elizabeth M. Murphy, securities per day is approximately 35 securities per up by a factor of 2.27. The factor is estimated from day. The 68% figure is estimated as 100% minus a more complete data set obtained from NSCC Secretary. the proportion of short sale trades found in the during the period from September 16, 2008 to [FR Doc. 2012–20827 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Regulation SHO Pilot Study. See http:// September 22, 2008. It should be noted that these BILLING CODE 8011–01–P www.sec.gov/news/studies/2007/ numbers include securities that were not subject to regshopilot020607.pdf. the close-out requirement of Rule 203(b)(3) of 5 See supra note 3. Regulation SHO. 7 See supra note 1.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51588 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE in the rule, the issuer, underwriter, or they obtain affirmative written consent COMMISSION dealer has obtained from each investor to household prospectuses in the fund’s written or implied consent to account opening documentation; or (ii) Submission for OMB Review; householding.2 The rule requires do not take advantage of the Comment Request issuers, underwriters, or dealers that householding provision because of Upon Written Request, Copies Available wish to household prospectuses with electronic delivery options which lessen From: Securities and Exchange implied consent to send a notice to each the economic and operational benefits Commission, Office of Investor investor stating that the investors in the of rule 154 when compared with the Education and Advocacy, household will receive one prospectus costs of compliance. Therefore, the Washington, DC 20549–0213. in the future unless the investors Commission estimates that each direct- provide contrary instructions. In marketed fund will spend an average of Extension: addition, at least once a year, issuers, 20 hours per year complying with the Rule 154, SEC File No. 270–438, OMB underwriters, or dealers, relying on rule notice requirement of the rule, for a total Control No. 3235–0495. 154 for the householding of of 4,000 hours. Of the 400 mutual funds Notice is hereby given that, under the prospectuses relating to open-end that engage in direct marketing, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 management investment companies that Commission estimates that U.S.C. 3501–3520), the Securities and are registered under the Investment approximately seventy-five percent Exchange Commission (the Company Act of 1940 (‘‘mutual funds’’) (300) of these funds will each spend 1 ‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the must explain to investors who have hour complying with the annual Office of Management and Budget a provided written or implied consent explanation of the right to revoke request for extension of the previously how they can revoke their consent.3 requirement of the rule, for a total of 300 approved collection of information Preparing and sending the notice and hours. The Commission estimates that discussed below. the annual explanation of the right to there are approximately 280 broker- The federal securities laws generally revoke are collections of information. dealers that carry customer accounts prohibit an issuer, underwriter, or The rule allows issuers, underwriters, and, therefore, may be required to dealer from delivering a security for sale or dealers to household prospectuses if deliver mutual fund prospectuses. The unless a prospectus meeting certain certain conditions are met. Among the Commission estimates that each affected requirements accompanies or precedes conditions with which a person relying broker-dealer will spend, on average, the security. Rule 154 (17 CFR 230.154) on the rule must comply are providing approximately 20 hours complying with under the Securities Act of 1933 (15 notice to each investor that only one the notice requirement of the rule, for a U.S.C. 77a) (the ‘‘Securities Act’’) prospectus will be sent to the household total of 5,600 hours. Each broker-dealer permits, under certain circumstances, and, in the case of issuers that are will also spend 1 hour complying with delivery of a single prospectus to mutual funds, providing to each the annual explanation of the right to investors who purchase securities from investor who consents to householding revoke requirement, for a total of 280 the same issuer and share the same an annual explanation of the right to hours. Therefore, the total number of address (‘‘householding’’) to satisfy the revoke consent to the delivery of a respondents for rule 154 is 580 (300 applicable prospectus delivery single prospectus to multiple investors mutual funds plus 280 broker-dealers), requirements.1 The purpose of rule 154 sharing an address. The purpose of the and the estimated total hour burden is is to reduce the amount of duplicative notice and annual explanation approximately 10,180 hours (4,300 prospectuses delivered to investors requirements of the rule is to ensure that hours for mutual funds plus 5,880 hours sharing the same address. investors who wish to receive for broker-dealers). Under rule 154, a prospectus is individual copies of prospectuses are The estimate of average burden hours considered delivered to all investors at able to do so. is made solely for the purposes of the a shared address, for purposes of the Although rule 154 is not limited to Paperwork Reduction Act, and is not federal securities laws, if the person mutual funds, the Commission believes derived from a comprehensive or even relying on the rule delivers the that it is used mainly by mutual funds a representative survey or study of the prospectus to the shared address, and by broker-dealers that deliver costs of Commission rules and forms. addresses the prospectus to the mutual fund prospectuses. The Compliance with the collection of investors as a group or to each of the Commission is unable to estimate the information requirements of the rule is investors individually, and the investors number of issuers other than mutual necessary to obtain the benefit of relying consent to the delivery of a single funds that rely on the rule. on the rule. Responses to the collections prospectus. The rule applies to The Commission estimates that, as of of information will not be kept prospectuses and prospectus March 2012, there are approximately confidential. The rule does not require supplements. Currently, the rule 1,700 mutual funds, approximately 400 these records be retained for any permits householding of all of which engage in direct marketing and specific period of time. An agency may prospectuses by an issuer, underwriter, therefore deliver their own not conduct or sponsor, and a person is or dealer relying on the rule if, in prospectuses. Of the approximately 400 not required to respond to, a collection addition to the other conditions set forth mutual funds that engage in direct of information unless it displays a marketing, the Commission estimates currently valid control number. 1 The Securities Act requires the delivery of that approximately half of these mutual The public may view the background prospectuses to investors who buy securities from funds (200) (i) do not send the implied documentation for this information an issuer or from underwriters or dealers who consent notice requirement because collection at the following Web site, participate in a registered distribution of securities. See Securities Act sections 2(a)(10), 4(1), 4(3), 5(b) www.reginfo.gov. Comments should be (15 U.S.C. 77b(a)(10), 77d(1), 77d(3), 77e(b)); see 2 Rule 154 permits the householding of directed to: (i) Desk Officer for the also rule 174 under the Securities Act (17 CFR prospectuses that are delivered electronically to Securities and Exchange Commission, 230.174) (regarding the prospectus delivery investors only if delivery is made to a shared Office of Information and Regulatory obligation of dealers); rule 15c2–8 under the electronic address and the investors give written Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (17 CFR 240.15c2– consent to householding. Implied consent is not Affairs, Office of Management and 8) (prospectus delivery obligations of brokers and permitted in such a situation. See rule 154(b)(4). Budget, Room 10102, New Executive dealers). 3 See rule 154(c). Office Building, Washington, DC 20503,
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51589
or by sending an email to: a hearing by writing to the as investment adviser to certain closed- [email protected]; and (ii) Commission’s Secretary and serving end investment companies also Thomas Bayer, Director/Chief Applicants with a copy of the request, registered under the Act. Information Officer, Securities and personally or by mail. Hearing requests 3. KECALP and MLGPE each serves as Exchange Commission, c/o Remi Pavlik- should be received by the Commission investment adviser to certain Simon, 6432 General Green Way, by 5:30 p.m. on September 14, 2012, employees’ securities companies within Alexandria, VA 22312 or send an email and should be accompanied by proof of the meaning of section 2(a)(13) of the to: [email protected]. Comments service on Applicants, in the form of an Act (‘‘ESCs’’). KECALP and MLGPE are must be submitted to OMB within 30 affidavit, or for lawyers, a certificate of registered as investment advisers under days of this notice. service. Hearing requests should state the Advisers Act. 4. On August 20, 2012, the United Dated: August 20, 2012. the nature of the writer’s interest, the reason for the request, and the issues States District Court for the Western Elizabeth M. Murphy, contested. Persons who wish to be District of Washington entered the Secretary. notified of a hearing may request Injunction against ReconTrust, in a [FR Doc. 2012–20826 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] notification by writing to the matter brought by the Attorney General BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Commission’s Secretary. of the State of Washington (the ‘‘AG’’).2 ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities The complaint filed by the AG 3 and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street (‘‘Complaint’’) alleged that ReconTrust SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE failed to comply with the procedures of COMMISSION NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090. Applicants, ReconTrust, 1800 Tapo the Washington Deeds of Trust Act [Release No. IC–30174; 812–14068] Canyon Road, Simi Valley, CA 93063; (‘‘Deeds of Trust Act’’) in foreclosures it BofA Advisors, BofA Distributors and conducted since at least June 12, 2008. ReconTrust Company, N.A., et al.; BACA, 100 Federal Street, Boston, MA Denying any wrongdoing as alleged by Notice of Application and Temporary 02110; and KECALP and MLGPE, 767 the AG or otherwise, ReconTrust Order Fifth Avenue, 7th Floor, New York, NY consented to the entry of the Injunction, 10153. which enjoined ReconTrust from doing August 20, 2012. business as a foreclosure trustee under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: AGENCY: Securities and Exchange deeds of trust with respect to property Commission (‘‘Commission’’). Emerson S. Davis, Senior Counsel, at located in the State of Washington, (202) 551–6868, or Daniele Marchesani, ACTION: Temporary order and notice of except in certain circumstances.4 Branch Chief, at (202) 551–6821 application for a permanent order under (Division of Investment Management, Applicants’ Legal Analysis section 9(c) of the Investment Company Office of Investment Company Act of 1940 (‘‘Act’’). 1. Section 9(a)(2) of the Act, in Regulation). relevant part, prohibits a person who Summary of Application: Applicants SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The has been enjoined from acting as a bank, have received a temporary order following is a temporary order and a or from engaging in or continuing any exempting them from section 9(a) of the summary of the application. The conduct or practice in connection with Act, with respect to an injunction complete application may be obtained such activity, from acting, among other entered against ReconTrust Company, via the Commission’s Web site by things, as an investment adviser or N.A. (‘‘ReconTrust’’) on August 20, 2012 searching for the file number, or an depositor of any registered investment by the United States District Court for applicant using the Company name box, company, or a principal underwriter for the Western District of Washington (the at http://www.sec.gov/search/search. any registered open-end investment ‘‘Injunction’’), until the Commission htm or by calling (202) 551–8090. company, registered unit investment takes final action on an application for trust (‘‘UIT’’) or registered face-amount a permanent order. Applicants have Applicants’ Representations certificate company. Section 9(a)(3) of requested a permanent order. 1. Each of the Applicants is a direct the Act extends the prohibitions of Applicants: ReconTrust, BofA or indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of section 9(a)(2) to a company any Advisors, LLC (‘‘BofA Advisors’’), BofA Bank of America Corporation (‘‘BAC’’). affiliated person of which has been Distributors, Inc. (‘‘BofA Distributors’’), ReconTrust is a chartered national trust disqualified under the provisions of Bank of America Capital Advisors LLC bank that, among other things, acts as section 9(a)(2). Section 2(a)(3) of the Act (‘‘BACA’’), KECALP Inc. (‘‘KECALP’’), foreclosure trustee responsible for defines ‘‘affiliated person’’ to include, and Merrill Lynch Global Private Equity conducting nonjudicial foreclosures among others, any person directly or Inc. (‘‘MLGPE’’) (collectively, other than within several states, including the state indirectly controlling, controlled by, or ReconTrust, the ‘‘Fund Servicing of Washington until recently. under common control with, the other Applicants,’’ and, together with ReconTrust is not registered as a broker- person. Applicants state that ReconTrust, the ‘‘Applicants’’).1 dealer under the Securities Exchange ReconTrust is, or may be considered to Filing Date: The application was filed Act of 1934 or as an investment adviser be, under common control with and on August 15, 2012, and amended on under the Investment Advisers Act of therefore an affiliated person of each of August 20, 2012. 1940 (the ‘‘Advisers Act’’). Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An 2. BofA Advisors is a registered 2 State of Washington v. ReconTrust Company, order granting the application will be investment adviser that serves as N.A. No. 2:11–cv–1460 (W.D. Wash. August 20, issued unless the Commission orders a investment adviser and subadviser to 2012). 3 The Complaint was initially filed in the State of hearing. Interested persons may request certain money market funds registered Washington King County Superior Court in a civil under the Act. BofA Distributors, a action and the matter was later removed to the 1 Applicants request that any relief granted limited purpose broker-dealer registered United States Western District Court of Washington. pursuant to the application also apply to any other with the Commission, serves as 4 This Injunction will terminate three years after company of which ReconTrust is an affiliated its entry. As described in the application, person or may become an affiliated person in the principal underwriter of some of the ReconTrust is required to take certain remedial future (together with the Applicants, the ‘‘Covered same money market funds. BACA is a actions to address the conduct that served as the Persons’’). registered investment adviser that serves basis for the Injunction.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51590 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
the other Applicants. Applicants state period covered by the Complaint) limitation, the consideration by the that the entry of the Injunction may participated in the conduct alleged in Commission of a permanent exemption from result in Applicants being subject to the the Complaint that constitutes the section 9(a) of the Act requested pursuant to disqualification provisions of section violations that provide a basis for the the application, or the revocation or removal 9(a) of the Act because ReconTrust is of any temporary exemptions granted under Injunction. Applicants also state that the the Act in connection with the application. enjoined from engaging in or continuing alleged conduct giving rise to the particular conduct or practice in Injunction did not involve any Fund for Temporary Order 5 connection with banking activity. which an Applicant provided Fund The Commission has considered the 2. Section 9(c) of the Act provides that Servicing Activities. matter and finds that Applicants have the Commission shall grant an 5. Applicants further represent that made the necessary showing to justify application for exemption from the the inability of Applicants (except for granting a temporary exemption. disqualification provisions of section ReconTrust) to continue providing Fund Accordingly, 9(a) if it is established that these Servicing Activities would result in provisions, as applied to Applicants, are potentially severe financial hardships It is hereby ordered, pursuant to unduly or disproportionately severe or for both the Funds and their section 9(c) of the Act, that the that the Applicants’ conduct has been shareholders. Applicants state that they Applicants and the other Covered such as not to make it against the public will distribute written materials, Persons are granted a temporary interest or the protection of investors to including an offer to meet in person to exemption from the provisions of grant the exemption. Applicants have discuss the materials, to the board of section 9(a), effective forthwith, solely filed an application pursuant to section directors of each Fund (excluding the with respect to the Injunction, subject to 9(c) seeking a temporary and permanent ESCs), including the directors who are the condition in the application, until order exempting the Applicants and the not ‘‘interested persons,’’ as defined in the date the Commission takes final other Covered Persons from the section 2(a)(19) of the Act, of such action on their application for a disqualification provisions of section Fund, and their independent legal permanent order. 9(a) of the Act. counsel as defined in rule 0–1(a)(6) By the Commission. 3. Applicants believe they meet the under the Act, if any, regarding the Elizabeth M. Murphy, standard for exemption specified in Injunction, any impact on the Funds, Secretary. section 9(c). Applicants state that the and the application. The Applicants [FR Doc. 2012–20859 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] prohibitions of section 9(a) as applied to will provide the Funds with all BILLING CODE 8011–01–P them would be unduly and information concerning the Injunction disproportionately severe and that the and the application that is necessary for conduct of Applicants has been such as the Funds to fulfill their disclosure and SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE not to make it against the public interest other obligations under the federal COMMISSION or the protection of investors to grant securities laws. the exemption from section 9(a). 6. Applicants also assert that, if the 4. Applicants state that the conduct [Release No. 34–67684; File No. SR– Applicants were barred from engaging NYSEMKT–2012–14] giving rise to the Injunction did not in Fund Servicing Activities, the effect involve any of the Applicants acting in on their businesses and employees Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE the capacity as investment adviser, sub- would be severe. The Applicants state MKT LLC; Order Granting Approval of adviser, or principal underwriter (as that they have committed substantial Proposed Rule Change Adopting Rules defined in section 2(a)(29) of the Act) resources to establishing expertise in Governing the Listing and Trading of for any registered investment companies providing Fund Servicing Activities. New Products Known as DIVS, OWLS, (‘‘RIC’’) or ESCs (together with any 7. Applicants also state that and RISKS business development company, disqualifying KECALP and MLGPE from ‘‘Funds’’). Applicants state that to the continuing to provide investment August 17, 2012. best of their reasonable knowledge none advisory services to their ESCs is not in I. Introduction of the Applicants’ current directors, the public interest or in furtherance of officers or employees who is involved in the protection of investors and would On June 19, 2012, NYSE MKT LLC providing services as investment frustrate the expectations of eligible (‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘NYSE MKT’’), on adviser, subadviser or depositor for any employees who invest in the ESCs that behalf of NYSE Amex Options LLC, Funds or principal underwriter (as the ESCs would be managed by an filed with the Securities and Exchange defined in section 2(a)(29) of the Act) affiliate of their employer. Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant for any registered open-end company, 8. Applicants state that several to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities UIT or registered face amount certificate Applicants and certain of their affiliates Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule company (collectively, the ‘‘Fund have previously received orders under 19b-4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule Servicing Activities’’) (or any other section 9(c), as described in greater change to adopt rules governing the persons in such roles during the time detail in the application. listing and trading of new products known as DIVS, OWLS, and RISKS Applicants’ Condition 5 Applicants represent that the foreclosure trustee (collectively, ‘‘DORS’’). The proposed activity specified in the Injunction is the same as Applicants agree that any order rule change was published for comment or similar to at least some of the loan servicing granting the requested relief will be in the Federal Register on July 6, 2012.3 activity deemed banking activity by an administrative order issued by the Office of the subject to the following condition: The Commission received no comments Comptroller of the Currency. See In the Matter of Any temporary exemption granted on the proposed rule change. This order Bank of America, N.A., The Office of the pursuant to the application shall be without approves the proposed rule change. Comptroller of the Currency Stipulation & Consent prejudice to, and shall not limit the Order No. AA–EC–11–12 (Apr. 13, 2011) (the ‘‘OCC Order’’). Applicants state that under the standard Commission’s rights in any manner with 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). set forth in the OCC Order, ReconTrust is enjoined respect to, any Commission investigation of, 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. from engaging in or continuing particular conduct or administrative proceedings involving or 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67315 or practice in connection with banking activity. against, Covered Persons, including without (June 12, 2012), 77 FR 130 (‘‘Notice’’).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51591
II. Description of the Proposed Rule security equal in value to the difference plus cash in lieu of fractional shares Change between the value of the underlying equal to the lesser of the composite The Exchange proposes to adopt rules security at expiration and the strike closing price of the stock or the strike governing the listing and trading of new price of the contract. At expiration, price of the OWLS contract. RISKS products known as DIVS, OWLS, and holders of RISKS will receive nothing if contracts will settle for shares of stock RISKS. Each product has a different the stock closes at or below the strike equal to the value (if any) between the risk/reward profile and may be bought price of the RISKS contract. A position difference of the composite closing price or sold separately to achieve a specific consisting of a long RISKS contract has of the stock at expiration and the strike investment goal. The three products, a risk/reward similar to that of a long price of the RISKS contract. Though all call position. A long RISKS position when combined appropriately (i.e., long DIVS contracts will be limited to strike offers an investor all of the upside price a DIVS, OWLS, and RISKS on the same prices of $0.01, settlement will not appreciation above the strike price of underlying security, having the same the RISKS contract while limiting the require delivery (receipt) of $1 per expiration, where the OWLS and RISKS investor’s capital at risk to the premium contract assigned (exercised) because have identical strike prices), are paid to acquire the RISKS contract. there is no value attached to the strike expected to generate total returns that RISKS contracts will be European-style price; the only amount due will be replicate that of a long stock position and cannot be exercised prior to potentially a cash amount equal to any held for the same duration. The expiration. dividend amount that the underlying Exchange believes that the structure of Listing Standards. Any security security is ‘‘ex’’ on expiration Friday. the product will enable investors to eligible for listed options pursuant to hedge or obtain exposure to discrete Additional information relating to NYSE MKT Rule 915 will be eligible for DORS, including listing standards, portions of the total return of a security. the listing of DORS. The Exchange has DIVS. The phrase ‘‘Dividend Value of exercise and settlement, symbology, stated that it will generally avoid listing margin rules, and position limits can be Stock’’ or ‘‘DIVS’’ refers to an option DORS on securities that meet the found in the Notice. contract that returns to the investor a criteria in Rule 915 but do not in fact stream of periodic cash flows equivalent have regular put and call options listed III. Discussion to the dividends paid by the underlying for trading. stock. An investor that holds a long Series Open for Trading. DIVS, The Commission finds that the DIVS contract will receive cash OWLS, and RISKS will be listed with proposed rule change is consistent with payments equal to the dividend paid by expirations of up to six years from the the requirements of the Act and the the underlying security. Such payment listing date. The Exchange intends to rules and regulations thereunder will occur on the ‘‘ex-dividend’’ date for list five consecutive-year expiration applicable to a national securities the underlying security. The investor series at any one time, with the exchange.4 In particular, the will continue to have the right to earn expiration date set to coincide with Commission finds that the proposed such dividend-equivalent cash regular options expiration on the third rule change is consistent with the payments as long as the investor Friday of January in each expiration requirements of Section 6(b)(5) of the remains long the DIVS contract until year. Act,5 which requires, among other expiration. DIVS contracts will be At the initial time of listing, the things, that the Exchange’s rules be European-style and cannot be exercised Exchange will seek to list both OWLS designed promote just and equitable prior to expiration. and RISKS with strike prices that are OWLS. The phrase ‘‘Options with slightly in or out of the money. principles of trade, to remove Limited Stock’’ or ‘‘OWLS’’ refers to an Periodically the Exchange will impediments to and perfect the option contract that returns to the introduce new strikes as necessary to mechanism of a free and open market investor at expiration shares of the ensure that both OWLS and RISKS that and a national market system, and, in underlying security equal in value to the are slightly in or out of the money will general, to protect investors and the lesser of (1) the current value of the be available for trading. The listing of a public interest. The Commission underlying security or (2) the strike new OWLS series will result in the believes that the proposal appropriately price of the option contract. At listing of a RISKS contract with the balances, on the one hand, the expiration, regardless of how high the same terms, and vice versa. Standard Exchange’s desire to offer new products stock closes above the strike price of an strike price intervals will apply to series to investors with, on the other hand, the OWLS contract, the holders of the of both OWLS and RISKS. DIVS, necessity of having appropriate rules for contract will never receive more than however, will always have one strike listing, trading, capital, and margin, shares of stock equivalent in value to available for trading for a given among other considerations relevant the strike price of the OWLS contract. expiration series. DIVS will always be under the Act. The risk/reward of a long OWLS listed with a strike price of $0.01. position is similar to a buy/write or Settlement. All DORS components IV. Conclusion covered call position, less the will be automatically exercised, and settled in accordance with the policies It is therefore ordered, pursuant to dividends, if any. A long OWLS 6 position offers investors some limited and procedures of the Options Clearing Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the downside protection in exchange for Corporation (‘‘OCC’’). Settlement of proposed rule change (SR–NYSEMKT– limiting their upside participation to the OWLS and RISKS will be made via a 2012–14) be, and hereby is, approved. strike price of the OWLS contract. combination of shares of the underlying security plus cash in lieu of any OWLS contracts will be European-style 4 In approving this proposed rule change, the and cannot be exercised prior to fractional shares of the underlying Commission notes that it has considered the expiration. security, except that RISKS may expire proposed rule’s impact on efficiency, competition, RISKS. The phrase ‘‘Residual Interest worthless and convey nothing at and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). in Stock’’ or ‘‘RISKS’’ refers to an option expiration upon assignment. At 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). contract that returns to the investor at expiration, holders of OWLS will 6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). expiration shares of the underlying receive shares of the underlying security 7 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51592 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
For the Commission, by the Division of The Exchange has prepared summaries, necessary or appropriate in furtherance Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the purposes of the Act. authority.7 of the most significant parts of such C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Elizabeth M. Murphy, statements. Secretary. Statement on Comments on the A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Proposed Rule Change Received From [FR Doc. 2012–20817 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Statement of the Purpose of, and Members, Participants, or Others BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule No written comments were solicited Change or received with respect to the proposed SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 1. Purpose rule change. COMMISSION The Exchange proposes to make III. Date of Effectiveness of the [Release No. 34–67695; File No. SR– certain conforming changes to its rules Proposed Rule Change and Timing for NYSEMKT–2012–38] following the change in the Exchange’s Commission Action name from NYSE Amex to NYSE MKT Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE The foregoing proposed rule change is LLC.3 MKT LLC; Notice of Filing and concerned solely with the Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed As part of the Exchange’s name administration of the Exchange 6 Rule Change Making Certain change, the Exchange simplified cross- pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of 7 Conforming Changes to Its Rules references within the Exchange’s rules. the Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(3) Following the Change in the The Exchange shortened references to thereunder. Accordingly, the proposal Exchange’s Name From NYSE Amex ‘‘NYSE Amex Equities’’ to ‘‘Equities’’ will take effect upon filing with the LLC (‘‘NYSE Amex’’) to NYSE MKT LLC (e.g., Rule 0—NYSE Amex Equities Commission. At any time within 60 became Rule 0—Equities). The days of the filing of the proposed rule August 20, 2012. Exchange proposes to change several change, the Commission summarily may Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the remaining cross-references to certain temporarily suspend such rule change if Securities Exchange Act of 1934 NYSE Amex Equities rules in Rules it appears to the Commission that such (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 17—Equities, 80B—Equities, 107B— action is necessary or appropriate in the notice is hereby given that, on August Equities, 107C—Equities, 127—Equities, public interest, for the protection of 9, 2012, NYSE MKT LLC (the 128—Equities, 241—Equities, 250— investors, or otherwise in furtherance of ‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘NYSE MKT’’) filed with Equities, 273—Equities, 432—Equities, the purposes of the Act. the Securities and Exchange and 502—Equities. Lastly, the Exchange IV. Solicitation of Comments Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the proposes to replace a reference to proposed rule change as described in ‘‘Amex’’ in Rule 193 and references to Interested persons are invited to Items I, II and III below, which Items ‘‘NYSE Amex Equities’’ and ‘‘NYSE submit written data, views, and have been prepared by the Exchange. Amex’’ in Rule 107C—Equities with arguments concerning the foregoing, The Commission is publishing this references to ‘‘Exchange.’’ including whether the proposed rule notice to solicit comments on the change is consistent with the Act. 2. Statutory Basis proposed rule change from interested Comments may be submitted by any of persons. The Exchange believes that the the following methods: proposed rule change is consistent with I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Electronic Comments Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Statement of the Terms of Substance of • Act of 1934 (the ‘‘Act’’),4 in general, and Use the Commission’s Internet the Proposed Rule Change Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,5 in particular, comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ The Exchange proposes to make rules/sro.shtml ); or in that it is designed to prevent • certain conforming changes to its rules fraudulent and manipulative acts and Send an email to rule- following the change in the Exchange’s practices, to promote just and equitable [email protected]. Please include File name from NYSE Amex LLC (‘‘NYSE principles of trade, to foster cooperation Number SR–NYSEMKT–2012–38 on the Amex’’) to NYSE MKT LLC. The text of and coordination with persons engaged subject line. the proposed rule change is available on in facilitating transactions in securities, Paper Comments the Exchange’s Web site at to remove impediments to and perfect • Send paper comments in triplicate www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the mechanism of a free and open to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, the Exchange, and at the Commission’s market and a national market system Securities and Exchange Commission, Public Reference Room. and, in general, to protect investors and 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC the public interest. The Exchange is II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 20549–1090. proposing certain conforming changes Statement of the Purpose of, and All submissions should refer to File Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule that would make the rule text more uniform, which is in the public interest. Number SR–NYSEMKT–2012–38. This Change file number should be included on the In its filing with the Commission, the B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s subject line if email is used. To help the self-regulatory organization included Statement on Burden on Competition Commission process and review your statements concerning the purpose of, The Exchange does not believe that comments more efficiently, please use and basis for, the proposed rule change the proposed rule change will impose only one method. The Commission will and discussed any comments it received any burden on competition that is not post all comments on the Commission’s on the proposed rule change. The text Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ of those statements may be examined at rules/sro.shtml ). Copies of the 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67037 the places specified in Item IV below. (May 21, 2012), 77 FR 31415 (May 25, 2012) (SR– submission, all subsequent NYSEAmex–2012–32). 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 4 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 7 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(3).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51593
amendments, all written statements I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s principles of trade, to foster cooperation with respect to the proposed rule Statement of the Terms of Substance of and coordination with persons engaged change that are filed with the the Proposed Rule Change in regulating, clearing, settling, Commission, and all written The Exchange proposes a rule change processing information with respect to, communications relating to the to terminate a revenue sharing program and facilitating transactions in proposed rule change between the with Correlix, Inc. (‘‘Correlix’’). The text securities, to remove impediments to Commission and any person, other than of the proposed rule change is attached and perfect the mechanism of a free and those that may be withheld from the as Exhibit 5 and is available on the open market and a national market public in accordance with the Exchange’s Web site at system, and, in general, to protect provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be www.directedge.com, at the Exchange’s investors and the public interest. available for Web site viewing and principal office, and at the Public Specifically, the Exchange believes printing in the Commission’s Public Reference Room of the Commission. ending the revenue sharing agreement Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., for a product customers have not chosen Washington, DC 20549, on official II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s to utilize is responsive to market business days between the hours of 10 Statement of the Purpose of, and participants and eliminates confusion a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule about offered products. Change will be available for inspection and B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s copying at the principal office of the In its filing with the Commission, the Statement on Burden on Competition Exchange. All comments received will Exchange included statements be posted without change; the concerning the purpose of, and basis for, The Exchange does not believe that Commission does not edit personal the proposed rule change and discussed the proposed rule change will result in identifying information from any comments it received on the any burden on competition that is not submissions. You should submit only proposed rule change. The text of these necessary or appropriate in furtherance information that you wish to make statements may be examined at the of the purposes of the Act, as amended. available publicly. All submissions places specified in Item IV below. The Specifically, the Exchange believes that should refer to File Number SR– self-regulatory organization has terminating the revenue sharing NYSEMKT–2012–38 and should be prepared summaries, set forth in agreement will not burden competition submitted on or before September 14, Sections A, B and C below, of the most since the latency measurement tools are 2012. significant aspects of such statements. not currently being used by any customers. For the Commission, by the Division of A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Statement of the Purpose of, and the C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s authority.8 Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Statement on Comments on the Elizabeth M. Murphy, Change Proposed Rule Change Received From Secretary. Members, Participants, or Others Purpose [FR Doc. 2012–20855 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] The Exchange has not solicited, and BILLING CODE 8011–01–P The Exchange proposes to eliminate does not intend to solicit, comments on its revenue sharing program with this proposed rule change. The Correlix, which was adopted to provide Exchange has not received any SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Users 3 with real-time analytical tools to unsolicited written comments from its COMMISSION measure latency of orders to and from Members or other interested parties. the System. In 2010, the Exchange [Release No. 34–67694; File No. SR–EDGX– entered into an agreement with Correlix, III. Date of Effectiveness of the 2012–35] under which the Exchange receives 30% Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGX of the total monthly subscription fees Because the foregoing proposed rule Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and received by Correlix from parties who contracted directly with Correlix to use change does not: (i) Significantly affect Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed the protection of investors or the public Rule Change To Terminate Revenue its RaceTeam latency measurement 4 interest; (ii) impose any significant Sharing Agreement service for EDGX. The Exchange proposes to terminate the revenue burden on competition; and (iii) become August 20, 2012. sharing relationship with Correlix due operative for 30 days after the date of Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the to the lack of customer interest in the the filing, or such shorter time as the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the measurement tools offered. Commission may designate, it has ‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 become effective pursuant to 19(b)(3)(A) Basis 7 notice is hereby given that on August 8, of the Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 8 2012, EDGX Exchange, Inc. (‘‘EDGX’’ or The Exchange believes that the thereunder. A proposed rule change filed under the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the proposed rule change is consistent with 5 Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 9 normally does not Securities and Exchange Commission the provisions of Section 6 of the Act, become operative prior to 30 days after (the ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule in general, and with Section 6(b)(5) of 6 the date of the filing. However, pursuant change as described in Items I, II and III the Act, in particular, in that the below, which items have been prepared proposal is designed to prevent 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). by the Exchange. The Commission is fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable 8 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). Rule 19b–4(f)(6) publishing this notice to solicit requires a self-regulatory organization to give the comments on the proposed rule change Commission written notice of its intent to file the 3 from interested persons. As defined in EDGX Rule 1.5(ee). proposed rule change at least five business days 4 See Exchange Act Release No. 62929 (September prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule 17, 2010), 75 FR 58003 (September 23, 2010) (SR– change, or such shorter time as designated by the 8 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). EDGX–2010–09). Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 5 15 U.S.C. 78f. requirement. 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 9 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51594 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
to Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii),10 the Commission process and review your below, which items have been prepared Commission may designate a shorter comments more efficiently, please use by the Exchange. The Commission is time if such action is consistent with the only one method. The Commission will publishing this notice to solicit protection of investors and the public post all comments on the Commission’s comments on the proposed rule change interest. The Exchange has requested Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ from interested persons. that the Commission waive the 30-day rules/sro.shtml ). Copies of the operative delay and designate the submission, all subsequent I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s proposed rule change to become amendments, all written statements Statement of the Terms of Substance of operative upon filing to eliminate with respect to the proposed rule the Proposed Rule Change confusion on the part of potential change that are filed with the The Exchange proposes a rule change customers regarding the availability of Commission, and all written to terminate a revenue sharing program the Correlix RaceTeam offering. The communications relating to the with Correlix, Inc. (‘‘Correlix’’). The text Commission believes that waiving the proposed rule change between the of the proposed rule change is attached 30-day operative delay is consistent Commission and any person, other than as Exhibit 5 and is available on the with the protection of investors and the those that may be withheld from the Exchange’s Web site at public interest. The Exchange represents public in accordance with the www.directedge.com, at the Exchange’s that there are no customers currently provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be principal office, and at the Public using Correlix’s RaceTeam latency available for Web site viewing and Reference Room of the Commission. measurement service. Therefore, the printing in the Commission’s Public II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Commission designates the proposed Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Statement of the Purpose of, and rule change as operative upon filing Washington, DC 20549, on official Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule with the Commission.11 business days between the hours of 10 At any time within 60 days of the a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also Change filing of the proposed rule change, the will be available for inspection and In its filing with the Commission, the Commission summarily may copying at the principal office of the Exchange included statements temporarily suspend such rule change if Exchange. All comments received will concerning the purpose of, and basis for, it appears to the Commission that such be posted without change; the the proposed rule change and discussed action is necessary or appropriate in the Commission does not edit personal any comments it received on the public interest, for the protection of identifying information from proposed rule change. The text of these investors, or otherwise in furtherance of submissions. You should submit only statements may be examined at the the purposes of the Act. If the information that you wish to make places specified in Item IV below. The Commission takes such action, the available publicly. All submissions self-regulatory organization has Commission shall institute proceedings should refer to File Number SR–EDGX– prepared summaries, set forth in to determine whether the proposed rule 2012–35 and should be submitted on or Sections A, B and C below, of the most should be approved or disapproved. before September 14, 2012. significant aspects of such statements. IV. Solicitation of Comments For the Commission, by the Division of A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Interested persons are invited to 12 Statement of the Purpose of, and the authority. Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule submit written data, views, and Elizabeth M. Murphy, arguments concerning the foregoing, Change Secretary. including whether the proposed rule Purpose change is consistent with the Act. [FR Doc. 2012–20854 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Comments may be submitted by any of BILLING CODE 8011–01–P The Exchange proposes to eliminate the following methods: its revenue sharing program with Correlix, which was adopted to provide Electronic Comments SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Users 3 with real-time analytical tools to • Use the Commission’s Internet COMMISSION measure latency of orders to and from comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ [Release No. 34–67693; File No. SR–EDGA– the System. In 2010, the Exchange rules/sro.shtml ); or 2012–36] entered into an agreement with Correlix, • Send an email to rule- under which the Exchange receives 30% [email protected]. Please include File Self-Regulatory Organizations; EDGA of the total monthly subscription fees Number SR–EDGX–2012–35 on the Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and received by Correlix from parties who subject line. Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed contracted directly with Correlix to use Rule Change To Terminate Revenue its RaceTeam latency measurement Paper Comments Sharing Agreement service for EDGA.4 The Exchange • Send paper comments in triplicate proposes to terminate the revenue August 20, 2012. to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, sharing relationship with Correlix due Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities and Exchange Commission, to the lack of customer interest in the 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the 1 2 measurement tools offered. 20549–1090. ‘‘Act’’), and Rule 19b–4 thereunder, notice is hereby given that on August 8, All submissions should refer to File Basis 2012, EDGA Exchange, Inc. (‘‘EDGA’’ or Number SR–EDGX–2012–35. This file The Exchange believes that the the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the number should be included on the proposed rule change is consistent with Securities and Exchange Commission subject line if email is used. To help the the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,5 (the ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II and III 10 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii). 3 As defined in EDGA Rule 1.5(ee). 11 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day 4 See Exchange Act Release No. 62928 (September operative delay, the Commission has considered the 12 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). 17, 2010), 75 FR 58002 (September 23, 2010) (SR– proposed rule’s impact on efficiency, competition, 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). EDGA–2010–09). and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 5 15 U.S.C. 78f.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51595
in general, and with Section 6(b)(5) of A proposed rule change filed under Securities and Exchange Commission, the Act,6 in particular, in that the Rule 19b–4(f)(6) 9 normally does not 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC proposal is designed to prevent become operative prior to 30 days after 20549–1090. fraudulent and manipulative acts and the date of the filing. However, pursuant practices, to promote just and equitable to Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii),10 the All submissions should refer to File principles of trade, to foster cooperation Commission may designate a shorter Number SR–EDGA–2012–36. This file and coordination with persons engaged time if such action is consistent with the number should be included on the in regulating, clearing, settling, protection of investors and the public subject line if email is used. To help the processing information with respect to, interest. The Exchange has requested Commission process and review your and facilitating transactions in that the Commission waive the 30-day comments more efficiently, please use securities, to remove impediments to operative delay and designate the only one method. The Commission will and perfect the mechanism of a free and proposed rule change to become post all comments on the Commission’s open market and a national market operative upon filing to eliminate Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ system, and, in general, to protect confusion on the part of potential rules/sro.shtml ). Copies of the investors and the public interest. customers regarding the availability of submission, all subsequent Specifically, the Exchange believes the Correlix RaceTeam offering. The amendments, all written statements ending the revenue sharing agreement Commission believes that waiving the with respect to the proposed rule for a product customers have not chosen 30-day operative delay is consistent change that are filed with the to utilize is responsive to market with the protection of investors and the Commission, and all written participants and eliminates confusion public interest. The Exchange represents communications relating to the about offered products. that there are no customers currently proposed rule change between the using Correlix’s RaceTeam latency B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Commission and any person, other than measurement service. Therefore, the Statement on Burden on Competition those that may be withheld from the Commission designates the proposed public in accordance with the The Exchange does not believe that rule change as operative upon filing provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be the proposed rule change will result in 11 with the Commission. available for Web site viewing and any burden on competition that is not At any time within 60 days of the necessary or appropriate in furtherance filing of the proposed rule change, the printing in the Commission’s Public of the purposes of the Act, as amended. Commission summarily may Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Specifically, the Exchange believes that temporarily suspend such rule change if Washington, DC 20549, on official terminating the revenue sharing it appears to the Commission that such business days between the hours of 10 agreement will not burden competition action is necessary or appropriate in the a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of the filing also since the latency measurement tools are public interest, for the protection of will be available for inspection and not currently being used by any investors, or otherwise in furtherance of copying at the principal office of the customers. the purposes of the Act. If the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Commission takes such action, the Commission does not edit personal Statement on Comments on the Commission shall institute proceedings Proposed Rule Change Received From to determine whether the proposed rule identifying information from Members, Participants, or Others should be approved or disapproved. submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make IV. Solicitation of Comments The Exchange has not solicited, and available publicly. All submissions does not intend to solicit, comments on Interested persons are invited to should refer to File Number SR–EDGA– this proposed rule change. The submit written data, views, and 2012–36 and should be submitted on or Exchange has not received any arguments concerning the foregoing, before September 14, 2012. unsolicited written comments from its including whether the proposed rule Members or other interested parties. change is consistent with the Act. For the Commission, by the Division of Comments may be submitted by any of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated III. Date of Effectiveness of the authority.12 Proposed Rule Change and Timing for the following methods: Elizabeth M. Murphy, Commission Action Electronic Comments Secretary. Because the foregoing proposed rule • Use the Commission’s Internet [FR Doc. 2012–20853 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] change does not: (i) Significantly affect comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ the protection of investors or the public rules/sro.shtml ); or BILLING CODE 8011–01–P interest; (ii) impose any significant • Send an email to rule- burden on competition; and (iii) become [email protected]. Please include File operative for 30 days after the date of Number SR–EDGA–2012–36 on the the filing, or such shorter time as the subject line. Commission may designate, it has Paper Comments become effective pursuant to 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 7 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) • Send paper comments in triplicate thereunder.8 to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary,
6 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this 7 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). requirement. 8 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). Rule 19b–4(f)(6) requires 9 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). a self-regulatory organization to give the 10 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii). Commission written notice of its intent to file the 11 For purposes only of waiving the 30-day proposed rule change at least five business days operative delay, the Commission has considered the prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule proposed rule’s impact on efficiency, competition, change, or such shorter time as designated by the and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 12 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51596 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE on the proposals. This order approves thereof, would immediately and COMMISSION the proposed rule changes as modified automatically cancel if by its terms it by Amendment No. 1. were not marketable at the opening [Release No. 34–67686; File Nos. SR–NYSE– price, if it were not executed on the 2012–19; SR–NYSEMKT–2012–13] II. Description of the Proposals opening trade of the security on the Self-Regulatory Organizations; New The Exchanges propose to (1) amend Exchange, or if the security opened on York Stock Exchange LLC; NYSE MKT Rule 13 to establish new order types, (2) a quote. Both MOO and LOO orders LLC; Order Granting Approval to amend Rule 115A to delete obsolete text could be entered before the open to Proposed Rule Changes, as Modified and to clarify and update the participate on the opening trade or by Amendment No. 1, (1) Amending description of the allocation of market during a trading halt or pause to NYSE Rule 13 and NYSE MKT Rule and limit interest in opening and participate on a reopening trade. 13—Equities to Establish New Order reopening transactions, (3) amend Rule The Exchanges also propose to add Types, (2) Amending NYSE Rule 115A 123C to include better-priced G orders new order type to IOC Orders in Rule and NYSE MKT Rule 115A—Equities to in the allocation of orders in closing 13, the ‘‘Immediate or Cancel Minimum Delete Obsolete Text and to Clarify and transactions, and (4) make other Trade Size’’ order (‘‘IOC MTS order’’). Update the Description of The technical and conforming changes. As proposed, any IOC order, including Allocation of Market and Limit Interest Amendments to Order Type Definitions an intermarket sweep order, may in Opening and Reopening Under Rule 13 include a minimum trade size (‘‘MTS’’) Transactions, (3) Amending NYSE Rule instruction.4 For each incoming IOC– The Exchanges propose deleting and 123C and NYSE MKT Rule 123C— MTS order, Exchange systems will replacing two types of opening orders Equities to Include Better-Priced G evaluate whether contra-side currently defined in Rule 13 to stop Orders in The Allocation of Orders in displayable and non-displayable interest opening orders from executing when a Closing Transactions, and (4) Making on Exchange systems can meet the MTS security opens on a quote or routing to Other Technical and Conforming instruction and will reject such an away market. Changes The orders the Exchanges propose to incoming IOC–MTS order if Exchange contra-side volume cannot satisfy the August 17, 2012. delete are ‘‘At the Opening or At the Opening Only’’ orders. These order MTS instruction. An IOC MTS order I. Introduction types currently are defined in Rule 13 could result in an execution in an away On June 15, 2012, New York Stock as market or limit orders which are to market. The Exchanges would reject any Exchange LLC (‘‘NYSE’’) and NYSE be executed on the opening trade of the IOC–MTS orders if the security is not MKT LLC (‘‘NYSE MKT’’ and together stock on one of the Exchanges, or if one open for trading or when auto-execution with NYSE, the ‘‘Exchanges’’) filed with of the Exchanges opens the stock on a is suspended. the Securities and Exchange quote, the opening trade in the stock on In conjunction with the substantive Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant another market center to which such amendments described above, the to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities order or part thereof has been routed in Exchanges propose to make technical Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule compliance with Regulation NMS. and conforming changes to the 19b–4 thereunder,2 proposed rule Under the current definition, any such Immediate or Cancel order definition in changes to (1) amend NYSE Rule 13 and order or portion thereof not so executed Rule 13. The Exchanges would make NYSE MKT Rule 13—Equities is to be treated as cancelled. conforming changes throughout the (hereinafter referred to collectively as Furthermore, all or part of such orders definition to provide that only an IOC ‘‘Rule 13’’) to establish new order types, that seek the possibility of an NYSE- or order without an MTS instruction could (2) amend NYSE Rule 115A and NYSE NYSE MKT-only opening execution, be entered before the Exchange opening MKT Rule 115A—Equities (hereinafter and that are marked as a Regulation for participation in the opening trade or referred to collectively as ‘‘Rule 115A’’) NMS-compliant Immediate or Cancel when auto execution is suspended, to delete obsolete text and to clarify and (‘‘IOC’’) order, are immediately and which includes during a trading pause update the description of the allocation automatically cancelled if they are not or halt. In addition, NYSE proposes to of market and limit interest in opening executed on the opening trade of the delete existing paragraph (e) from its and reopening transactions, (3) amend stock on one of the Exchanges or if Immediate or Cancel order definition NYSE Rule 123C and NYSE MKT Rule compliance with Regulation NMS because the paragraph’s references to 123C—Equities (hereinafter referred to would require all or part of such order commitments to trade received on the collectively as ‘‘Rule 123C’’) to include to be routed to another market center. Floor through the Intermarket Trading better-priced G orders in the allocation The Exchanges propose to replace ‘‘At System are no longer relevant, as the of orders in closing transactions, and (4) the Opening or At the Opening Only’’ Intermarket Trading System was make other technical and conforming orders with two new order types: decommissioned in 2007. changes. On June 27, 2012, the Market ‘‘On-the-Open’’ (‘‘MOO’’) and Lastly, the Exchanges propose to Exchanges filed Amendment No. 1 to Limit ‘‘On-the-Open’’ (‘‘LOO’’) orders. A delete several obsolete provisions of their proposals. The proposed rule MOO order would be defined as a Rule 13. They propose to delete the changes, as modified by Amendment market order in a security that is to be definition of Time Order because this No. 1, were published for comment in executed in its entirety on the opening order typically related to a Floor broker the Federal Register on July 6, 2012.3 or reopening trade of the security on the order that historically would have been The Commission received no comments Exchange; it would be immediately and held by the specialist on behalf of the automatically cancelled if the security Floor broker and converted to a market 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). opened on a quote or not executed due or limit order at a specified time. The 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. to tick restrictions. A LOO order would Exchange notes that this order can no 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 67317 be defined as a limit order in a security (June 29, 2012), 77 FR 40133 (SR–NYSE–2012–19) 4 A minimum trade size instruction currently is and 67318 (June 29, 2012), 77 FR 40129 (SR– that is to be executed on the opening or available to Floor brokers for d-quotes under NYSE NYSEMKT–2012–13) (hereinafter referred to reopening trade of the security on the Rule 70.25(d) and NYSE MKT Rule 70.25(d)— collectively as ‘‘Notices’’). Exchange. A LOO order, or a part Equities.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51597
longer be used by Floor brokers. Also, would yield to all other limit interest 115A(b)(1)(A)(iii). Paragraph 2(b) NYSE proposes to delete the definition priced equal to the opening or provides that when the price on a of Auction Market Order 5 because this reopening price of a security except limited price order is the same as the order type was never implemented, and DMM interest. price at which the stock is to be opened to amend the definition of Auto Ex Proposed Rule 115A(b)(2) would or reopened, it may not be possible to Order to remove a reference to the clarify the circumstances surrounding execute a limited price order at such Automated Bond System, which is no when a security could open on a quote. price, and substantially similar language longer operational. As proposed, Rule 115A(b)(2) would appears in proposed paragraph provide that if the aggregate quantity of 115A(b)(1)(C). Paragraph 2(c) requires a Rule 115A—Opening Allocation MOO and market orders on at least one DMM to see that each market order the The Exchanges propose to amend side of the market equals one round lot DMM holds participates in the opening Rule 115A, which addresses orders at or more, the security must open on a transaction, and if the order is for an the opening or in unusual situations. In trade. If the aggregate quantity of MOO amount larger than one round lot, the its existing form, the Rule has no main and market orders on each side of the size of the bid that is accepted or the text but has Supplementary Material market equals less than one round lot or offer that is taken establishing the .10, which addresses queries to the is zero, the security could open on a opening or reopening price is the Display Book before an opening; quote. If a security opens on a quote, amount that a market order is entitled Supplementary Material .20, which odd-lot market orders would to participate in at the opening or addresses the arranging of an opening or automatically execute in a trade reopening. This concept is contained in price by a Designated Market Maker immediately following the open on a proposed paragraph 115A(b). (‘‘DMM’’); and Supplementary Material quote and odd-lot MOOs would .30, which addresses certain functions Rule 123C—Closing Allocation and ‘‘G immediately and automatically cancel. Orders’’ of Exchange systems with respect to MOO and market orders subject to tick orders at the opening. restrictions that either cannot The Exchanges propose to amend The Exchanges propose to re- participate at an opening or reopening Rules 13 and 123C as those rules relate designate what is now Supplementary price or are priced equal to the opening to G orders. First, the Exchanges Material .10 as paragraph (a) as the main or reopening price would not be propose to add the phrase ‘‘G orders’’ as text of Rule 115A. The Exchanges included in the aggregate quantity of a formal definitional term to an existing further propose to add new paragraph MOO and market orders. order type found in Rule 13. Paragraph (b) to Rule 115A to address the process Finally, the Exchanges propose to (g) of the Auto Ex Order definition in of arranging a price and the allocation delete Supplementary Material .20 and Rule 13 currently describes ‘‘an order of orders on opening and reopening .30. The Exchanges state that much of entered pursuant to Subsection (G) of trades. Proposed Rule 115A(b) would the content of these provisions has been Section 11(a)(1) of the Securities provide that when arranging an opening obsolete since the second phase of the Exchange Act of 1934.’’ The Exchanges or reopening price, except as provided New Market Model was launched in explain in their Notices that this for in proposed Rule 115A(b)(2), which 2008.9 For instance, the Exchanges note definition is meant to include concerns opening a security on a quote that some of the language in these proprietary orders of members of the and is described below, market interest 6 provisions relates to DMMs holding Exchanges when those orders are would be guaranteed to participate in orders, but DMMs no longer hold executed by one of the members’ floor the opening or reopening transaction 10 orders. Similarly, the Exchanges note brokers. While the Auto Ex order type and have precedence over (i) limit that some of the language in described in paragraph (g) was interest 7 that is priced equal to the Supplementary Material .30 describes commonly referred to by the Exchanges opening or reopening price of a security as a ‘‘G order’’ and referred to as such and (ii) DMM interest.8 In addition, G systems of the Exchanges that are either outdated or otherwise covered by Rule elsewhere in the Exchanges’ rules, it orders that are priced equal to the was not officially defined as such in the opening or reopening price of a security 15, which deals with Pre-Opening Indications. Exchanges’ order type rules. The The Exchanges point out that to the Exchanges now propose to add to the 5 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53539 end of paragraph (g) of the Auto Ex (March 22, 2006), 71 FR 16353 (March 31, 2006) extent certain concepts in (SR–NYSE–2004–05) (Order Approving Proposed Supplementary Material .20 are still Order definition a parenthetical phrase Rule Change to Establish a Hybrid Market) relevant or applicable, they are noting that such orders will be officially (describing the addition of the proposed Auction incorporated into proposed new defined as ‘‘G orders.’’ Market Order type). The Exchanges also propose to amend 6 paragraph 115A(b), described above. For For purposes of the opening or reopening Rule 123C to include better-priced G transaction, market interest would include (i) instance, current paragraphs 2(a), (b), market and MOO orders, (ii) tick-sensitive market and (c) of Supplementary Material .20 orders in the list of orders that must be and MOO orders to buy (sell) that are priced higher address the allocation and precedence allocated in whole or part in closing (lower) than the opening or reopening price, (iii) of certain orders in openings and transactions. Currently, Rule 123C(7)(a) limit interest to buy (sell) that is priced higher sets forth six order types that must be (lower) than the opening or reopening price, and reopenings. Paragraph 2(a) provides that (iv) Floor broker interest entered manually by the a limited price order to buy (sell) that included in the closing transaction in DMM. See proposed Rule 115A(b)(1)(A). is at a higher (lower) price than the 7 For purposes of the opening or reopening 10 In a previous filing, NYSE MKT’s predecessor transaction, limit interest would include (i) limited- security is to be opened or reopened is described G orders as ‘‘orders for an Exchange priced interest, including e-Quotes, LOO orders, treated as a market order, and market member’s own account where the member meets a and G orders; and (ii) tick-sensitive market and orders have precedence over limited business mix test that requires it to be primarily MOO orders that are priced equal to the opening orders. Substantially similar language engaged in the business of underwriting and or reopening price of a security. See proposed Rule distributing securities, selling securities to 115A(b)(1)(B). appears in proposed paragraph customers, and/or acting as a broker and provided 8 Limit interest that is priced equal to the opening more than 50% of its gross revenues is derived from or reopening price of a security and DMM interest 9 See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 58845 such businesses and related activities.’’ See would not be guaranteed to participate in the (Oct. 24, 2008), 73 FR 73683) (Oct. 29, 2008) (SR– Securities Exchange Act Release No. 63972 (Feb. 25, opening or reopening transaction. See proposed NYSE–2008–46); 59022 (Nov. 26, 2008), 73 FR 2011), 76 FR 12202 (Mar. 4, 2011) (SR– Rule 115A(b)(1)(C). 73683 (Dec. 3, 2008) (SR–NYSEALTR–2008–10). NYSEAMEX–2011–09).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51598 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
the following order: (1) MOC orders that DMM interest would be treated in such are similar in concept and terminology do not have tick restrictions, (2) MOC a manner.11 to orders offered by other exchanges.16 The Commission finds that the other orders that have tick restrictions that III. Discussion and Commission’s proposed amendments to Rule 13 are limit the execution of the MOC to a Findings price better than the price of the closing also consistent with the requirements of transaction, (3) Floor broker interest After carefully considering the the Act. The Exchanges’ proposed new entered manually by the DMM, (4) limit proposed rule changes, as modified by IOC MTS order type will offer market orders better priced than the closing Amendment No.1, the Commission participants added functionality and finds that they are consistent with the price, (5) LOC orders that do not have additional trading opportunities similar requirements of the Act and the rules tick restrictions better priced than the to what is offered in other trading and regulations thereunder applicable to venues.17 The Exchanges’ proposed closing transaction, and (6) LOC orders a national securities exchange.12 In better priced than the closing non-substantive and technical particular, the Commission finds that conforming changes are consistent with transaction that have tick restrictions the proposals are consistent with that are capable of being executed based the requirements of the Act because Section 6(b) of the Act.13 Specifically, they clarify the rule text for ease of on the closing price (‘‘must execute’’ the Commission believes that the list). Once all of the ‘‘must execute’’ reference and delete obsolete language. proposed rule changes do not impose In addition, the Commission finds interest listed in Rule 123C(7)(a) has any burden on competition not been satisfied, Rule 123C(7)(b) provides that the Exchanges’ proposed revision of necessary or appropriate in furtherance Rule 115A is consistent with the that the following interest may be used of the Act and are designed to promote requirements of the Act. The proposals to offset a closing imbalance in the just and equitable principles of trade, to would specify how market interest following order: (1) Limit orders prevent fraudulent and manipulative would participate in the opening or represented in the Display Book with a acts, and, in general, to protect investors reopening transaction and how market price equal to the closing price, (2) LOC 14 and the public interest. interest would have precedence over orders with a price equal to the closing The Exchanges’ proposals to delete limit interest priced equal to the price, (3) MOC orders that have tick ‘‘At the Opening or At the Opening opening price or reopening price of a restrictions that limit the execution of Only’’ orders, and to replace them with security and DMM interest. The the MOC to the price of the closing MOO and LOO orders, are intended to Commission believes that the proposal transaction, (4) LOC orders that have make clear that such opening orders should ensure that market interest, tick restrictions that are capable of being will not execute when a security opens except as provided in Rule 115A(b)(2), executed based on the closing price and on a quote, and that they will not be would be guaranteed to participate in the price of such limit order is equal to routed to away markets. The openings or reopenings. the price of the closing transaction, (5) Commission finds that the proposed The Commission also finds that the G orders, and (6) Closing Only orders MOO and LOO order type definitions proposals would delete duplicative and (‘‘may execute’’ list). are clear and transparent as to when obsolete language in Rule 115A, which The Exchanges propose to amend such orders will be immediately and should bring clarity to the Exchanges’ Rule 123C(7)(a) to add G orders that are automatically cancelled; in the case of a rules. Similarly, the Commission finds MOO order, if the security opens on a priced better than the closing price as that amending Rule 123C(7)(b)(i) to quote or if it is not executed due to tick the last type of order that must be expressly provide for the treatment of restrictions, and in the case of a LOO included in the closing transaction. In DMM interest in offsetting a closing order, if it is not marketable at the conjunction with this change, the imbalance will add transparency and opening price, it is not executed on the Exchanges also propose to make a clarity to the Exchange’s rules, thereby opening trade of a security, or if the promoting just and equitable principles conforming change to the reference to G security opens on a quote. The orders in paragraph 5 of Rule of trade. Commission notes that the MOO and Lastly, the Commission believes that 123(C)(7)(b) (the ‘‘may execute’’ list of LOO order types proposed by the interest). Under the proposals, language the Exchanges’ proposed changes to Exchanges are variations of Market ‘‘At- Rule 123C are consistent with the would be added to paragraph 5 of Rule The-Close’’ (‘‘MOC’’) and Limit ‘‘At- 123(C)(7)(b) to make clear that the G requirements of the Act, and in The-Close’’ (‘‘LOC’’) orders already particular Section 11(a) of the Act. orders included in the ‘‘may execute’’ 15 offered by the Exchanges. In addition, Section 11(a)(1) of the Act prohibits a list of interest are those G orders with the proposed MOO and LOO order types a price equal to the closing price—to be member of a national securities exchange from effecting transactions on distinguished from the G orders priced 11 See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. that exchange for its own account, the better than the closing price that are 60974 (Nov. 9, 2009) 74 FR 59299 (Nov. 17, 2009) being added to the list of ‘‘must (SR–NYSE–2009–111) (‘‘After the ‘must execute account of an associated person, or any execute’’ interest in 123(C)(7)(a). interest’ is satisfied, then any limit orders account over which it or an associated represented in Display Book at the closing price person exercises discretion, unless an Finally, the Exchanges propose one may be used to offset the remaining imbalance. It exception applies. Subsection (G) of more change to the ‘‘may execute’’ list should be noted that DMM interest, including better-priced DMM interest entered into the Display Section 11(a)(1) provides an exemption of interest. The Exchanges propose to Book prior to the closing transaction, eligible to from the general prohibition set forth in amend Rule 123C(7)(b)(i) to add that participate in the closing transaction is always Section 11(a)(1) for any transaction for DMM interest, as well as limit orders included in the hierarchy of execution as if it were interest equal to the price of the closing a member’s own account, provided that: represented in the Display Book with a transaction.’’). (i) Such member is primarily engaged in price equal to the closing price, are the 12 In approving the proposal, the Commission has certain underwriting, distribution, and first types of interest that may be used considered the proposed rule’s impact on to offset a closing imbalance. According efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 16 See, e.g., NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.31(t)(1) to the Exchanges, this is intended to be 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). and (2); NASDAQ Rule 4752(a)(3) and (4); and 13 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b). a clarifying change because they have BATS Exchange Rule 11.23(a)(14) and (16). 14 15 U.S.C. 78(f)(b)(5). 17 See, e.g., Nasdaq Stock Market Rule 4751(e)(5) noted before in prior rule filings that 15 See Rule 13. (defining ‘‘Minimum Quantity Orders’’).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51599
other activities; and (ii) the transaction The Commission believes that it is 2012, ICE Clear Credit LLC (‘‘ICC’’) filed is effected in compliance with the rules consistent with the requirements of the with the Securities and Exchange of the Commission, which, at a Act for G orders priced better than the Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the minimum, assure that the transaction is closing price to execute before ‘‘may proposed rule change as described in not inconsistent with the maintenance execute’’ interest priced equal to the Items I, II, and III below, which Items of fair and orderly markets and yields closing price. Such G orders could offer have been prepared primarily by ICC. priority, parity and precedence in contra-side interest a chance at price The Commission is publishing this execution to orders for the account of improvement if executed prior to the notice to solicit comments on the persons who are not members or close. Further, because the rules will proposed rule change from interested associated with members of the require G orders priced better than the persons. exchange.18 In addition, Rule 11a1–1(T) closing price to yield to all other eligible I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s under the Act specifies that a orders priced better than the closing Statement of the Terms of Substance of transaction effected on a national price, the Commission believes that the the Proposed Rule Change securities exchange for the account of a proposal, with respect to such priority, member which meets the requirements is consistent with Section 11(a)(1)(G) of The purpose of proposed rule change of Section 11(a)(1)(G)(i) of the Act is the Act21 and Rule 11a1–1(T)(a)(3) is to provide for the clearance of the deemed, in accordance with the thereunder.22 following twenty additional investment requirements of Section 11(a)(1)(G)(ii), grade Standard North American to be not inconsistent with the IV. Conclusion Corporate Single Name CDS contracts: maintenance of fair and orderly markets It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Nucor Corporation; V.F. Corporation; and to yield priority, parity, and Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,23 that the The Procter & Gamble Company; Encana precedence in execution to orders for proposed rule changes (SR–NYSE– Corporation; Weatherford International the account of non-members or persons 2012–19 and SR–NYSEMKT–2012–13), Ltd.; Chevron Corporation; Nexen Inc.; associated with non-members of the as modified by Amendment No. 1, be, Energy Transfer Partners, L.P.; Apache exchange, if such transaction is effected and hereby are, approved. Corporation; Kimco Realty Corporation; in compliance with certain Prudential Financial, Inc.; Prologis, L.P.; 19 For the Commission, by the Division of requirements. Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated HCP, Inc.; Lincoln National Under the proposals, the Exchanges authority.24 Corporation; The Travelers Companies, would add G orders priced better than Elizabeth M. Murphy, Inc.; Textron Financial Corporation; the closing price to the list of ‘‘must Secretary. Textron Inc.; The Williams Companies, execute’’ interest to be allocated in Inc.; Pacific Gas and Electric Company; [FR Doc. 2012–20839 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] whole or part at the close. Only G orders and Starwood Hotels & Resorts priced better than the closing price BILLING CODE 8011–01–P Worldwide, Inc. (the ‘‘Additional Single would be eligible to execute as part of Names’’). the ‘‘must execute’’ interest, and then only after execution of all other ‘‘must SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s execute’’ interest.20 COMMISSION Statement of the Purpose of, and [Release No. 34–67696; File No. SR–ICC– Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 18 See 15 U.S.C. 78k(a)(1)(G). 2012–12] Change 19 Rule 11a1–1(T)(a)(1)–(3) provides that each of In its filing with the Commission, ICC the following requirements must be met: (1) A Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE included statements concerning the member must disclose that a bid or offer for its Clear Credit LLC; Notice of Filing of account is for its account to any member with purpose of and basis for the proposed whom such bid or offer is placed or to whom it is Proposed Rule Change To Amend rule change and discussed any communicated, and any member through whom Schedule 502 of the ICE Clear Credit comments it received on the proposed that bid or offer is communicated must disclose to Rules To Provide for Clearing of rule change. The text of these statements others participating in effecting the order that it is Additional Single Name Investment for the account of a member; (2) immediately before may be examined at the places specified executing the order, a member (other than the Grade CDS Contracts in Item IV below. ICC has prepared specialist in such security) presenting any order for summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), the account of a member on the exchange must August 20, 2012. clearly announce or otherwise indicate to the and (C) below, of the most significant Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the 3 specialist and to other members then present for the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 aspects of these statements. trading in such security on the exchange that he is 1 2 presenting an order for the account of a member; (‘‘Act’’) and Rule 19b–4 thereunder (A) Self-Regulatory Organization’s and (3) notwithstanding rules of priority, parity, notice is hereby given that on August 9, Statement of the Purpose of, and and precedence otherwise applicable, any member Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule presenting for execution a bid or offer for its own to other ‘‘may execute’’ interest will remain Change account or for the account of another member must unchanged under the proposal. grant priority to any bid or offer at the same price 21 15 U.S.C. 78k(a)(1)(G). As with the Standard North American for the account of a person who is not, or is not 22 Corporate Single Names currently associated with, a member, irrespective of the size 17 CFR 240.11a1–1(T). The Commission notes of any such bid or offer or the time when entered. that this exemption is available only for orders for cleared, ICC plans to provide for the See 17 CFR 240.11a1–1(T)(a)(1)–(3). the account of Exchange members. The Commission clearance of contracts with a also reminds the Exchanges and their members that, 20 In its proposal, the Exchanges note that Section in addition to yielding priority to non-member restructuring type of no restructuring, 11(a)(1)(G) of the Act does not require better-priced orders at the same price, members submitting ‘‘G standardized maturity dates up to the G orders to yield. See Notices, 77 FR at 40135 and orders’’ must also meet the other requirements 40131. See also 17 CFR 240.11a1–1(T)(a)(3), which 10-year tenor and both standardized under section 11(a)(1)(G) and Rule 11a1–1(T) to requires that a ‘‘member presenting for execution a coupons. One of the Additional Single effect transactions for their own accounts in bid or offer for its own account or for the account reliance on this exception (or satisfy the Names (Starwood Hotels & Resorts of another member shall grant priority to any bid requirements of another exception). Worldwide, Inc.) was recently added by or offer at the same price for the account of a person 23 who is not, or is not associated with, a member 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). Markit as one of the one hundred irrespective of the size of any such bid or offer or 24 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). the time when entered.’’ The priority of G orders 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 3 The Commission has modified the text of the with a price equal to the closing price in relation 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. summaries prepared by ICC.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51600 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
twenty-five single constituents of its to be appropriate and publishes its not edit personal identifying Markit CDX North American Investment reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which information from submissions. You Grade Series 18 Index, and is not the self-regulatory organization should submit only information that currently being cleared by ICC. Another consents, the Commission will: you wish to make available publicly. All of the Additional Single Names (Textron (A) By order approve or disapprove submissions should refer to File Financial Corporation) is a constituent the proposed rule change; or Number SR–ICC–2012–12 and should of the Series 8 through 12 of the Markit (B) institute proceedings to determine be submitted on or before September 14, CDX North American Investment Grade whether the proposed rule change 2012. Index, and has not been cleared should be disapproved. For the Commission by the Division of previously by ICC. All other Additional IV. Solicitation of Comments Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Single Names are not constituents of authority.5 Interested persons are invited to Series 8 through 18 of the Markit CDX Elizabeth M. Murphy, submit written data, views, and North American Investment Grade Secretary. arguments concerning the foregoing, Index. The Additional Single Names do [FR Doc. 2012–20823 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] not require any changes to the body of including whether the proposed rule BILLING CODE 8011–01–P the ICC Rules. ICC will clear the change is consistent with the Act. Additional Single Names pursuant to Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: ICC’s existing Rules. The Additional SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Single Names do not require any Electronic Comments COMMISSION changes to the ICC risk management • Use the Commission’s Internet framework including the ICC margin [Release No. 34–67692; File No. SR–ICC– comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ 2012–13] methodology, guaranty fund rules/sro.shtml§ ); or methodology, pricing parameters, or • Send an email to rule- Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE pricing model. The only change being [email protected]. Please include File Clear Credit LLC; Notice of Filing and submitted is the inclusion of the Number SR–ICC–2012–12 on the subject Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Additional Single Names to Schedule line. Rule Change To Amend Schedule 502 502 of the ICC Rules. The Additional of the ICC Rules To Provide for Single Names have been reviewed by Paper Comments Clearing of Additional Markit CDX the ICC Risk Department, the ICC • Send paper comments in triplicate North American Investment Grade Trading Advisory Committee, and the to Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary, Indices ICC Risk Committee. Securities and Exchange Commission, ICC believes that the clearing of the 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC August 20, 2012. Additional Single Names is consistent 20549–1090. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the with the purposes and requirements of Securities Exchange Act of 1934 4 All submissions should refer to File 1 2 Section 17A of the Act and the rules Number SR–ICC–2012–12. This file (‘‘Act’’) and Rule 19b–4 thereunder and regulations thereunder applicable to number should be included on the notice is hereby given that on August ICC because it will facilitate the prompt subject line if email is used. To help the 10, 2012, ICE Clear Credit LLC (‘‘ICC’’) and accurate settlement of security- Commission process and review your filed with the Securities and Exchange based swaps and contribute to the comments more efficiently, please use Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the safeguarding of securities and funds only one method. The Commission will proposed rule change as described in associated with security-based swap post all comments on the Commission’s Items I, II and III below, which Items transactions. Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ have been prepared primarily by ICC. ICC filed the proposed rule change Self-Regulatory Organization’s rules/sro.shtml§ ). Copies of the pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) 3 of the Statement on Burden on Competition submission, all subsequent Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(4)(ii) 4 ICC does not believe the proposed amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule thereunder, so that the proposed rule rule change would have any impact, or change was effective upon filing with impose any burden, on competition. change that are filed with the Commission, and all written the Commission. The Commission is (C) Self-Regulatory Organization’s communications relating to the publishing this notice to solicit Statement on Comments on the proposed rule change between the comments on the proposed rule change Proposed Rule Change Received From Commission and any person, other than from interested parties. Members, Participants or Others those that may be withheld from the I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Written comments relating to the public in accordance with the Statement of Terms of Substance of the proposed rule change have not been provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Proposed Rule Change solicited or received. ICC will notify the available for Web site viewing and The purpose of proposed rule change Commission of any written comments printing in the Commission’s Public is to provide for the clearance of the received by ICC. Reference Section, 100 F Street NE., following credit default swaps: Markit Washington, DC 20549, on official III. Date of Effectiveness of the CDX North American Investment Grade business days between the hours of Series 11 Index with a seven year Proposed Rule Change and Timing for 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such Commission Action maturity, maturing on December 20, filings will also be available for 2015, Markit CDX North American Within 45 days of the date of inspection and copying at the principal Investment Grade Series 12 Index with publication of this notice in the Federal office of ICC and on ICC’s Web site at
Register or within such longer period https://www.theice.com/publicdocs/ 5 _ 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may regulatory filings/ 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). designate if it finds such longer period ICEClearCredit_080912.pdf. 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. All comments received will be posted 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 15 U.S.C. 78q–1. without change; the Commission does 4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(4)(ii).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51601
a seven year maturity, maturing on June set forth in sections A, B, and C below, Comments may be submitted by any of 20, 2016, Markit CDX North American of the most significant aspects of such the following methods: Investment Grade Series 13 Index with statements. a three year maturity, maturing on Electronic Comments A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s December 20, 2012, Markit CDX North Statement of Purpose of, and Statutory • Use the Commission’s Internet American Investment Grade Series 13 comment form (http://www.sec.gov/ Index with a seven year maturity, Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change rules/sro.shtml); or maturing on December 20, 2016, Markit ICC believes that the clearing of the • CDX North American Investment Grade Additional Index will facilitate the Send an email to rule- Series 14 Index with a three year prompt and accurate settlement of [email protected]. Please include File maturity, maturing on June 20, 2013, swaps and contribute to the No. SR–ICC–2012–13 on the subject Markit CDX North American Investment safeguarding of securities and funds line. Grade Series 14 Index with a seven year associated with swap transactions. maturity, maturing on June 20, 2017, Paper Comments Markit CDX North American Investment B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s • Statement on Burden on Competition Send in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Grade Series 15 Index with a three year Murphy, Secretary, Securities and maturity, maturing on December 20, ICC does not believe that the Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., 2013, Markit CDX North American proposed rule change will have any Washington, DC 20549–1090. Investment Grade Series 15 Index with impact, or impose any burden, on a seven year maturity, maturing on competition. All submissions should refer to File December 20, 2017, Markit CDX North Number SR–ICC–2012–13. This file American Investment Grade Series 16 C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s number should be included on the Index with a three year maturity, Statement on Comments on the subject line if email is used. To help the maturing on June 20, 2014, Markit CDX Proposed Rule Change Received From Commission process and review your North American Investment Grade Members, Participants, or Others comments more efficiently, please use Series 16 Index with a seven year ICC has not solicited, and does not only one method. The Commission will maturity, maturing on June 20, 2018, intend to solicit, comments regarding post all comments on the Commission’s Markit CDX North American Investment this proposed rule change. ICC will Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/ Grade Series 17 Index with a three year notify the Commission of any written rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the maturity, maturing on December 20, comments received by ICC. submission, all subsequent 2014, Markit CDX North American Investment Grade Series 17 Index with III. Date of Effectiveness of the amendments, all written statements a seven year maturity, maturing on Proposed Rule Change and Timing for with respect to the proposed rule December 20, 2018, Markit CDX North Commission Action change that are filed with the American Investment Grade Series 18 Commission, and all written The foregoing rule change was filed Index with a three year maturity, communications relating to the pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) 5 of the maturing on June 20, 2015, and Markit proposed rule change between the Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(4)(ii) 6 thereunder CDX North American Investment Grade Commission and any person, other than and thus became effective upon filing Series 18 Index with a seven year those that may be withheld from the because it effects a change in an existing maturity, maturing on June 20, 2019 (the public in accordance with the service of a registered clearing agency ‘‘Additional Indices’’). ICC currently provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be that primarily affects the futures clears Markit CDX North American available for Web site viewing and clearing operations of the clearing Investment Grade Indices with five, printing in the Commission’s Public seven and ten year maturities. The agency with respect to futures that are not security futures and does not Reference Room, 100 F Street NE., Additional Indices do not require any Washington, DC 20549 on official changes to the body of the ICC Rules. significantly affect any securities clearing operations of the clearing business days between the hours of 10 ICC will clear the Additional Indices a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filings pursuant to ICC’s existing Rules. Also, agency or any related rights or obligations of the clearing agency or will also be available for inspection and clearing the Additional Indices does not copying at the principal office of ICE require any changes to the ICC risk persons using such service. At any time Clear Credit and on ICE Clear Credit’s management framework including the within sixty days of the filing of such Web site at https://www.theice.com/ ICC margin methodology, guaranty fund rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule publicdocs/regulatory_filings/ methodology, pricing parameters and _ pricing model. The only change relates change if it appears to the Commission ICEClearCredit 080912a.pdf. to the inclusion of the Additional that such action is necessary or All comments received will be posted Indices in Schedule 502 of the ICC appropriate in the public interest, for without change; the Commission does Rules. the protection of investors, or otherwise not edit personal identifying in furtherance of the purposes of the information from submissions. You II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Act. Statement of Purpose of, and Statutory should submit only information that Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change IV. Solicitation of Comments you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File In its filing with the Commission, ICC Interested persons are invited to Number SR–ICC–2012–13 and should included statements concerning the submit written data, views and be submitted on or before September 14, purpose and basis for the proposed rule arguments concerning the foregoing, change and discussed any comments it including whether the proposed rule 2012. received on the proposed rule change. change is consistent with the Act. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item 5 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). IV below. ICC has prepared summaries, 6 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(4)(ii).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51602 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
For the Commission, by the Division of times. The Commission has taken direct including the filing of at least one Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated action against Reverse Merger annual report containing audited authority.7 companies. During 2011, the financial statements for a full fiscal year Elizabeth M. Murphy, Commission suspended trading in, and commencing on a date after the date of Secretary. revoked the securities registration of, a filing with the Commission of the filing [FR Doc. 2012–20822 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] number of Reverse Merger companies.4 described in paragraph (1) above. BILLING CODE 8011–01–P The Commission also brought an In addition, a Reverse Merger enforcement proceeding against an audit company would be required to maintain firm relating to its work for Reverse on both an absolute and an average basis SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE Merger companies.5 In addition, the a minimum stock price of at least $4 COMMISSION Commission issued a bulletin on the through listing. BATS stated that requiring a [Release No. 34–67685; File No. SR–BATS– risks of investing in Reverse Merger 2012–023] companies, noting potential market and ‘‘seasoning’’ period prior to listing for regulatory risks related to investing in Reverse Merger companies should Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS Reverse Merger companies.6 provide great assurance that the Exchange, Inc.; Order Granting In light of the well-documented company’s operations and financial Approval of a Proposed Rule Change concerns related to some Reverse reporting are reliable, and will also to Amend BATS Rules 14.2 and 14.3 To Merger companies described above, provide time for its independent auditor Adopt Additional Listing Requirements BATS stated its belief that it is to detect any potential irregularities, as for Reverse Merger Companies and To appropriate to codify in its rules specific well as for the company to identify and Align BATS Rules With the Rules of requirements with respect to the initial implement enhancements to address Other Self-Regulatory Organizations listing qualification of Reverse Merger any internal control weaknesses. The companies. As proposed, a Reverse seasoning period would also provide August 17, 2012. Merger company would not be eligible time for regulatory and market scrutiny I. Introduction for listing unless the combined entity of the company and for any concerns had, immediately preceding the filing of that would preclude listing eligibility to On June 15, 2012, BATS Exchange, the initial listing application: be identified. Inc. (‘‘BATS’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with (1) Traded for at least one year in the BATS stated its belief that the the Securities and Exchange U.S. over-the-counter market, on proposed rule change would increase Commission (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant another national securities exchange, or transparency to issuers and market to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities on a regulated foreign exchange participants with respect to the factors Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Exchange considered by the Exchange in assessing 1 2 following the consummation of the Act’’) and Rule 19b–4 thereunder, a Reverse Merger and (i) in the case of a Reverse Merger companies for listing proposed rule change to amend BATS domestic issuer, filed with the and should generally reduce the risk of Rules 14.2 and 14.3 to adopt additional Commission a form 8–K including all of regulatory concerns with respect to listing requirements for companies that the information required by Item 2.01(f) these companies being discovered after become a reporting company under the of Form 8–K, including all required listing. BATS further noted that, while Exchange Act by combining with a audited financial statements; or (ii) in it believes that the proposed public shell, whether through a reverse the case of a foreign private issuer, filed requirements would be a meaningful merger, exchange offer, or otherwise (a the information described in (i) above additional safeguard, it is not possible to ‘‘Reverse Merger’’) and to align BATS on Form 20–F; guarantee that a Reverse Merger Rules with the rules of other self- (2) Maintained on both an absolute company (or any other listed company) regulatory organizations. The proposed and an average basis for a sustained is not engaged in undetected accounting rule change was published for comment period a minimum stock price of at least fraud or subject to other concealed and 3 in the Federal Register on July 5, 2012. $4, but in no event for less than 30 of undisclosed legal or regulatory The Commission received no comments the most recent 60 trading days prior to problems. on the proposed rule change. This order each of the filing of the initial listing For purposes of the proposal approves the proposed rule change. application and the date of the Reverse amending BATS Rules 14.2(c) and II. Description of the Proposal Merger company’s listing on the 14.3(b)(9) (which will both be Exchange, except that a Reverse Merger applicable to Reverse Merger companies BATS proposed to adopt more company that has satisfied the one-year which qualify to list under BATS Rules) stringent listing requirements for trading requirement described in and as defined above, a Reverse Merger operating companies that become paragraph (1) above and has filed at would mean any transaction whereby an Exchange Act reporting companies least four annual reports with the operating company became an Exchange through a Reverse Merger. In a Reverse Commission which each contain all Act reporting company by combining Merger, an existing public shell required audited financial statements either directly or indirectly with a shell company merges with a private for a full fiscal year commencing after company that was an Exchange Act operating company in a transaction in filing the information described in reporting company, whether through a which the shell company is the paragraph (1) above will not be subject Reverse Merger, exchange offer, or surviving legal entity. to this price requirement; and otherwise. However, a Reverse Merger Significant regulatory concerns, (3) Timely filed with the Commission would not include the acquisition of an including accounting fraud allegations, all required reports since the operating company by a listed company have arisen with respect to a number of consummation of the Reverse Merger, that qualified for initial listing under Reverse Merger companies in recent BATS Rule 14.2(b) (the Exchange’s 4 See Letter from Mary L. Schapiro to Hon. Patrick standard for companies whose business 7 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). T. McHenry, dated April 27, 2011 (‘‘Schapiro plan is to complete one or more 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). Letter’’), at pages 3–4. 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. 5 See Schapiro Letter at page 4. acquisitions). In determining whether a 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 67304 6 See ‘‘Investor Bulletin: Reverse Mergers’’ 2011– company was a shell company, BATS (June 28, 2012), 77 FR 39781 (‘‘Notice’’). 123. would consider, among other factors:
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51603
whether the company was considered a a Reverse Merger company is non- and perfect the mechanism of a free and ‘‘shell company’’ as defined in Rule compliant with BATS Rules. open market and a national market 12b–2 under the Exchange Act; what A Reverse Merger company would not system, and, in general, to protect percentage of the company’s assets were be subject to the requirements of investors and the public interest. active versus passive; whether the proposed BATS Rules 14.2(c)(3) and The development and enforcement of company generates revenues, and if so, 14.3(b)(9) if, in connection with its meaningful listing standards for an whether the revenues were passively or listing, it completes a firm commitment exchange is of substantial importance to actively generated; whether the underwritten public offering where the financial markets and the investing company’s expenses were reasonably gross proceeds to the Reverse Merger public. Among other things, listing related to the revenues being generated; company will be at least $40 million.7 standards provide the means for an how many employees worked in the In that case, the Reverse Merger exchange to screen issuers that seek to company’s revenue-generating business company would only need to meet the become listed, and to provide listed operations; how long the company had initial listing standards. BATS stated status only to those that are bona fide been without material business that it believes that it is appropriate to companies with sufficient public float, operations; and whether the company exempt Reverse Merger companies from investor base, and trading interest likely had publicly announced a plan to begin the proposed rule where they are listing to generate depth and liquidity operating activities or generate in conjunction with a sizable offering, as sufficient to promote fair and orderly revenues, including through a near-term those companies would be subject to the markets. Meaningful listing standards acquisition or transaction. same Commission review and due also are important given investor In order to qualify for initial listing, diligence by underwriters as a company expectations regarding the nature of a Reverse Merger company would be listing in conjunction with its IPO or securities that have achieved an required to comply with one of the any other company listing in exchange listing, and the role of an initial listing standards set forth in conjunction with an initial firm exchange in overseeing its market and BATS Rule 14.4 or 14.5 and the stock commitment underwritten public assuring compliance with its listing price and market value requirements of offering, so it would be inequitable to standards. BATS proposed to make more BATS Rule 14.8 or 14.9, as appropriate. subject them to more stringent rigorous its listing standards for Reverse Proposed Rules 14.2(c)(3) and 14.3(b)(9) requirements. BATS further noted that the proposal Merger companies, given the significant would supplement and not replace any is based on and consistent with recent regulatory concerns, including applicable requirements of Chapter XIV Commission approvals of analogous accounting fraud allegations, that have of BATS Rules. In addition to the rules for the New York Stock Exchange recently arisen with respect to these otherwise applicable requirements of LLC (‘‘NYSE’’), NYSE Amex LLC companies. As noted above, the BATS Rules, a Reverse Merger company (‘‘AMEX’’) and the NASDAQ Stock Commission previously approved would be eligible to submit an Market LLC (‘‘Nasdaq’’).8 similar filings by Nasdaq, NYSE and application for an initial listing only if NYSE Amex.11 The proposal, and those III. Discussion and Commission it meets the additional criteria specified previously filed by Nasdaq, NYSE and Findings above. NYSE Amex, among other things, are BATS would continue to have the The Commission has carefully intended to improve the reliability of discretion to impose more stringent reviewed the proposed rule change and the reported financial results of Reverse requirements than those set forth above finds that it is consistent with the Merger companies by requiring a pre- if the Exchange believed that it was requirements of the Act and the rule and listing ‘‘seasoning period’’ during which warranted in the case of a particular regulations thereunder applicable to a the post-merger public company would Reverse Merger company, based on, national securities exchange,9 and, in have produced financial and other among other things, an inactive trading particular, Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,10 information in connection with its market in the Reverse Merger company’s which, among other things, requires that required Commission filings. The securities, the existence of a low the rules of a national securities current proposal is also intended to number of publicly held shares that exchange be designed to prevent address concerns that some might were not subject to transfer restrictions, fraudulent and manipulative acts and attempt to meet the minimum price test if the Reverse Merger company had not practices, to promote just and equitable required for exchange listing through a had a Securities Act registration principles of trade, to foster cooperation quick manipulative scheme in the statement or other filing subjected to a and coordination with persons engaged securities of a Reverse Merger company, comprehensive review by the in regulating, clearing, settling, by requiring that minimum price to be Commission, or if the Reverse Merger processing information with respect to, sustained for a meaningful period of company had disclosed that it had and facilitating transactions in time. material weaknesses in its internal securities, to remove impediments to The Commission believes the controls which had been identified by proposed one-year seasoning management and/or the Reverse Merger 7 The prospectus and registration statement requirement for Reverse Merger company’s independent auditor and had covering the offering would thus need to relate to the combined financial statements and operations companies that seek to list on the not yet implemented an appropriate of the Reverse Merger Company. Exchange is reasonably designed to corrective action plan. 8 See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 65709 address concerns that the potential for BATS further stated that any Reverse (November 8, 2011), 76 FR 70795 (November 15, accounting fraud and other regulatory Merger company would have to comply 2011) (File No. SR–NYSE–2011–38); 65710 issues is more pronounced for this type (November 8, 2011), 76 FR 70790 (November 15, with all listing standards set forth in 2011) (File No. SR–NYSEAmex–2011–55); 65708 of issuer. As discussed above, these BATS Rules, including corporate (November 8, 2011), 76 FR 70799 (November 15, additional listing requirements will governance standards. BATS also noted 2011) (File No. SR–NASDAQ–2011–073). assure that a Reverse Merger company that it would monitor the compliance 9 In approving this proposed rule change, the has produced and filed with the Commission has considered the proposed rule’s with applicable BATS Rules by any impact on efficiency, competition, and capital Commission at least one full year of all Reverse Merger company and would formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). investigate any issues that indicate that 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). 11 See supra note 8.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51604 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
required audited financial statements treatment as issuers that were not Dated: August 13, 2012. following the Reverse Merger formed through a Reverse Merger. Thomas R. Nides, transaction before it is eligible to list on Nevertheless, the Commission expects Deputy Secretary for Management and BATS. The Reverse Merger company the Exchange to monitor any issuers that Resources. also must have filed all required qualify for these exceptions and, if fraud Section 7044(c) of the Department of Commission reports since the or other abuses are detected, to propose State, Foreign Operations consummation of the Reverse Merger, appropriate changes to its listing Appropriations Act, 2012 (Div. I, which should help assure that material standards. Pub. L. 112–74) information about the issuer have been filed with the Commission and that the For the reasons discussed above, the Funding for the Extraordinary issuer has a demonstrated track record Commission believes that BATS’s Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia of meeting its Commission filing and proposal will further the purposes of Sec. 7044(c) Cambodia.—Funds made disclosure obligations. In addition, the Section 6(b)(5) of the Act by, among available in this Act for a United States requirement that the Reverse Merger other things, helping prevent fraud and contribution to a Khmer Rouge tribunal company has traded for at least one year manipulation associated with Reverse may only be made available if the in the over-the-counter market or on Merger companies, and protecting Secretary of State certifies to the another exchange could make it more investors and the public interest. Committees on Appropriations that the likely that analysts have followed the IV. Conclusion United Nations and the Government of company for a sufficient period of time Cambodia are taking credible steps to to provide an additional check on the It is therefore ordered, pursuant to address allegations of corruption and validity of the financial and other Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, that the mismanagement within the tribunal. information made available to the proposed rule change (SR–BATS–2012– public. Memorandum of Justification for The Commission also believes the 023) is approved. Certification Related to the Khmer proposed requirement for a Reverse For the Commission, by the Division of Rouge Tribunal Under Section 7044(C) Merger company to maintain the Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated Of the Department of State, Foreign specified minimum share price for a authority.12 Operations and Related Programs sustained period, and for at least 30 of Elizabeth M. Murphy, Appropriations Act, 2012 the most recent 60 trading days, prior to Secretary. Section 7044(c) of the Department of the date of the initial listing application [FR Doc. 2012–20818 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] State, Foreign Operations and Related and the date of listing, is reasonably Program Appropriations Act, 2012 (Div. designed to address concerns that the BILLING CODE 8011–01–P I Pub. L. 112–74), provides that funds potential for manipulation of the appropriated by that act for a United security to meet the minimum price States contribution to the Extraordinary requirements is more pronounced for Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia DEPARTMENT OF STATE this type of issuer. By requiring that (ECCC, also known as the Khmer Rouge minimum price to be maintained for a Tribunal) may only be made available if meaningful period of time, the proposal [Public Notice 7990] the Secretary of State certifies to the should make it more difficult for a Committees on Appropriations that the manipulative scheme to be successfully Certification Related to the Khmer United Nations (UN) and Royal used to meet the Exchange’s minimum Rouge Tribunal Government of Cambodia (RGC) are share price requirements. taking credible steps to address In addition, the Commission believes Pursuant to the authority vested in me allegations of corruption and that the proposed exceptions to the under Section 7044(c) of the Department mismanagement within the ECCC. enhanced listing requirements for of State, Foreign Operations, and Deputy Secretary Nides has signed the Reverse Merger companies that (1) Related Programs Appropriations Act, certification pursuant to State complete a substantial firm commitment 2012 (Division I, Pub. L. 112–74) Department Delegation of Authority underwritten public offering in (SFOAA) and Delegation of Authority 245–1. connection with its listing, or (2) have 245–1, I hereby certify that that the Background filed at least four annual reports United Nations and Government of containing all required audited financial Cambodia are taking credible steps to The ECCC, which began operations in statements with the Commission address allegations of corruption and 2006, was established as a national following the filing of all required mismanagement within the court with UN assistance to bring to information about the Reverse Merger Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of justice senior leaders and those most transaction, and satisfying the one-year responsible for the deaths of as many as Cambodia (also known as the ‘‘Khmer trading requirement, reasonably two million Cambodians under the accommodate issuers that may present a Rouge Tribunal’’). Khmer Rouge regime, which was in lower risk of fraud or other illegal This Certification shall be published power from April 17, 1975 until January activity. The Commission believes it is in the Federal Register, and sent, along 6, 1979. In 2010, the ECCC completed reasonable for the Exchange to conclude with related Memorandum of its first case (Case 001), convicting that, although formed through a Reverse Justification, to the appropriate Kaing Guek Eav (aka ‘‘Duch’’), former Merger, an issuer that (1) undergoes the committees of the Congress. chief of the Tuol Sleng torture center, of due diligence and vetting required in crimes against humanity and war connection with a sizeable underwritten crimes, and sentenced him to 35 years public offering, or (2) has prepared and in prison. Duch’s trial was the first filed with the Commission four years of attempt in three decades to hold a all required audited financial statements Khmer Rouge official accountable for following the Reverse Merger, presents that era’s atrocities and was a milestone less risk and warrants the same 12 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). in the history of Cambodian justice. In
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51605
February, 2012 the ECCC’s Supreme protect the confidentiality of Economic and Social Affairs. The UN Chamber upheld that conviction, and complainants, ensure that there are no Office of Legal Affairs actively engages extended Duch’s sentence to life in reprisals for whistle-blowing, and on judicial management issues. For prison. The United States, other foreign provide a report of his activities to both example, the ECCC accepted the UN’s governments, and non-governmental the UN and RGC. Addressing the ECCC recommendation that the Pre-Trial organizations (NGOs) monitoring the in October 2010, the Secretary General Chamber sit on a full-time basis in order ECCC agree that proceedings throughout commended the work of the to improve the ECCC’s efficiency and to met international standards of justice. In Independent Counselor and the effect expedite its decision-making. September, 2010, the four surviving that office has on the public perception Since the appointment of the new senior leaders of the Khmer Rouge, of the ECCC—that the Tribunal’s ECCC administration, the creation of the including Nuon Chea (‘‘Brother Number administration will not tolerate any Independent Counselor position, and 2’’), were indicted on a variety of form of corruption. the establishment of the UN’s Special charges (‘‘Case 002’’), including crimes These steps have led to increased Expert Office, the United States has not against humanity, grave breaches of the confidence in the ECCC. The Human learned of any credible allegations of Geneva Convention, and genocide. The Rights Center of the University of corruption or mismanagement within trial commenced in November 2011. In California Berkeley conducted a survey the ECCC. Developments in Cases 003 response to pre-trial motions, Ms. Ieng in December 2010 across 125 and 004, while not related to corruption Thirith, the Khmer Rouge’s Minister of Cambodian communes nationwide. The or mismanagement, do warrant Social Affairs, was found mentally Center’s final report, released on June 9, examination. incompetent to stand trial. She has not 2011, reveals that an increasing number In late April 2011, the ECCC’s Office been released from custody, as of Cambodians have confidence in the of Co-Investigating Judges (OCIJ)—at the treatment is underway to see if her court. A recent poll by the International time led by Cambodian national You condition can be sufficiently improved Republican Institute found that 77 Bunleng and German national Siegfried to allow her to stand trial. Investigations percent of Cambodians were aware of Blunk—ended its investigation into by the ECCC’s Office of the Co- the proceedings at the ECCC. Case 003 and forwarded the evidence to Investigating Judges commenced in Donor States, NGOs, and other the Office of the Co-Prosecutors. The September, 2009 against three suspects monitors of the ECCC have expressed international co-prosecutor, Andrew (‘‘Case 003’’) and no final decision has increased confidence in the proceedings Cayley, dissatisfied with the amount been made regarding the legal question as well. The Secretary General stated in and depth of evidence, requested the of whether the suspects and their the fall of 2010 that ‘‘Beyond all doubt, OCIJ to conduct further investigations alleged crimes fall within the the court has shown that it is capable of and publicly released his request for jurisdiction of the ECCC. Two prosecuting complex international additional investigation. This action led additional suspects (‘‘Case 004’’) are crimes in accordance with international to a response from the OCIJ that also being investigated. standards.’’ In a resolution adopted at appeared to threaten Cayley with its 18th session (September 2011), the contempt for publicizing confidential Factors Justifying Certification Human Rights Council reaffirmed the matters. While the OCIJ subsequently From the time the ECCC commenced importance of the ECCC as an made it clear that it did not seek to operations in 2006, there have been independent and impartial body, and sanction Cayley, it also disagreed with allegations of corruption on the welcomed the assistance of member Mr. Cayley’s legal position and administrative side of the court, states and the efforts of the Cambodian defended the adequacy of its factual primarily in the form of salary kickback government to work with the UN to investigations. While no closing order schemes affecting Cambodian staff ensure the highest standards of recommending dismissal was ever filed, members. These allegations received administration are met. ECCC’s observers assess that the OCIJ widespread attention from U.S. and In July 2010, the UN established the supported dismissing the suspects from international media, and concerns about office of the Special Expert to the further investigation. Mr. Blunk came corruption led many to question the Secretary-General of the ECCC to under intense criticism from outside ECCC’s ability to deliver justice. In late provide advice and assistance to observers and by some of his own office 2008, at the request of the United States successfully managing this high-profile for his handling of Case 003, and a and other donors, the RGC removed the war crimes tribunal. In furtherance of prominent international NGO alleged Cambodian head of administration, the this mandate, the Special Expert is mismanagement and possibly person most associated with the tasked with monitoring, reporting, and misconduct. However, neither the NGO, corruption scheme. His replacement, addressing any and all administrative nor missions by the UN’s Office of Tony Kranh, who remains the Acting issues related to the ECCC’s functioning. Human Resource Management nor any Director today, has been competent and The position was held from July 2010 to other source has produced evidence that has cooperated well with the donor October 2011 by J. Clint Williamson, substantiates this allegation. community, the ECCC officials, and the U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for War Nevertheless, under increasing pressure, UN Office of Legal Affairs. Crimes Issues from 2006–2009. Mr. Blunk announced his resignation The ECCC, in cooperation with the Williamson was succeeded in January October 10, 2011, claiming that he was UN, has taken additional steps to 2012 by David Scheffer, himself also a unable to carry out his duties due to protect the integrity of its proceedings former Ambassador-at-Large for War political interference by the RGC. against corruption. In August 2009 the Crimes Issues (1997–2001). It was expected that Mr. Blunk would UN and RGC reached an agreement to The ECCC provides a monthly report be succeeded by Mr. Laurent Kasper- establish an Independent Counselor, to the UN Controller and the UN Ansermet of Switzerland, whom the UN which is semi-autonomous from the Department of Economic and Social had previously nominated and Tribunal’s administration, the UN, the Affairs, which closely monitors the confirmed as the reserve co- RGC and donor states, to hear and Tribunal’s activities, including its investigative judge. It was the UN’s legal address corruption allegations at ECCC. expenditures. In addition, all hiring on view that Kasper-Ansermet’s accession The guidelines established confirm the the international side of the ECCC is was to have been automatic. However, Independent Counselor’s obligations to vetted by the UN Department of citing statements Mr. Kasper-Ansermet
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51606 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
has published on Twitter prior to his continue their vigilant engagement with to be displayed at The Metropolitan nomination, the RGC refused to confirm the United Nations and the Royal Museum of Art until on or about him. After attempting to exercise his Cambodian government to ensure that January 31, 2014. I have ordered that duties as reserve co-investigating judge the ECCC remains judicially Public Notice of these Determinations for six months, Mr. Kasper-Ansermet independent, corruption-free, and well- be published in the Federal Register. tendered his resignation on March 19, managed. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 2012 citing his inability to gain the [FR Doc. 2012–20899 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] further information, including a list of cooperation of the Cambodian national BILLING CODE 4710–30–P the additional exhibit objects, contact co-investigating judge, Mr. You Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, Office Bunleng. Mr. Kasper-Ansermet’s of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of resignation was effective May 4, 2012. DEPARTMENT OF STATE State (telephone: 202–632–6467). The To replace Kasper-Ansermet, the UN [Public Notice 7993] mailing address is U.S. Department of nominated U.S. citizen Mark Harmon, a State, SA–5, L/PD, Fifth Floor (Suite retired career U.S. Department of Justice Culturally Significant Objects Imported 5H03), Washington, DC 20522–0505. prosecutor, who also served more than for Exhibition Determinations: a decade as a Senior Trial Attorney in Dated: August 17, 2012. ‘‘Extravagant Inventions: The Princely J. Adam Ereli, the Office of the Prosecutor of the Furniture of the Roentgens,’’ Formerly Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau International Criminal Tribunal for the Titled ‘‘Seductive Luxury and former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Unlike of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Innovation: The Furniture of Abraham Department of State. Kasper-Ansermet, the Cambodian and David Roentgen’’ Supreme Council of the Magistracy [FR Doc. 2012–20894 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] (SCM) confirmed Harmon in the ACTION: Notice, correction. BILLING CODE 4710–05–P position. The ECCC’s jurisdiction over suspects SUMMARY: On August 29, 2011, notice in the Cases 003/004 has yet to be was published on page 53705 of the DEPARTMENT OF STATE resolved; and therefore the co- Federal Register (volume 76, number [Public Notice 7992] investigating judges have not made a 167) of determinations made by the final determination on whether these Department of State pertaining to the Notice of Request for Expressions of individuals should be indicted. Should exhibition ‘‘Seductive Luxury and Interest by Environmental Experts in the national and international co- Innovation: The Furniture of Abraham Assisting the CAFTA–DR Secretariat investigating judges disagree, there is a and David Roentgen.’’ The referenced for Environmental Matters With the formal process under the governing notice is corrected here to change the Preparation of Factual Records documents of the ECCC for resolving exhibition name to ‘‘Extravagant this disagreement in the Pre-Trial Inventions: The Princely Furniture of AGENCY: Department of State. Chamber. the Roentgens’’ and to include ACTION: Request for environmental Before his departure, Kasper- additional objects as part of the experts to assist the Dominican Ansermet complained publicly that his exhibition. Notice is hereby given of the Republic-Central America-United States investigation of Cases 003/004 has been following determinations: Pursuant to Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA–DR) obstructed by the non-cooperation of the authority vested in me by the Act of Secretariat for Environmental Matters Cambodian-appointed judges and October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. (Secretariat) with the preparation of officials. Judge Bunleng publicly 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March factual records. responded that the difficulties had 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and arisen because Kasper-Ansermet had not Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. SUMMARY: The Department of State and been confirmed in his appointment due 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et the Office of the United States Trade to the latter’s public comments on seq.), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of Representative are compiling confidential judicial matters. As Mark October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority recommendations for candidates to be Harmon’s nomination has been No. 236–3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as included on a roster of environmental confirmed by the SCM, we anticipate appropriate, Delegation of Authority No. experts from which the CAFTA–DR that he will receive appropriate 257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby Secretariat can select individuals to cooperation from national and determine that the additional objects to assist in the preparation of factual international judges and officials. There be included in the exhibition records. The Department of State and may be disagreements about whether ‘‘Extravagant Inventions: The Princely the Office of the United States Trade the suspects in Cases 003/004 should be Furniture of the Roentgens,’’ imported Representative invite environmental subject to indictment and trial, but we from abroad for temporary exhibition experts, including representatives from expect these matters to be resolved by within the United States, are of cultural non-governmental organizations, the co-investigative judges and the Pre- significance. The additional objects are educational institutions, private sector Trial Chamber in accordance with imported pursuant to loan agreements enterprises, and other interested applicable law and procedure. with the foreign owners or custodians. persons, to submit their expression of I also determine that the exhibition or interest in being included on a roster of Certification and United States Policy display of the additional exhibit objects experts. We encourage submitters to Objectives at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, review the following prior to offering a Certification recognizes the efforts of New York, NY, from on or about recommendation: (1) Chapter 17: the UN and RGC to address allegations October 29, 2012, until on or about Environment of the CAFTA–DR, in of corruption and mismanagement January 27, 2013, and at possible particular Articles 17.7 and 17.8; (2) within the ECCC. It is not an indication, additional exhibitions or venues yet to paragraph 2(d) of the Understanding however, that work is complete. Both be determined, is in the national Regarding the Establishment of a parties must continue to exercise interest. At the conclusion of the Secretariat for Environmental Matters oversight of the ECCC’s operations, and exhibition at The Metropolitan Museum Under CAFTA–DR; (3) paragraphs 3 and the donor community and NGOs must of Art, three of the works will continue 4 of Article 5 of the Agreement
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51607
Establishing a Secretariat for expertise, including regional expertise, 2. Contact information (should Environmental Matters Under CAFTA– from which the Secretariat shall select, include a business address, telephone DR; and (4) Decision No. 10 of the as appropriate, individuals to assist the number, and email address). CAFTA–DR Environmental Affairs Secretariat with the preparation of 3. Citizenship(s). Council (Council). These documents are factual records pursuant to Article 17.8 4. A resume or curriculum vitae. available at: http://www.state.gov/e/oes/ of the CAFTA–DR. 5. A letter of reference. env/trade/caftadr/index.htm. Consistent with the obligation of DATES: To be assured of timely paragraph 2(d) of the Understanding 6. Three individuals, in addition to consideration, all written suggestions and paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 5 of the author of the letter of reference, who are requested no later than September 3, the Agreement Establishing a Secretariat are willing to serve as a reference and 2012. for Environmental Matters Under provide information regarding the ADDRESSES: Written suggestions should CAFTA–DR, on July 3, 2012, the expert’s professional experience (should be emailed or faxed to Kelly Milton, Council set forth procedures for the include the names, contact information, Office of Environment and Natural Secretariat to follow regarding the and relationship to expert). Resources, Office of the United States engagement of such experts. See 7. A summary of any current and past Trade Representative Decision No. 10 ‘‘Engagement of employment by, consulting experience, ([email protected], Fax: 202–395– Environmental Experts to Assist the or other work for any of the 9517), and Abby Lindsay, Office of Secretariat for Environmental Matters Governments that are a Party to the Environmental Policy, Bureau of Oceans with the Preparation of Factual CAFTA–DR. and International Environmental and Records.’’ Pursuant to Decision 10, the 8. Proof of Spanish and English Scientific Affairs, U.S. Department of General Coordinator of the Secretariat language proficiency, written and State ([email protected], Fax: 202– shall compile the recommendations spoken. 647–5947), with the subject line received from the Parties and present For additional information, please ‘‘CAFTA–DR Roster of Environmental the Council with the proposed roster of Experts to Assist in Development of visit: http://www.state.gov/e/oes/env/ environmental experts. The Council trade/caftadr/index.htm. Factual Records.’’ If you have access to shall decide, by consensus, to establish Disclaimer: This Public Notice is a the Internet, you can view and comment the roster as proposed. on this notice by going to: http:// request for expressions of interest, and www.regulations.gov/#!home and According to Decision No. 10, is not a request for applications. No searching on docket number: DOS– individuals selected for inclusion on the granting of money is directly associated 2012–0047. roster shall: with this request for environmental • FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Have demonstrated a record of good experts. The Department of State and Abby Lindsay, telephone (202) 647– judgment, objectivity and environmental the Office of the United States Trade 8772 or Kelly Milton, telephone (202) expertise; Representative will select which • Carry out all duties fairly, thoroughly 395–9590. environmental experts are included on and diligently; the U.S. recommendation of candidates. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant • Demonstrate national or regional to Article 17.7 and 17.8 of the expertise where possible; Dated: August 20, 2012. Dominican Republic-Central America- • Avoid impropriety or the appearance of John Thompson, United States Free Trade Agreement impropriety and shall observe high standards Acting Director, Office of Environmental (CAFTA–DR), any person of a Party may of conduct so that the integrity or Policy, Department of State. file a submission with the CAFTA–DR impartiality of any work performed by the [FR Doc. 2012–20896 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] expert at the request of the SEM shall not be Secretariat asserting that a Party is BILLING CODE 4710–09–P failing to effectively enforce its called into question; • Not seek or receive instructions from any environmental laws. Where the government or any other authority external to Secretariat determines that a submission the SEM or Council. Accordingly, experts meets the criteria set out in paragraph shall not have ex parte contacts with any of STATE JUSTICE INSTITUTE 2 and 4 of Article 17.7, and where the the Parties without the prior explicit consent Secretariat considers that the of the Secretariat or Council; SJI Board of Directors Meeting submission, in light of any response • Safeguard from public disclosure any provided by the Party, warrants information received in their capacity as an AGENCY: State Justice Institute. developing a factual record, the environmental expert, where the information ACTION: Notice of Meeting. Secretariat shall so inform the Council is designated by its source as confidential or proprietary; and provide its reasons. The Secretariat SUMMARY: The SJI Board of Directors • Ensure that his or her work complies shall prepare a factual record if the with all applicable laws and regulations; and will be meeting on Monday, September Council, by vote of any Party, instructs • Promptly disclose any interest, 17, 2012 at 1 p.m. The meeting will be it to do so. For more information on relationship or matter that is likely to affect held at the National Judicial College, in factual records, see the Web site of the the expert’s independence or impartiality or Reno, Nevada. The purpose of this CAFTA–DR Secretariat, available at: that might reasonably create an appearance of meeting is to consider grant applications www.saa-sem.org. impropriety or an apprehension of bias in his for the 4th quarter of FY 2012, and other Pursuant to paragraph 2(d) of the work. business. All portions of this meeting Understanding Regarding the are open to the public. Establishment of a Secretariat for The Department of State and the ADDRESSES: Environmental Matters Under CAFTA– Office of the US Trade Representative National Judicial College, DR (the Understanding), the Council are requesting expressions of interest in Judicial College Building, M/S 358, shall establish a roster of environmental being included on the roster from Reno, NV 89557, 1–800–25–JUDGE. experts, comprising persons with a environmental experts. To do so, please FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: demonstrated record of good judgment, submit the following information: Jonathan Mattiello, Executive Director, objectivity, and environmental 1. Full Name. State Justice Institute, 11951 Freedom
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51608 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
Drive, Suite 1020, Reston, VA 20190, with the Internal Revenue Service as FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 571–313–8843, [email protected]. 501 C(6) or 501 C(3) tax-exempt Kathy DePaepe at (405) 954–9362, or by organizations, to compete for Jonathan D. Mattiello, email at: [email protected]. participation in OSDBU’s Small Executive Director. Business Transportation Resource SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: [FR Doc. 2012–20865 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Center (SBTRC) program in the Mid- OMB Control Number: 2120–0608. BILLING CODE P Atlantic Region. Title: Commercial Space Issued in Washington, DC, on August 15, Transportation Licensing Regulations. 2012. Form Numbers: FAA Form 8800–1. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Brandon Neal, Type of Review: Renewal of an Office of the Secretary Director, Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization,Office of the Secretary, information collection. Notice of Funding Availability for the U.S. Department of Transportation. Background: The Commercial Space Small Business Transportation [FR Doc. 2012–20846 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] Launch Act of 1984, 49 U.S.C. App. Resource Center Program BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P §§ 2601–2623, as recodified at 49 U.S.C. Subtitle IX, Ch. 701—Commercial Space AGENCY: Department of Transportation Launch Activities, 49 U.S.C. 70101– (DOT), Office of the Secretary of DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Transportation (OST), Office of Small 70119 (1994), requires certain data be and Disadvantaged Business Utilization Federal Aviation Administration provided in applying for a license to (OSDBU). conduct commercial space launch ACTION: Notice of Funding Availability; Agency Information Collection activities. These data are required to Extension of closing and award dates. Activities: Requests for Comments; demonstrate to the Federal Aviation Clearance of Renewed Approval of Administration (FAA), Associate SUMMARY: This action extends the Information Collection: Commercial Administrator for Commercial Space closing and award dates for a Notice of Space Transportation Licensing Transportation (AST), that a license Funding Availability for the Small Regulations applicant’s proposed activities meet Business Transportation Resource AGENCY: Federal Aviation applicable public safety, national Center in the Mid-Atlantic Region that Administration (FAA), DOT. security, and foreign policy interests of was published on July 20, 2012, 77 FR the United States. 42790. USDOT OSDBU is extending the ACTION: Notice and request for closing date to allow eligible entities comments. Respondents: Approximately 4 space launch applicants. time to adequately submit a proposal. SUMMARY: In accordance with the DATES: The submission period for the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA Frequency: Information is collected Notice of Funding Availability invites public comments about our on occasion. published on July 20, 2012 closing on intention to request the Office of Estimated Average Burden per September 3, 2012 is extended until Management and Budget (OMB) Response: 1544.5 hours. September 17, 2012, 5 p.m. Eastern approval to renew an information Standard Time. Also, the notice of collection. The Federal Register Notice Estimated Total Annual Burden: award for the competed region on or with a 60-day comment period soliciting 6,178 hours. before August 17, 2012 is extended until comments on the following collection of Public Comments Invited: You are October 1, 2012. information was published on May 18, asked to comment on any aspect of this ADDRESSES: Proposals must be 2012, vol. 77, no. 97, page 29748–29749. information collection, including (a) electronically submitted to OSDBU via The information will determine if Whether the proposed collection of email at [email protected]. applicant proposals for conducting information is necessary for FAA’s FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For commercial space launches can be performance; (b) the accuracy of the further information concerning this accomplished according to regulations estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to notice, contact Ms. Patricia Martin, U.S. issued by the Office of the Associate enhance the quality, utility and clarity Department of Transportation, Office of Administrator for Commercial Space of the information collection; and (d) Small and Disadvantaged Business Transportation. ways that the burden could be Utilization, 1200 New Jersey Avenue DATES: Written comments should be minimized without reducing the quality SE., W56–462, Washington, DC 20590. submitted by September 24, 2012. of the collected information. The agency Telephone: 1–800 532 1169. Email: ADDRESSES: Interested persons are will summarize and/or include your [email protected]. invited to submit written comments on comments in the request for OMB’s SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the July the proposed information collection to clearance of this information collection. 20, 2012 document (Notice No. USDOT– the Office of Information and Regulatory Issued in Washington, DC, on August 20, OST–OSDBU–SBTRC2012–11; Docket Affairs, Office of Management and 2012. Number: DOT–OST–2009–0092), the Budget. Comments should be addressed Department of Transportation (DOT), to the attention of the Desk Officer, Albert R. Spence, Office of the Secretary (OST), Office of Department of Transportation/FAA, and FAA Assistant Information Collection Small and Disadvantaged Business sent via electronic mail to Clearance Officer, IT Enterprises Business Utilization (OSDBU) announces the [email protected], or faxed Services Division, AES–200. opportunity for; (1) business centered to (202) 395–6974, or mailed to the [FR Doc. 2012–20811 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] community-based organizations; (2) Office of Information and Regulatory BILLING CODE 4910–13–P transportation-related trade Affairs, Office of Management and associations; (3) colleges and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, universities; (4) community colleges or; 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC (5) chambers of commerce, registered 20503.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51609
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must ask five data collection sites within each for public comment on the following: location for a total of 300 data collection National Highway Traffic Safety (i) Whether the proposed collection of sites. Researchers would conduct Administration information is necessary for the proper surveys with at least 7,500 drivers. The performance of the functions of the research team will consist of a survey [U.S. DOT Docket No. NHTSA–2012–0121] agency, including whether the manager, a licensed phlebotomist, data information will have practical utility; collectors, and two off-duty law Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping (ii) The accuracy of the agency’s enforcement officers. Law enforcement Requirements estimate of the burden of the proposed officers will wave vehicles into the AGENCY: National Highway Traffic collection of information, including the survey site, and then a data collector Safety Administration (NHTSA), DOT. validity of the methodology and will ask the driver to participate in a assumptions used; ACTION: Notice of request for public voluntary, anonymous, research survey. (iii) How to enhance the quality, The survey includes questions about comment on proposed collection of utility, and clarity of the information to alcohol and drug use and impaired information. be collected; and driving, a Blood Alcohol Concentration SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can (iv) How to minimize the burden of (BAC) breath test, collection of an oral collect certain information from the the collection of information on those fluid specimen, and collection of a public, it must receive approval from who are to respond, including the use blood sample. The results of the breath the Office of Management and Budget of appropriate automated, electronic, and biological samples will not be (OMB). Under procedures established mechanical, or other technological known to the researchers on site. Breath by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 collection techniques or other forms of alcohol test results will be downloaded (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), before seeking information technology, e.g., permitting and analyzed later. Biological samples OMB approval, Federal agencies must electronic submission of responses. will be analyzed later at a central solicit public comment on proposed In compliance with these laboratory by a trained toxicologist. collections of information, including requirements, NHTSA asks public Drivers must be at least age 16 to extensions and reinstatements of comment on the following proposed participate (18 years to provide a blood previously approved collections. This collection of information: sample), speak English or Spanish, not document describes one collection of be in emotional or physical distress, not National Roadside Survey of Alcohol be driving a commercial vehicle, and be information for which NHTSA intends and Drugged Driving 2013 to seek OMB approval. able to understand that they are being Type of Request—New information asked to voluntarily participate in a DATES: Comments must be received on collection requirement. confidential research study. or before October 23, 2012. OMB Clearance Number—None. A road sign will indicate ‘‘Voluntary ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to Form Number—This collection of Survey Ahead.’’ The team’s police the docket number and be submitted to: information uses no standard forms. officer will flag down the first available U.S. Department of Transportation, Requested Expiration Date of vehicle after the data collector indicates Docket Management Facility, West Approval—3 years from date of that he/she is ready to commence data Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., approval. collection. The data collector will invite Room W12–140, Washington, DC 20590. Summary of the Collection of the driver to participate in a voluntary Docket hours are 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Information—NHTSA proposes to anonymous research survey and explain Monday through Friday, except Federal conduct a study to estimate the the details of the data collection. The holidays. You may call the docket at prevalence of alcohol-, drug-, and same survey questions as noted above 202–647–5527. You may also submit alcohol-and-drug-involved driving, will be used. There will be a total of at comments electronically at primarily among nighttime weekend least 7,500 subjects. www.regulations.gov. drivers, but also daytime Friday drivers, Description of the Need for the on our Nation’s roadways. A minimum Information and Proposed Use of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. of 7,500 drivers at various locations Information—The National Highway Amy Berning, Contracting Officer’s across the country will be interviewed Traffic Safety Administration’s Technical Representative, Office of anonymously at the roadside to: (1) (NHTSA) mission is to save lives, Behavioral Safety Research (NTI–131), Determine the prevalence of drivers at prevent injuries, and reduce healthcare National Highway Traffic Safety various BACs, and (2) determine the and other economic costs associated Administration, 1200 New Jersey prevalence of drivers with the presence with motor vehicle crashes. The Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. of various (over-the-counter, agency’s goal is to reduce the rate of Ms. Berning’s phone number is 202– prescription, and illegal) drugs in their fatalities in alcohol-related (.08+ BAC) 366–5587 and the email address is system. Trained survey teams will crashes per 100 million vehicle miles [email protected]. obtain data on alcohol and drug use of traveled, 0.45 in 2011 (the rate in 2006 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the drivers through passive alcohol sensors was .50). NHTSA also has the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, (PASs), preliminary breath-test samples, responsibility to reduce drug-involved before an agency submits a proposed oral fluid samples, and, for a subset of driving. While much is known about collection of information to OMB for the drivers, blood samples. Each driver alcohol-involved driving, relatively approval, it must publish a document in will be asked several questions little is known about drug-involved the Federal Register providing a 60-day regarding their general driving behavior, driving associated with drivers having comment period and otherwise consult alcohol use, drinking-and-driving consumed psychoactive drugs other with members of the public and affected behavior, drug use, and drugged-driving than alcohol, alone and in combination agencies concerning each proposed behavior. Some demographic data will with alcohol. This study would collection of information. The OMB has be recorded as well. significantly add to the body of promulgated regulations describing Data collection would take place over knowledge about that important issue, what must be included in such a a six month period at 60 different providing critical data on alcohol-, document. Under OMB’s regulations (at locations across the United States, with drug-, and alcohol-and-drug-involved
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51610 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
drivers on the road. The alcohol use limitation that may be established in Nation’s highways. Driving while prevalence estimates among drivers will appropriations law. Therefore, the distracted is a deadly habit that be compared with previous National amount available for the grants in FY contributes to a significant portion of Roadside Surveys conducted in 1973, 2013 may be less than the amount that total, with 3,000 lives lost in 1986, 1996, and 2007. The drug use identified above. crashes where distraction was a factor. prevalence estimates will be compared A State’s distracted driving law must The epidemic of distracted driving is with the results of the 2007 National meet statutorily-specified criteria in one of our greatest highway safety Roadside Survey, the first time these order for the State to receive a grant. challenges. data were collected. The results of the States that are awarded grants also must On July 6, 2012, the President signed study will be used by NHTSA to help follow post-award grant requirements. into law the ‘‘Moving Ahead for guide policy development and This notice describes the statutorily- Progress in the 21st Century Act’’ countermeasure programs intended to specified criteria, the application (MAP–21), Public Law 112–141, which reduce the risk on our highways requirements and the administrative created a new distracted driving grant presented by impaired drivers. requirements for the Distracted Driving program. MAP–21 authorizes the Description of the Likely Respondents Grant Program. Secretary of Transportation to provide (Including Estimated Number, and The Department is publishing this incentive grants to States that enact and Proposed Frequency of Response to the notice to give States an opportunity to enforce laws prohibiting distracted Collection of Information)—Under this submit applications for the newly driving. MAP–21 authorizes funding proposed effort, the Contractor would authorized distracted driving grants as beginning in fiscal year (FY) 2013. The collect data from approximately 7,500 soon as possible in FY 2013. Funds for Administrator of the National Highway subjects. Data collection would take this grant program are authorized Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) place over a six month period at 60 beginning on October 1, 2012. oversees State highway safety programs different sites across the United States, DATES: To receive a grant under the on behalf of the Secretary, including with five data collection sites within Distracted Driving Grant Program, a application, review, award and each location for a total of 300 data State must submit an application by the administration of grants. collection locations. deadline established by the Secretary. MAP–21 authorizes $22.525 million Estimate of the Total Annual Applications for FY 2013 distracted in FY 2013 for the Distracted Driving Reporting and Record Keeping Burden driving grants must be received by 11:59 Grant Program from the Highway Trust Resulting from the Collection of p.m. Eastern Time on October 9, 2012. Fund. See 23 U.S.C. 405(a)(1)(D). Of this Information—NHTSA estimates that Applications received after that date amount, up to $5 million may be participants will spend an average of 20 will not be considered. Applications expended for the development and minutes each to complete the survey, for will not be accepted on a rolling basis placement of broadcast media to a total of approximately 2,500 hours for after the deadline. support the enforcement of State distracted driving laws. After reserving the study respondents. The respondents ADDRESSES: Applications must be $5 million for broadcast media support, would not incur any reporting cost or submitted electronically to the $17.525 million is authorized in FY record keeping burden from the data following email address: DOT- 2013 to provide grants under 23 U.S.C. collection. [email protected]. Only applications 405(e) (hereinafter ‘‘Section 405(e)’’). Authority: 44 U.S.C. Section 3506(c)(2)(A). submitted to that email address will be However, since these FY 2013 grant deemed properly filed. Instructions for Issued on: August 21, 2012. funds are subject to an annual obligation submitting applications are included in Jeffrey P. Michael, limitation, the amount of available Section IV (Application Process). Associate Administrator for Research and funds for the FY 2013 grants may be Program Development. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For less. [FR Doc. 2012–20940 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] legal issues: Ms. Jin Kim, Attorney- II. Eligibility BILLING CODE 4910–59–P Advisor, Office of the Chief Counsel, National Highway Traffic Safety The Distracted Driving Grant Program, Administration, Telephone number: as enacted by MAP–21, derives its DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 202–366–1834; email: [email protected]. definition of ‘‘State’’ from 23 U.S.C. 401. For program issues: Dr. Maggi Gunnels, In accordance with 23 U.S.C. 401, the 50 National Highway Traffic Safety Associate Administrator, Regional States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Administration Operations and Program Delivery, Rico, American Samoa, the National Highway Traffic Safety Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Distracted Driving Grant Program Administration, Telephone number: Islands, Guam and the Virgin Islands AGENCY: Department of Transportation 202–366–2121; email: Maggi.Gunnels@ (‘‘the States’’) are eligible to apply for (DOT), National Highway Traffic Safety dot.gov. distracted driving grants. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Administration (NHTSA). III. Qualification Requirements ACTION: Notice of funding availability. Table of Contents A. General. In FY 2013, a State may SUMMARY: Pursuant to the recently I. Background qualify for a grant under Section 405(e) enacted Moving Ahead for Progress in II. Eligibility in one of two ways. A State may qualify the 21st Century Act (MAP–21), the III. Qualification Requirements by having a comprehensive primary Department of Transportation (DOT) IV. Application Process enforcement distracted driving law V. Program Funding and Award announces the availability of funding VI. Use of Grant Funds (hereinafter ‘‘Distracted Driving Grant’’). authorized in the amount of $17.525 VII. Administration See Section III.B. Alternatively, in the million in Federal fiscal year (FY) 2013 VIII. Additional Information first year only, a State may qualify by funds to provide grants to States for having a primary enforcement texting enacting and enforcing distracted I. Background law if the State is ineligible for a driving laws. The FY 2013 funds are In 2010, there were nearly 33,000 Distracted Driving Grant (hereinafter subject to an annual obligation motor-vehicle related deaths on our ‘‘First-Year Texting-Ban Grant’’). See
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51611
Section III.C. The basis for an award messaging, or engaging in any other texting law before July 6, 2012. under this grant program is a State form of electronic data retrieval or Specifically, the State statute must— statute that complies with the criteria electronic data communication. (1) Prohibit drivers from texting set out in Section 405(e). (See Sections In addition, Section 405(e) requires through a personal wireless B and C and the permitted exceptions States to enforce the law in order to communications device while driving; and definitions below for an outline of qualify for a grant. While Section 405(e) and the provisions.) does not define the term ‘‘enforce,’’ we (2) Make a violation of the statute a Permitted exceptions. In accordance will use the definition that DOT has primary offense. with MAP–21, a State statute may historically used in similar programs IV. Application Process provide for the following exceptions (e.g., Public Law 109–59, Section 2005). and still meet the qualification In order to meet the requirement that A. Application Contents. The DOT requirements for a grant (either as a the State enforce a statute, the law must Uniform Administrative Requirements Distracted Driving Grant or a First-Year not only be enacted but be in operation, for Grants and Cooperative Agreements Texting-Ban Grant)— allowing citations to be issued. to State and Local Governments, found • A driver who uses a personal Therefore, a law that has a future at 49 CFR part 18, directs applicants to wireless communications device to effective date or that includes a use standard application forms or those contact emergency services; provision limiting enforcement (e.g., by prescribed by the granting agency with • Emergency services personnel who imposing written warnings) during a the approval of the Office of use a personal wireless communications ‘‘grace period’’ after the law goes into Management and Budget under the device while operating an emergency effect would not be deemed in effect or Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980. services vehicle and engaged in the being enforced until the effective date is Accordingly, States interested in performance of their duties as reached or the grace period ends. A applying for Section 405(e) grant funds emergency services personnel; and State whose law is either not in effect in FY 2013 must submit Standard Form • An individual employed as a or contains a ‘‘grace period’’ or (SF) 424, Application for Federal commercial motor vehicle driver or a ‘‘warning period’’ on the due date for Assistance, signed by the Governor’s school bus driver who uses a personal grant applications (see ‘‘Dates’’ section Representative for Highway Safety. wireless communications device within above) will not qualify for a FY 2013 Please see www07.grants.gov/assets/ the scope of such individual’s grant under this program. SF424Instructions.pdf for instructions employment if such use is permitted B. Distracted Driving Grant. In order on how to complete the SF 424. under the regulations promulgated to qualify for a Distracted Driving Grant, As a part of an attachment to SF 424, pursuant to section 31152 of title 49. a State must have enacted and be applicants must specify the grant for No other exceptions are permitted enforcing a statute that meets all the which the applicant is applying under MAP–21. requirements set out in Section 405(e), (Distracted Driving Grant or First-Year Definitions. Section 405(e) defines as outlined below: Texting-Ban Grant), and identify the certain terms. The operation of the State (1) Prohibition on texting while State statute (by citation), including statute must be consistent with the driving. The State statute must— each provision of the State statute that following definitions: (a) Prohibit drivers from texting meets each of the qualification • ‘‘Driving’’ means operating a motor through a personal wireless requirements for a Section 405(e) grant. vehicle on a public road, including communications device while driving; Applications must be submitted operation while temporarily stationary (b) Make violation of the statute a electronically to the following Email because of traffic, a traffic light or stop primary offense; and address: [email protected]. Only sign, or otherwise; and does not include (c) Establish— applications submitted to that Email operating a motor vehicle when the (i) a minimum fine for a first violation address will be deemed properly filed. vehicle has pulled over to the side of, of the statute; and B. Application Deadline. For FY 2013 or off, an active roadway and has (ii) increased fines for repeat Distracted Driving Grants or First-Year stopped in a location where it can safely violations. Texting-Ban Grants, grant applications remain stationary. (2) Prohibition on youth cell phone must be received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern • ‘‘Personal wireless communications use while driving. The State statute Time on October 9, 2012. Late device’’ means a device through which must— applications will not be considered. personal wireless services (as defined in (a) Prohibit a driver who is younger C. Application Review. DOT will section 332(c)(7)(C)(i) of the than 18 years of age from using a review each application and State Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. personal wireless communications statute to verify compliance with all of 332(c)(7)(C)(i))) are transmitted, but device while driving; the provisions of Section 405(e). DOT does not include a global navigation (b) Make violation of the statute a reserves the right to seek clarification satellite system receiver used for primary offense; from any applicant about the positioning, emergency notification, or (c) Require distracted driving issues to information in its application, but navigation purposes. be tested as part of the State’s driver’s expects applications to be complete • ‘‘Primary offense’’ means an offense license examination; and upon submission. Applicants will be for which a law enforcement officer may (d) Establish— notified of award by letter to the stop a vehicle solely for the purpose of (i) a minimum fine for a first violation Governor. issuing a citation in the absence of of the statute; and V. Program Funding and Award evidence of another offense. (ii) increased fines for repeat • ‘‘Public road’’ has the meaning violations. As noted above, MAP–21 authorizes given such term in 23 U.S.C. 402(c). C. First-Year Texting-Ban Grant. In $22.525 million in FY 2013 for the • ‘‘Texting’’ means reading from or the first year only of this grant program, Distracted Driving Grant Program. See manually entering data into a personal a State that is ineligible for a Distracted 23 U.S.C. 405(a)(1)(D). In the first fiscal wireless communications device, Driving Grant (Section III.B) may qualify year of this program, MAP–21 provides including doing so for the purpose of for a First-Year Texting-Ban Grant if the that DOT may award up to 25 percent SMS texting, emailing, instant State has enacted a primary enforcement of the amount available for Section
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51612 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
405(e) grants to those States that have project or activity under 23 U.S.C. 402. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION enacted a primary enforcement texting- See 23 U.S.C. 405(e)(5)(B). ban law before July 6, 2012, and are B. Matching requirement. MAP–21 National Highway Traffic Safety otherwise ineligible for a grant under Section 31105 does not specify a Administration this program (i.e., First-Year Texting- Federal share for the activities funded Ban Grant). See 23 U.S.C. 405(e)(6). Petition for Exemption From the by the Distracted Driving Grant Vehicle Theft Prevention Standard; Therefore, subject to the availability of Program. However, 23 U.S.C. 120 funds, DOT intends to make available Mitsubishi Motors R&D of America, specifies a Federal share of 80 percent Inc. approximately $5.6 million for First- for any project or activity carried out Year Texting-Ban Grants in FY 2013 under Title 23. Because the Distracted AGENCY: National Highway Traffic (Section III.C). In FY 2013, DOT further Driving Grant Program is a program Safety Administration (NHTSA), intends to reserve $5 million of the under Title 23, the Federal share is 80 Department of Transportation (DOT). amount available for Section 405(e) percent. ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption. grants for broadcast media support, as is authorized in MAP–21. See 23 U.S.C. VII. Administration SUMMARY: This document grants in full 405(e)(7). Accordingly, subject to the the Mitsubishi Motors R&D of America, The requirements of 49 CFR part 18, availability of funds, of the $17.525 Inc.’s (Mitsubishi) petition for the Uniform Administrative million reserved in FY 2013 to provide exemption of the Mitsubishi Requirements for Grants and grants under Section 405(e), DOT [confidential] vehicle line in accordance Cooperative Agreements to State and intends to make available approximately with 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from $11.9 million for Distracted Driving Local Governments, govern the the Theft Prevention Standard. This Grants (Section III.B) and approximately implementation and management of petition is granted because the agency $5.6 million for First-Year Texting-Ban grants awarded under the Distracted has determined that the antitheft device Grants (Section III.C). Driving Grant Program. For ease of to be placed on the line as standard Section 405(e) does not specify how administration, States may fulfill equipment is likely to be as effective in distracted driving grants are to be financial and reporting requirements reducing and deterring motor vehicle allocated among the qualifying States. through the processes (e.g., vouchering, theft as compliance with the parts- Four of the six grant programs reporting) applied to the other highway marking requirements of the Theft authorized in MAP–21 Section 31105 safety grants in Title 23, Chapter 4. This Prevention Standard 49 CFR part 541, (Occupant Protection, State Traffic includes the requirement that qualifying Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention Safety Information System, Impaired States submit a plan explaining, by Standard. Mitsubishi requested Driving Countermeasures and countermeasure area, how awarded [confidential] treatment for specific Graduated Driver Licensing Laws) grant funds will be used, including information in its petition. The agency allocate grant funds in proportion to the those that will be used to address will address Mitsubishi’s request for State’s apportionment under 23 U.S.C. distracted driving and those that will be [confidential] treatment by separate 402 for FY 2009. DOT will use this used for eligible projects under 23 letter. process to allocate grant funds to States U.S.C. 402. DATES: The exemption granted by this under both parts of this grant program VIII. Additional Information notice is effective beginning with the (Distracted Driving Grants and First- 2014 model year. Year Texting-Ban Grants), consistent Beginning with FY 2014 grants, July with past practice in a number of 1 of the prior year is the single FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. highway safety grant programs. In application deadline for highway safety Deborah Mazyck, Office of International addition, consistent with limitations in program grants and national priority Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer some other highway safety programs, a program grants. See MAP–21 Sections Programs, NHTSA, West Building, cap of 10 percent of the total amount 31101 and 31102. While DOT is W43–443, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., authorized for FY 2013 Section 405(e) publishing this notice to give States an Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Mazyck’s will apply to each grant award. The opportunity to submit applications for phone number is (202) 366–0846. Her amount of funds awarded to a State these newly authorized grants in FY fax number is (202) 493–2990. under this program will depend on the 2013, in the near future, DOT intends to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a grant for which a State is applying and issue regulations implementing highway petition dated June 29, 2012, Mitsubishi the total number of States qualifying for safety program grants and national requested exemption from the parts- each type of grant under the program. priority safety program grants under marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541) VI. Use of Grant Funds Sections 402 and 405 for FY 2013 and 2014, as applicable. DOT intends to for the Mitsubishi [confidential] vehicle A. Eligible uses of grant funds. MAP– award Distracted Driving Grants under line, beginning with MY 2014. The 21 stipulates that each State that Section 405(e) for FY 2014 and future petition requested an exemption from receives a Section 405(e) grant must use years pursuant to the single application parts-marking pursuant to 49 CFR part at least 50 percent of the grant funds (1) process to be set forth in those 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft to educate the public through upcoming regulations. Prevention Standard, based on the advertising containing information installation of an antitheft device as about the dangers of texting or using a Authority: Public Law 112–141, Section 31105(e); 23 U.S.C. 405(e) (as set forth in standard equipment for the entire cell phone while driving; (2) for traffic MAP–21); delegation of authority at 49 CFR vehicle line. signs that notify drivers about the §§ 1.94 and 1.95. Under § 543.5(a), a manufacturer may distracted driving law of the State; or (3) petition NHTSA to grant an exemption for law enforcement costs related to the Issued on: August 17, 2012. for one vehicle line per model year. In enforcement of the distracted driving Ray LaHood, its petition, Mitsubishi provided a law. See 23 U.S.C. 405(e)(5)(A). The Secretary. detailed description and diagram of the remaining grant funds, but no more than [FR Doc. 2012–20926 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] identity, design, and location of the 50 percent, may be used for any eligible BILLING CODE 4910–59–P components of the antitheft device for
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51613
the [confidential] vehicle line. In addressing the specific content effective than those devices in the lines Mitsubishi will install a passive, requirements of 543.6, Mitsubishi for which NHTSA has already granted transponder-based, electronic engine provided information on the reliability full exemption from the parts-marking immobilizer device as standard and durability of its proposed device. requirements. equipment on its [confidential] vehicle To ensure reliability and durability of Based on the supporting evidence line beginning with MY 2014. the device, Mitsubishi conducted tests submitted by Mitsubishi on the device, Mitsubishi stated that its entry models based on its own specified standards. the agency believes that the antitheft will be equipped with a Wireless Mitsubishi provided a detailed list of device for the [confidential] vehicle line Control Module (WCM) immobilizer. the tests conducted and believes that the is likely to be as effective in reducing Components of the WCM will include a device is reliable and durable since the and deterring motor vehicle theft as transponder key, key ring antenna and device complied with its specific compliance with the parts-marking an electronic time and alarm control requirements for each test. Mitsubishi requirements of the Theft Prevention system (ETACS). All other models will additionally stated that its immobilizer Standard (49 CFR part 541). The agency be equipped with a One-touch Starting device is further enhanced by several concludes that the device will provide System (OSS) immobilizer. Components factors making it very difficult to defeat. four of the five types of performance of the OSS include the engine switch, Specifically, Mitsubishi stated that listed in § 543.6(a)(3): promoting keyless operation electronic control unit communication between the activation; preventing defeat or (KOS ECU), OSS ECU and KOS key. transponder and the ECU are encrypted. circumvention of the device by Mitsubishi will not incorporate an The WCM has over 4.3 billion and the unauthorized persons; preventing audible and visual alarm system on its OSS has over 250 million different operation of the vehicle by vehicles. Mitsubishi’s submission is possible key codes that make successful unauthorized entrants; and ensuring the considered a complete petition as key code duplication virtually reliability and durability of the device. required by 49 CFR 543.7, in that it impossible. Mitsubishi also stated that Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 meets the general requirements its immobilizer system and the ECU CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants a contained in 543.5 and the specific share security data during vehicle petition for an exemption from the content requirements of 543.6. assembly that make them a matched set. parts-marking requirements of Part 541 either in whole or in part, if it Mitsubishi stated that the WCM is a These matched modules will not determines that, based upon substantial keyless entry system in which the function if taken out and reinstalled evidence, the standard equipment transponder is embedded in a separately on other vehicles. Mitsubishi antitheft device is likely to be as traditional key and inserted into the key also stated that it is impossible to mechanically override the system and effective in reducing and deterring cylinder to activate the ignition and motor vehicle theft as compliance with start the vehicle because the vehicle will start the engine. All other models of the the parts-marking requirements of Part not be able to start without the [confidential] vehicle line are equipped 541. The agency finds that Mitsubishi transmission of the specific code to the with a OSS system, which utilizes a has provided adequate reasons for its electronic control module. Lastly, keyless system that allows the driver to belief that the antitheft device for the Mitsubishi stated that the antitheft press a button on the instrument panel Mitsubishi [confidential] vehicle line is device is extremely reliable and durable to activate and deactivate the ignition as likely to be as effective in reducing and because there are no moving parts, nor long as the transponder is located in deterring motor vehicle theft as does the key require a separate battery. close proximity to the driver. Mitsubishi compliance with the parts-marking also stated that the performance of the Mitsubishi informed the agency that requirements of the Theft Prevention immobilizer will be the same in all its Eclipse vehicle line has been Standard (49 CFR part 541). This models whether the vehicle has a WCM equipped with the device since conclusion is based on the information or OSS entry system. Mitsubishi further introduction of its MY 2000 vehicles. Mitsubishi provided about its device. stated that the only difference between Mitsubishi stated that the theft rate for For the foregoing reasons, the agency the two devices will be the ‘‘key’’ (i.e., the MY 2000 Eclipse decreased by hereby grants in full Mitsubishi’s transponder key or keyless operation almost 42% when compared with that petition for exemption for the key) and the method used to transmit of its MY 1999 Mitsubishi Eclipse [confidential] vehicle line from the the information to the immobilizer. (unequipped with an immobilizer parts-marking requirements of 49 CFR Mitsubishi stated that once the device). Mitsubishi also revealed that part 541, beginning with the 2014 model ignition switch is turned or pushed to the Eclipse, Galant, Endeavor, year vehicles. The agency notes that 49 the ‘‘ignition-on’’ position, the Outlander, Lancer, Outlander Sport and CFR part 541, Appendix A–1, identifies transceiver module reads the specific i-MiEV vehicle lines have been those lines that are exempted from the ignition key code for the vehicle and equipped with a similar type of Theft Prevention Standard for a given transmits an encrypted message immobilizer device since January 2000, model year. 49 CFR 543.7(f) contains containing the key code to the electronic January 2004, April 2004, September publication requirements incident to the control unit (ECU). The immobilizer 2006, March 2007, September 2010 and disposition of all Part 543 petitions. receives the key code signal transmitted October 2011 respectively. The Advanced listing, including the release from either type of key (WCM or OSS) Mitsubishi Eclipse, Galant, Endeavor, of future product nameplates, the and verifies that the key code signal is Outlander and Lancer vehicle lines have beginning model year for which the correct. The immobilizer then sends a all been granted parts-marking petition is granted and a general separate encrypted start-code signal to exemptions by the agency and the description of the antitheft device is the engine ECU to allow the driver to average theft rates using 3 MY’s data are necessary in order to notify law start the vehicle. The engine only will 1.7356, 4.8973, 1.1619, 0.3341 and enforcement agencies of new vehicle function if the key code matches the 1.0871 respectively. Theft rate data for lines exempted from the parts-marking unique identification key code the Outlander Sport and i-MiEV are not requirements of the Theft Prevention previously programmed into the ECU. If available. Therefore, Mitsubishi has Standard. Mitsubishi will provide the the codes do not match, the engine and concluded that the antitheft device agency with notification of the fuel systems will be disabled. proposed for its vehicle line is no less nameplate and model year of the vehicle
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51614 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
line for which [confidential] treatment 28.1, in Niagara Falls, Niagara County, representative: Louis E. Gitomer, Law has been requested prior to introduction N.Y. The line traverses United States Offices of Louis E. Gitomer, LLC, 600 of the vehicle line. Postal Service Zip Code 14305. Baltimore Avenue, Suite 301, Towson, If Mitsubishi decides not to use the CSXT has certified that: (1) No local MD 21204. exemption for this line, it must formally traffic has moved over the line for at If the verified notice contains false or notify the agency. If such a decision is least 2 years; (2) any overhead traffic misleading information, the exemption made, the line must be fully marked as can be rerouted over other lines; (3) no is void ab initio. required by 49 CFR 541.5 and 541.6 formal complaint filed by a user of rail CSXT has filed environmental and (marking of major component parts and service on the line (or by a state or local historic reports that address the effects, replacement parts). government entity acting on behalf of if any, of the abandonment on the NHTSA notes that if Mitsubishi such user) regarding cessation of service environment and historic resources. wishes in the future to modify the over the line either is pending with the OEA will issue an environmental device on which this exemption is Surface Transportation Board (Board) or assessment (EA) by August 31, 2012. based, the company may have to submit with any U.S. District Court or has been Interested persons may obtain a copy of a petition to modify the exemption. Part decided in favor of a complainant the EA by writing to OEA (Room 1100, 543.7(d) states that a Part 543 exemption within the 2-year period; and (4) the Surface Transportation Board, applies only to vehicles that belong to requirements at 49 CFR 1105.7(c) Washington, DC 20423–0001) or by a line exempted under this part and (environmental report), 49 CFR. 1105.11 calling OEA at (202) 245–0305. equipped with the antitheft device on (transmittal letter), 49 CFR 1105.12 Assistance for the hearing impaired is which the line’s exemption is based. (newspaper publication), and 49 CFR available through the Federal Further, § 543.9(c)(2) provides for the 1152.50(d)(1) (notice to governmental Information Relay Service (FIRS) at submission of petitions ‘‘to modify an agencies) have been met. (800) 877–8339. Comments on exemption to permit the use of an As a condition to this exemption, any environmental and historic preservation antitheft device similar to but differing employee adversely affected by the matters must be filed within 15 days from the one specified in that abandonment shall be protected under after the EA becomes available to the exemption.’’ Oregon Short Line Railroad— public. The agency wishes to minimize the Abandonment Portion Goshen Branch Environmental, historic preservation, administrative burden that Part Between Firth & Ammon, in Bingham & public use, or trail use/rail banking 543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted Bonneville Counties, Idaho, 360 I.C.C. conditions will be imposed, where vehicle manufacturers and itself. The 91 (1979). To address whether this appropriate, in a subsequent decision. agency did not intend Part 543 to condition adequately protects affected Pursuant to the provisions of 49 CFR require the submission of a modification employees, a petition for partial 1152.29(e)(2), CSXT shall file a notice of petition for every change to the revocation under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) consummation with the Board to signify components or design of an antitheft must be filed. that it has exercised the authority Provided no formal expression of device. The significance of many such granted and fully abandoned the line. If intent to file an offer of financial changes could be de minimis. Therefore, consummation has not been effected by assistance (OFA) has been received, this NHTSA suggests that if the CSXT’s filing of a notice of exemption will be effective on manufacturer contemplates making any consummation by August 24, 2013, and September 25, 2012, unless stayed changes, the effects of which might be there are no legal or regulatory barriers pending reconsideration. Petitions to characterized as de minimis, it should to consummation, the authority to stay that do not involve environmental consult the agency before preparing and abandon will automatically expire. issues,1 formal expressions of intent to submitting a petition to modify. Board decisions and notices are file an OFA under 49 CFR available on our Web site at Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of 1152.27(c)(2),2 and trail use/rail banking www.stb.dot.gov. authority at 49 CFR 1.50. requests under 49 CFR 1152.29 must be Issued on: August 20, 2012. filed by September 4, 2012. Petitions to Decided: August 20, 2012. Christopher J. Bonanti, reopen or requests for public use By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. conditions under 49 CFR 1152.28 must Director, Office of Proceedings. [FR Doc. 2012–20837 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] be filed by September 13, 2012, with the Raina S. White, BILLING CODE 4910–59–P Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Clearance Clerk. Street SW., Washington, DC 20423– [FR Doc. 2012–20861 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] 0001. BILLING CODE 4915–01–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION A copy of any petition filed with the Board should be sent to CSXT’s Surface Transportation Board DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1 The Board will grant a stay if an informed [Docket No. AB 55 (Sub-No. 716X)] decision on environmental issues (whether raised Surface Transportation Board by a party or by the Board’s Office of Environmental CSX Transportation, Inc.— Analysis (OEA) in its independent investigation) [Docket No. AB 33 (Sub-No. 310X)] Abandonment Exemption—in Niagara cannot be made before the exemption’s effective County, NY date. See Exemption of Out-of-Serv. Rail Lines, 5 Union Pacific Railroad Company— I.C.C. 2d 377 (1989). Any request for a stay should Abandonment Exemption—in Polk CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT) filed be filed as soon as possible so that the Board may take appropriate action before the exemption’s County, IA a verified notice of exemption under 49 effective date. CFR part 1152 subpart F—Exempt 2 Each OFA must be accompanied by the filing Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) Abandonments to abandon a 0.1-mile fee. Effective August 26, 2012, the filing fee for an has filed a verified notice of exemption rail line on its Northern Region, Albany OFA increases from $1,500 to $1,600. See 49 CFR under 49 CFR part 1152 subpart F— 1002.2(f)(25); Regulations Governing Fees for Servs. Division, Niagara Subdivision, between Performed in Connection with Licensing & Related Exempt Abandonments to abandon a milepost QDN 28.0 near North Avenue Servs.—2012 Update, EP 542 (Sub-No. 20), slip op. 5.8-mile line of railroad on the Ankeny to the end of the track at milepost QDN app. B at 17 (STB served July 27, 2012). Industrial Lead between milepost 4.7
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51615
near Des Moines and milepost 10.5 at be filed by September 13, 2012, with the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION the end of the line at Ankeny, in Polk Surface Transportation Board, 395 E County, Iowa (the line). The line Street SW., Washington, DC 20423– Surface Transportation Board traverses United States Postal Service 0001. [Docket No. FD 35662] Zip Codes 50313, 50021, and 50023. A copy of any petition filed with the UP has certified that: (1) No local DMH Trust fbo Martha M. Head— traffic has moved over the line for the Board should be sent to UP’s representative: Mack H. Shumate, Jr., Acquisition of Control Exemption— past two years; (2) there is no overhead Twin Cities & Western Railroad Senior General Attorney, 101 North traffic on the line; (3) no formal Company, Minnesota Prairie Line, Inc. Wacker Drive, #1920, Chicago, IL 60606. complaint filed by a user of rail service and Sisseton Milbank Railroad on the line (or by a state or local If the verified notice contains false or Company government entity acting on behalf of misleading information, the exemption such user) regarding cessation of service is void ab initio. DMH Trust fbo Martha M. Head (the over the line either is pending with the Trust), a noncarrier, has filed a verified UP has filed a combined Surface Transportation Board (Board) or notice of exemption to acquire control with any U.S. District Court or has been environmental and historic report that of Twin Cities & Western Railroad decided in favor of complainant within addresses the effects, if any, of the Company (TCW), Minnesota Prairie the two-year period; and (4) the abandonment on the environment and Line, Inc. (MPL), and Sisseton Milbank requirements at 49 CFR 1105.7(c) historic resources. OEA will issue an Railroad Company (SMRC),1 all Class III (environmental report), 49 CFR 1105.11 environmental assessment (EA) by rail carriers. (transmittal letter), 49 CFR 1105.12 August 31, 2012. Interested persons may According to the Trust, Douglas M. (newspaper publication), and 49 CFR obtain a copy of the EA by writing to Head owned all of the controlling shares 1152.50(d)(1) (notice to governmental OEA (Room 1100, Surface of voting stock of TCW and indirectly agencies) have been met. Transportation Board, Washington, DC controlled MPL and SMRC. Following As a condition to this exemption, any 20423–0001) or by calling OEA at (202) his death in February 2011, TCW’s stock employee adversely affected by the 245–0305. Assistance for the hearing continues to be held by Mr. Head’s abandonment shall be protected under impaired is available through the estate, which now desires to distribute Oregon Short Line Railroad— Federal Information Relay Service at 1– this stock to the Trust. The Trust Abandonment Portion Goshen Branch 800–877–8339. Comments on intends to consummate the transaction Between Firth & Ammon, in Bingham & environmental and historic preservation on or after September 10, 2012 (the Bonneville Counties, Idaho, 360 I.C.C. matters must be filed within 15 days effective date of the exemption is 91 (1979). To address whether this after the EA becomes available to the September 9, 2012, 30 days after the condition adequately protects affected public. verified notice of exemption was filed). employees, a petition for partial The Trust represents that: (1) TCW, revocation under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) Environmental, historic preservation, MPL, and SMRC will not connect with must be filed. public use, or trail use/rail banking any rail lines owned or controlled by Provided no formal expression of conditions will be imposed, where the Trust; (2) the transaction is not part intent to file an offer of financial appropriate, in a subsequent decision. of a series of anticipated transactions assistance (OFA) has been received, this Pursuant to the provisions of 49 CFR that would connect any railroad owned exemption will be effective on 1152.29(e)(2), UP shall file a notice of or controlled by the Trust with TCW, September 25, 2012, unless stayed consummation with the Board to signify MPL, or SMRC, or that would provide pending reconsideration. Petitions to that it has exercised the authority an additional connection between any stay that do not involve environmental granted and fully abandoned the line. If of the carriers controlled by the Trust; issues,1 formal expressions of intent to and (3) the transaction does not involve consummation has not been effected by file an OFA under 49 CFR a Class I rail carrier. The proposed 2 UP’s filing of a notice of consummation 1152.27(c)(2), and trail use/rail banking transaction is therefore exempt from the requests under 49 CFR 1152.29 must be by August 24, 2013, and there are no prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. filed by September 4, 2012. Petitions to legal or regulatory barriers to 11323 pursuant to 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(2). reopen or requests for public use consummation, the authority to The Trust states that the purpose of the conditions under 49 CFR 1152.28 3 must abandon will automatically expire. transaction is to transfer the TCW shares Board decisions and notices are from the estate of Mr. Head to the Trust 1 The Board will grant a stay if an informed available on our Web site at www.stb. in compliance with provisions of Mr. decision on environmental issues (whether raised by a party or by the Board’s Office of Environmental dot.gov. Head’s will, allowing the substantial completion of the probate of the estate. Analysis (OEA) in its independent investigation) Decided: August 20, 2012. cannot be made before the exemption’s effective Under 49 U.S.C. 10502(g), the Board date. See Exemption of Out-of-Serv. Rail Lines, 5 By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, may not use its exemption authority to I.C.C.2d 377 (1989). Any request for a stay should Director, Office of Proceedings. be filed as soon as possible so that the Board may relieve a rail carrier of its statutory take appropriate action before the exemption’s Derrick A. Gardner, obligation to protect the interests of its effective date. Clearance Clerk. employees. Section 11326(c), however, 2 Each OFA must be accompanied by the filing [FR Doc. 2012–20873 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] does not provide for labor protection for fee. Effective August 26, 2012, the filing fee for an transactions under 11324 and 11325 OFA increases from $1,500 to $1,600. See 49 CFR BILLING CODE 4915–01–P 1002.2(f)(25); Regulations Governing Fees for Servs. that involve only Class III rail carriers. Performed in Connection with Licensing and Accordingly, the Board may not impose Related Servs.—2012 Update, EP No. 542 (Sub-No. labor protective conditions here, 20) (STB served July 27, 2012). because all of the carriers involved are 3 UP states that the right-of-way (ROW) is not suitable for public purposes, including roads or utility lines at the present time. However, UP notes Class III carriers. highways, other forms of mass transportation, that there does appear to be local interest in use of conservation, energy production or transmission as the ROW as a public recreational trail for hiking 1 MPL and SMRC are wholly owned subsidiaries this area is adequately served by existing roads and and bicycle use. of TCW.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51616 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices
If the verified notice contains false or participation will be limited to 50 Dated: August 16, 2012. misleading information, the exemption individual phone lines. Notification of Donna J. Gambrell, is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the intent to attend the meeting must be Director, Community Development Financial exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) made via email to advisoryboard@cdfi. Institutions Fund. may be filed at any time. The filing of treas.gov. The CDFI Fund will send [FR Doc. 2012–20860 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] a petition to revoke will not confirmation of attendance and BILLING CODE 4810–70–P automatically stay the effectiveness of instructions on accessing the meeting to the exemption. Petitions for stay must the first 50 individuals who submit be filed no later than August 31, 2012 notifications of intent. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY (at least seven days before the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section exemption becomes effective). 104(d) of the Community Development Office of Foreign Assets Control An original and ten copies of all Banking and Financial Institutions Act pleadings, referring to Docket No. FD Additional Designations, Foreign of 1994 (12 U.S.C. 4703(d)) established Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act 35662, must be filed with the Surface the Advisory Board. The charter for the Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW., Advisory Board has been filed in AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets Washington, DC 20423–0001. In accordance with the Federal Advisory Control, Treasury. addition, a copy of each pleading must Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. ACTION: Notice. be served on Rose-Michele Nardi, App.), and with the approval of the Weiner Brodsky Sidman Kider PC, 1300 Secretary of the Treasury. SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of the 19th Street NW., Fifth Floor, The function of the Advisory Board is Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Washington, DC 20036. to advise the Director of the CDFI Fund Control (‘‘OFAC’’) is publishing the Board decisions and notices are (who has been delegated the authority to names of 2 individuals and 24 entities available on our Web site at www.stb. administer the CDFI Fund) on the whose property and interests in dot.gov. policies regarding the activities of the property have been blocked pursuant to Decided: August 20, 2012. CDFI Fund. The Advisory Board does the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin By the Board, Rachel D. Campbell, not advise the CDFI Fund on approving Designation Act (‘‘Kingpin Act’’) (21 Director, Office of Proceedings. or declining any particular application U.S.C. 1901–1908, 8 U.S.C. 1182). Derrick A. Gardner, for monetary or non-monetary awards. DATES: The designation by the Director Clearance Clerk. The Advisory Board meets at least of OFAC of the two individuals and 24 annually. [FR Doc. 2012–20864 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] entities identified in this notice It has been determined that this pursuant to section 805(b) of the BILLING CODE 4915–01–P document is not a major rule as defined Kingpin Act is effective on August 15, in Executive Order 12291 and therefore 2012. regulatory impact analysis is not DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: required. In addition, this document Assistant Director, Sanctions Community Development Financial does not constitute a rule subject to the Compliance & Evaluation, Office of Institutions Fund Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department Chapter 6). of the Treasury, Washington, DC 20220, Open Meeting of the Community The next meeting of the Advisory Tel: (202) 622–2490. Board, all of which will be open to the Development Advisory Board SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: public, will be held from 2 p.m. to 3:30 AGENCY: Community Development p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, Electronic and Facsimile Availability Financial Institutions Fund, Department September 12, 2012 via a telephone This document and additional of the Treasury. conference call. Public participation information concerning OFAC are ACTION: Notice of open meeting. will be limited to 50 individual phone available on OFAC’s Web site at lines. Notification of intent to attend the http://www.treasury.gov/ofac or via SUMMARY: This notice announces the meeting must be made via email to next meeting of the Community facsimile through a 24-hour fax-on- [email protected]. The CDFI demand service at (202) 622–0077. Development Advisory Board (the Fund will send confirmation of Advisory Board), which provides advice attendance and instructions on Background to the Director of the Community accessing the meeting to the first 50 The Kingpin Act became law on Development Financial Institutions individuals who submit notifications of December 3, 1999. The Kingpin Act Fund (the CDFI Fund). The meeting will intent. For more information, please call establishes a program targeting the be conducted via telephone conference (202) 622–8042. activities of significant foreign narcotics call. Participation in the discussions at the traffickers and their organizations on a DATES: The next meeting of the meeting will be limited to Advisory worldwide basis. It provides a statutory Advisory Board will be held from 2 p.m. Board members, Department of the framework for the imposition of to 3:30 p.m. Eastern Time on Treasury staff, and certain invited sanctions against significant foreign Wednesday, September 12, 2012. guests. Anyone who would like to have narcotics traffickers and their FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The the Advisory Board consider a written organizations on a worldwide basis, Office of Public and Legislative Affairs statement must submit it to the Office of with the objective of denying their of the CDFI Fund, 1500 Pennsylvania Legislative and External Affairs, CDFI businesses and agents access to the U.S. Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20220, Fund, 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., financial system and the benefits of (202) 622–8042 (this is not a toll free Washington, DC 20220, by 5 p.m. trade and transactions involving U.S. number). Other information regarding Eastern Time on Tuesday, September 4, companies and individuals. the CDFI Fund and its programs may be 2012. The Kingpin Act blocks all property obtained through the CDFI Fund’s Web Authority: 12 U.S.C. 4703; Chapter X, Pub. and interests in property, subject to U.S. site at http://www.cdfifund.gov. Public L. 104–19, 109 Stat. 237. jurisdiction, owned or controlled by
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Notices 51617
significant foreign narcotics traffickers 4. ALQUILERES ROSSELL, Km 12.5 Guatemala City, Guatemala; as identified by the President. In Carrertera Al Salvador, Santa Registration ID 75563 (Guatemala) addition, the Secretary of the Treasury, Rosalia, Condominio La Laguna, [SDNTK]. in consultation with the Attorney Casa 1, Guatemala, Guatemala; 17. FERNAPLAST, Km 12–5 Ruta Al General, the Director of the Central Registration ID 388175 (Guatemala) Atlantico, Apto. A, Zona 18, Intelligence Agency, the Director of the [SDNTK]. Guatemala City, Guatemala; Federal Bureau of Investigation, the 5. AUTO HOTEL PUNTO CERO, Registration ID 188919A Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Kilometro 49.5 Carretera A El (Guatemala) [SDNTK]. Salvador, Aldea El Cerinal, Administration, the Secretary of 18. GRUPO MPV, Km 14.1 Carretera El Defense, the Secretary of State, and the Barberena, Santa Rosa, Guatemala; Registration ID 404256 (Guatemala) Salvador, Centro Comercial Paseo Secretary of Homeland Security may San Sebastian Local 92, Guatemala designate and block the property and [SDNTK]. 6. BODEGAS BANYOLAS, 14 Avenida City, Guatemala; Registration ID interests in property, subject to U.S. 55544 (Guatemala) [SDNTK]. jurisdiction, of persons who are found 7–12 Zona 14, Centro Empresarial to be: (1) Materially assisting in, or La Villa Bodega 23, Guatemala City, 19. HACIENDA SANTA INES, 3 providing financial or technological Guatemala; Registration ID 71152 Avenida 13–46 Zona 1, Guatemala support for or to, or providing goods or (Guatemala) [SDNTK]. City, Guatemala; Registration ID services in support of, the international 7. BOUTIQUE MARLLORY, KM 54.5 319945 (Guatemala) [SDNTK]. narcotics trafficking activities of a Carretera Al Salvador, Santa Rosa, 20. HUERTAS Y HORTALIZAS, Lote 10 person designated pursuant to the Barberena, Guatemala; Registration Aldea Las Vacas, Zona 16, Kingpin Act; (2) owned, controlled, or ID 159497A (Guatemala) [SDNTK]. Guatemala City, Guatemala; 8. BRODWAY COMMERCE INC., 17 directed by, or acting for or on behalf of, Registration ID 49720 (Guatemala) Calle A 7–21, Zona 10, Guatemala a person designated pursuant to the [SDNTK]. City, Guatemala; Registration ID Kingpin Act; or (3) playing a significant 21. IMPORTADORA BORRAYO 60832 (Guatemala) [SDNTK]. role in international narcotics 9. CABOMARZO, 3A Calle 3–46, Zona LASMIBAT, 13 Av 26–49, San Jose trafficking. 2, Residenciales Valles De Maria, Las Rosas Zona 8, Guatemala City, On August 15, 2012, the Director of Villa Nueva, Guatemala; Guatemala; Registration ID 135027 OFAC designated the following two Registration ID 89276 (Guatemala) [SDNTK]. individuals and 24 entities whose [SDNTK]. 22. INMOBILIARIA DATEUS, 1era property and interests in property are 10. CASA VOGUE, Km 14.1 Carretera El Avenida 7–60, Zona 14, blocked pursuant to section 805(b) of Salvador, Centro Comercial Paseo Apartamento 1602 Del Edificio the Kingpin Act. San Sebastian Local 92, Guatemala Tadeus, Guatemala City, Guatemala; City, Guatemala [SDNTK]. Registration ID 84101 (Guatemala) Individuals 11. CORPORACION DAIMEX S.A., 14 [SDNTK]. 1. CASTELLANOS CHACON, Christina Avenida 7–12, Zona 14, Bodega No. 23. INVERSIONES A&E, 8 Avenida 16– Stetanel (a.k.a. ‘‘CHRISTA 22, Empresarial La Villa, Guatemala 49 Zona 10, Edificio San Ignacio CASTELLANOS’’); DOB 17 Jun City, Guatemala; Registration ID Apto. 2–A, Guatemala City, 1991; nationality Guatemala; 36397 (Guatemala) [SDNTK]. Guatemala; Registration ID 43339 Passport 133374328 (Guatemala) 12. DELPSA, 2 Calle 25–80, Zona 15, (Guatemala) [SDNTK]. (individual) [SDNTK]. Vista Hermosa II, Apt. 800, Guatemala City, Guatemala; 24. OPERADORA CORPORATIVA DE 2. SAENZ LEHNHOFF, Maria Corina Registration ID 200766 (Guatemala) NEGOCIOS (a.k.a. ‘‘OCN’’), Diagnol (a.k.a. DE DEL PINAL, Maria [SDNTK]. 6 No. 16–01, Zona 10, Guatemala Corina; a.k.a. SAENZ LEHNHOFF, 13. DIGITAL SYS ADVISORS, 14 City, Guatemala [SDNTK]. Maria Gabriela; a.k.a. SAENZ Avenida 7–12 Zona 14, Bodega 22, 25. SISTEMAS CONSTRUCTORES PINAL, Maria Corina); DOB 19 May Empresarial La Villa, Guatemala (a.k.a. ‘‘SICONSA’’), Lote 10, Aldea 1965; POB Guatemala; nationality City, Guatemala; Registration ID Las Vacas, Zona 16, Guatemala City, Guatemala; Passport 31486K 68326 (Guatemala) [SDNTK]. Guatemala; Registration ID 34279 (Guatemala) (individual) [SDNTK] 14. DISTRIBUIDORA ROSSELL, Calzada (Guatemala) [SDNTK]. Linked To: INMOBILIARIA Roosevelt KM, 13 40–31, Zona 11, 26. WALNUTHILL, Diagnol 6 10–01, DATEUS; Linked To: Guatemala City, Guatemala; Zona 10, Centro Gerencial Las WALNUTHILL; Linked To: Registration ID 388221 (Guatemala) Margaritas, Torre II, Of. 301–B, CABOMARZO; Linked To: GRUPO [SDNTK]. Guatemala City, Guatemala; MPV; Linked To: DELPSA; Linked 15. ESTRUCTURAS METALICAS, Registration ID 80886 (Guatemala) To: BRODWAY COMMERCE INC.; CIRCULARES Y ORTOGONALES [SDNTK]. Linked To: CASA VOGUE. (a.k.a. ‘‘EMCO’’), Aldea El Durazno Dated: August 15, 2012. Entities Lote 12 Kilometro 8.5, Antigua Ruta A San Pedro Ayampuc, Chinautla, Barbara C. Hammerle, 3. ALMACEN PICIS, 3 Avenida 19–59, Guatemala; Registration ID 45703 Acting Director, Office of Foreign Assets Local 14, Zona 1, Guatemala City, (Guatemala) [SDNTK]. Control. Guatemala; Registration ID 80617 16. FARFAR, 14 Avenida 7–12 Zona 14, [FR Doc. 2012–20954 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] (Guatemala) [SDNTK]. Bodega 22, Empresarial La Villa, BILLING CODE 4810–AL–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:22 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUN1.SGM 24AUN1 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Vol. 77 Friday, No. 165 August 24, 2012
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency
40 CFR Part 49 Source Specific Federal Implementation Plan for Implementing Best Available Retrofit Technology for Four Corners Power Plant: Navajo Nation; Final Rule
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51620 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION this action is available electronically at Significantly Affect Energy Supply, AGENCY http://www.regulations.gov and in hard Distribution, or Use copy at EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne I. National Technology Transfer and 40 CFR Part 49 Street, San Francisco, California. While Advancement Act J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions [EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0683; FRL–9715–9] all documents in the docket are listed in To Address Environmental Justice in the index, some information may be Minority Populations and Low-Income Source Specific Federal publicly available only at the hard copy Populations Implementation Plan for Implementing location (e.g. copyrighted material), and K. Congressional Review Act Best Available Retrofit Technology for some may not be publicly available in L. Petitions for Judicial Review either location (e.g. Confidential Four Corners Power Plant: Navajo I. Background of the Final Rule Nation Business Information (CBI)). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule FCPP is a privately owned and AGENCY: Environmental Protection an appointment during normal business operated coal-fired power plant located Agency (EPA). hours with the contact listed in the FOR on the Navajo Nation Indian Reservation ACTION: Final rule. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. near Farmington, New Mexico. Based on A reasonable fee may be charged for lease agreements signed in 1960, FCPP SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection copies. was constructed and has been operating Agency (EPA) is promulgating a source- Throughout this document, ‘‘we’’, on real property held in trust by the specific Federal Implementation Plan ‘‘us’’, and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. Federal government for the Navajo (FIP) requiring the Four Corners Power Nation. The facility consists of five coal- Plant (FCPP), a coal-fired power plant Table of Contents fired electric utility steam generating located on the Navajo Nation near I. Background of the Final Rule units with a total capacity of 2060 Farmington, New Mexico, to achieve II. Summary of Final Federal Implementation megawatts (MW). Units 1, 2, and 3 at emissions reductions required by the Plan (FIP) Provisions FCPP are owned entirely by Arizona Clean Air Act’s (CAA) Best Available III. Analysis of Major Issues Raised by Public Service (APS) which serves as Retrofit Technology (BART) provision. Commenters the facility operator, and are rated to In this final action, EPA is requiring A. Comments on Factor One—Cost of Controls 170 MW (Units 1 and 2) and 220 MW FCPP to reduce emissions of oxides of 1. Comments on the Analysis of the Cost (Unit 3). Units 4 and 5 are each rated to nitrogen (NOX) and is setting emission of SCR at FCPP a capacity of 750 MW, and are co-owned limits for particulate matter (PM) based 2. Comments on Top-Down Analysis by six entities: Southern California on emission rates already achieved at Versus Incremental Cost Effectiveness Edison 1 (48 percent), APS (15 percent), FCPP. These pollutants contribute to B. Comments on Factor Two—Economic, Public Service Company of New Mexico visibility impairment in the numerous Energy, and Non-Air Quality (13 percent), Salt River Project (SRP) (10 mandatory Class I Federal areas Environmental Impacts percent), El Paso Electric Company (7 surrounding FCPP. For NO emissions, 1. Comments on Economic Impacts X a. General Comments on Economic Impacts percent), and Tucson Electric Power (7 EPA is requiring FCPP to meet a plant- b. Comments on EPA’s Economic Analysis percent). wide emission limit of 0.11 lb/MMBtu 2. Comments on Energy and Non-Air EPA’s proposed BART determination on a rolling 30-day heat input-weighted Quality Environmental Impacts for FCPP, published on October 19, average. This represents an 80 percent C. Comments on Factor Three—Existing 2010, provided a thorough discussion of reduction from the current NOX Controls at FCPP the statutory and regulatory framework emission rate and is expected to provide D. Comments on Factor Four—Remaining for addressing visibility through significant improvement in visibility. Useful Life at FCPP application of BART for sources located EPA is also finalizing an alternative E. Comments on Factor Five—Anticipated Visibility Improvements in Indian country, and of the factual emission control strategy that gives the F. Comments on BART Determinations background for BART determinations at owners of FCPP the option to close 1. Comments on the Proposed BART FCPP. 75 FR 64221. Units 1–3 and install controls on Units Determination for NOX On February 25, 2011, as a result of 4 and 5 to each meet an emission limit 2. Comments on the Proposed BART additional information provided by of 0.098 lb/MMBtu, based on a rolling Determination for PM stakeholders, EPA published a average of 30 successive boiler operating 3. Comments on BART for SO2 Supplemental Proposal. FR 76 10530. days. For PM, EPA is requiring Units 4 4. Other Comments on BART We briefly summarize the provisions of and 5 at FCPP to meet an emission limit G. Comments on Arizona Public Service’s our Proposal and our Supplemental of 0.015 lb/MMBtu, and retaining the Alternative and EPA’s Supplemental Proposal Proposal below. existing 20 percent opacity limit. These H. Other Comments Part C Subpart II of the 1977 CAA PM limits are achievable through the IV. Administrative Requirements establishes a visibility protection proper operation of the existing A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory program that sets forth ‘‘as a national baghouses. EPA is also requiring FCPP Planning and Review and Executive goal the prevention of any future, and to comply with a 20 percent opacity Order 13563: Improving Regulation and the remedying of any existing, limit on its coal and material handling Regulatory Review impairment of visibility in mandatory operations. B. Paperwork Reduction Act class I Federal areas which impairment C. Regulatory Flexibility Act results from manmade air pollution.’’ 42 DATES: Effective Date: This rule is D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act effective on October 23, 2012. E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism U.S.C. 7491A(a)(1). EPA promulgated FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation regional haze regulations on April 22, Anita Lee, EPA Region 9, (415) 972– and Coordination With Indian Tribal 1999. 64 FR 35765. Consistent with the 3958, [email protected]. Governments statutory requirement in 42 U.S.C. G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 7491(b)(2)(a), EPA’s 1999 regional haze SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has Children From Environmental Health established a docket for this action Risks and Safety Risks 1 Arizona Public Service is currently seeking under Docket ID No. EPA–R09–OAR– H. Executive Order 13211: Actions regulatory approvals to purchase Southern 2010–0683. The index to the docket for Concerning Regulations That California Edison’s share of Units 4 and 5.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51621
regulations include a provision FIP. Therefore, EPA proposed a new FIP comply with the alternative emission requiring States to require certain major for FCPP in September 2006. 71 FR control strategy in lieu of complying stationary sources to procure, install 53631 (Sept. 12, 2006). In the final FIP, with our October 19, 2010, proposed and operate BART. This provision EPA indicated that the new SO2 BART determination. EPA’s alternative covers sources ‘‘in existence on August emissions limits were close to or the emission control strategy involved 7, 1977, but which ha[ve] not been in equivalent of the emissions reductions closure of Units 1–3 by 2014 and operation for more than fifteen years as that would have been required in a installation and operation of add-on of such date’’ and which emit pollutants BART determination. 72 FR 25698 (May post combustion controls on Units 4 and that are reasonably anticipated to cause 7, 2007). The FIP also required FCPP to 5 to each meet a NOX emission limit of or contribute to any visibility comply with a 20 percent opacity limit 0.098 lb/MMBtu by July 31, 2018. EPA impairment. EPA has determined that on both the combustion and fugitive proposed that this alternative emission FCPP is a BART-eligible source (75 FR dust emissions from material handling control strategy represents reasonable 64221). operations. progress towards the national visibility In determining BART, States are APS, the operator of FCPP, and Sierra goal, under CAA Section 169A(b)(2), required to take into account five factors Club each filed Petitions seeking because it would result in greater identified in the CAA and EPA’s judicial review of EPA’s promulgation visibility improvement in surrounding regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7491(g)(2) and 40 of the 2007 FIP for FCPP on separate Class I areas at a lower cost than our CFR 51.308. Those factors are: (1) The grounds. The Court of Appeals for the October 19, 2010, BART proposal. The costs of compliance, (2) the energy and Tenth Circuit rejected both Petitions. proposal to require PM and opacity non-air quality environmental impacts The Court agreed with EPA’s request for limits on Units 1–5, as well as 20 of compliance, (3) any pollution control a voluntary remand of a single narrow percent opacity limits for controlling equipment in use or in existence at the aspect of the 2007 FIP: The opacity limit dust from coal and ash handling and source, (4) the remaining useful life of for the fugitive dust for the material storage facilities, was unchanged. the source, and (5) the degree of handling operations. Id. At 1131. improvement in visibility which may On October 19, 2010 (75 FR 64221) II. Summary of Final FIP Provisions reasonably be anticipated to result from EPA proposed a second FIP under 40 EPA is finding today that it is the use of such technology. 40 CFR CFR 49.11(a) finding it is necessary or necessary or appropriate to promulgate appropriate to establish BART 51.308(e)(1)(ii)(A). EPA’s guidelines for a source-specific FIP requiring FCPP to requirements for NO and PM emissions evaluating BART are set forth in X achieve emissions reductions required from FCPP, and proposed specific NO Appendix Y to 40 CFR Part 51. X by the CAA’s BART provision. In 1998, EPA promulgated the Tribal and PM limits as BART. For NO , EPA X Specifically, EPA is requiring FCPP to Authority Rule (TAR) relating to proposed a plant-wide emission limit of meet new emissions limits for NO and implementation of CAA programs in 0.11 lb/MMBtu, representing an 80 X PM. These pollutants contribute to Indian country. See 40 CFR part 49; see percent reduction from current NO X visibility impairment in the 16 also 59 FR 43956 (Aug. 25, 1994) emission rates, achievable by installing mandatory Class I Federal areas (proposed rule); 63 FR 7254 (Feb. 12, and operating SCR technology on Units surrounding FCPP. For NO emissions, 1998) (final rule); Arizona Public 1–5. For PM, EPA proposed an emission X Service Company v. EPA, 211 F.3d 1280 limit of 0.012 lb/MMBtu for Units 1–3 EPA is finalizing a BART determination (DC Cir. 2000), cert. den., 532 U.S. 970 and 0.015 lb/MMBtu for Units 4 and 5 as well as an optional alternative to (2001) (upholding the TAR). achievable by installing and operating BART. FCPP can choose which In the TAR, EPA determined that it any of several equivalent controls on emissions control strategy to follow and has the discretionary authority to Units 1–3, and through proper operation must notify EPA of its choice by July 1, promulgate ‘‘such federal of the existing baghouses on Units 4 and 2013. Our final BART determination implementation plan provisions as are 5. EPA also proposed a 10 percent requires FCPP to meet a plant-wide heat necessary or appropriate to protect air opacity limit from Units 1–5 and a 20 input-weighted emission limit of 0.11 quality’’ consistent with CAA sections percent opacity limit to apply to FCPP’s lb/MMBtu on a rolling 30-calendar day 301(a) and 301(d)(4) when a Tribe has material handling operations to respond average which represents an 80 percent not submitted or EPA has not approved to the voluntary remand EPA took on reduction from current NOX emission a Tribal Implementation Plan (TIP). 40 this issue from the 2007 FIP. rates. This NOX limit is achievable by CFR 49.11(a). On November 24, 2010, APS, acting installing and operating add-on post- EPA has previously promulgated FIPs on behalf of FCPP’s owners, submitted combustion controls on Units 1–5. under the TAR to regulate air pollutants a letter to EPA offering an alternative to Installation and operation of the new emitted from FCPP. In 1999, EPA reduce visibility-impairing pollution. NOX controls on one 750 MW unit must proposed a FIP for FCPP. That FIP APS proposed to close Units 1–3 by be within 4 years of October 23, 2012. proposed to fill the regulatory gap that 2014 and install and operate SCR on NOX controls on the remaining units existed because New Mexico permits Units 4 and 5 to each meet an emission must be installed and operated within 5 and State Implementation Plan (SIP) limit of 0.11 lb/MMBtu by the end of years of October 23, 2012. rules are not applicable or enforceable 2018. On February 25, 2011, we Alternatively, FCPP may choose to in the Navajo Nation, and the Tribe had published a Supplemental Proposal (76 comply with an alternative emission not sought approval of a TIP covering FR 10530) with a technical evaluation of control strategy for NOX in lieu of the plant. 64 FR 48731 (Sept. 8, 1999). APS’ alternative. Our Supplemental complying with EPA’s final BART Before EPA finalized the 1999 FIP, the Proposal also provides a detailed determination for NOX. This alternative operator of FCPP began negotiations to summary of the legal background for emission control strategy requires reduce SO2 emissions from FCPP by proposing an alternative emission permanent closure of Units 1–3 by making upgrades to improve the control strategy as achieving better January 1, 2014, and installation and efficiency of its SO2 scrubbers. The progress towards the national visibility operation of add-on post combustion parties to the negotiations requested goal (76 FR 10530). controls on Units 4 and 5 to meet a NOX EPA to make those SO2 reductions In our Supplemental Proposal, EPA emission limit of 0.098 lb/MMBtu each, enforceable through a source-specific proposed to allow APS the option to based on a rolling average of 30
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51622 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
successive boiler operating days, by July and responded to all comments in a associations, three from federal 31, 2018. separate Response to Comments (RTC) agencies, one from a U.S. Senator, and For PM, EPA is requiring Units 4 and document that is also included in the one from the operator of the Navajo 5 to meet a BART emission limit of docket for this final rulemaking. In this Mine. 0.015 lb/MMBtu within 60 days after Federal Register notice, EPA is A. Comments on Factor One—Cost of restart following the scheduled major including a summary of the major Controls outages for Units 4 and 5 in 2013 and comments we received and a summary 2014. This emission limit is achievable of our responses. We received a number of comments through the proper operation of the on our approach for estimating the cost existing baghouses. EPA is determining III. Summary of Major Issues Raised by of SCR at FCCP, the incremental cost that it is not necessary or appropriate to Commenters effectiveness of controls, and on our finalize our proposed PM BART Our October 19, 2010, proposal top-down approach for evaluating determination for Units 1–3 or our included a 60-day public comment controls. period that ended on December 20, proposed opacity limit of 10 percent on 1. Comments on the Analysis of the Cost 2010. On November 12, 2010, EPA Units 1–5. FCPP must continue to meet of SCR at FCPP the existing 20 percent opacity limit on published a notice of public hearings to Units 1–5. be held in the Four Corners area on Comment: Some of the owners of To address our voluntary remand of December 7–9, 2010 (75 FR 69374). On FCPP and a utility industry association the material handling requirements from December 8, 2010, EPA published in the stated that in analyzing the cost of SCR the 2007 FIP, EPA is finalizing our Federal Register a notice that EPA at FCPP, EPA improperly reworked and proposal to require FCPP to comply received an alternative proposal from reduced the SCR cost estimates with a 20 percent opacity limit on its APS and would be extending the public submitted for FCPP by eliminating line material handling operations, including comment period to March 18, 2011, and item costs that are not explicitly coal handling. postponing the previously scheduled included in the EPA Control Cost In our final rule, EPA has made public hearings in order to evaluate that Manual (citing 75 FR 64227). several revisions to the proposed rule alternative proposal (75 FR 76331). Commenters noted that APS’ estimate and Supplemental Proposal based on Notices of public hearings and was prepared by B&V, an engineering comments we received during the rescheduled hearings were published in firm with extensive experience with the public comment period. These revisions three newspapers near the Four Corners installation and operation of pollution include: revising the compliance date Power Plant 4. Our supplemental control equipment and that the prices under BART from within 3 to 5 years 2 proposal on February 25, 2011, used in the cost analysis were based on of the effective date of the final rule to subsequently extended the public quotes from equipment vendors that within 4 to 5 years 3 of the effective date; comment period until May 2, 2011, and reflected current pricing. revising the interim limits to only announced four public hearings on the Response: EPA disagrees with the include an interim limit for one 750 proposed BART determination and comment that EPA improperly reworked MW unit rather than all units to match supplemental proposal in the Four and reduced the SCR cost estimates. the revised compliance timeframes; Corners area on March 29, 30, and 31, EPA used a hybrid approach for our cost adding 6 months to the notification 2011. In all, 90 oral testimonies were analysis that relied primarily on the dates to EPA on APS’s plans to presented at the public hearings. highest of several cost estimates implement BART or the BART We received nearly 13,000 written provided by APS, but also followed the Alternative; revising the averaging time comments. Of these, over 12,800 BART Guidelines that state ‘‘[i]n order for the NOX limit under the BART comments came from private citizens to maintain and improve consistency, Alternative from a 30-day average to a who submitted substantially similar cost estimates should be based on the rolling average of 30 successive boiler comments. We received an additional OAQPS Control Cost Manual, where operating days; retaining the existing 110 unique written comments (not possible’’,5 to determine whether APS opacity limit of 20 percent instead of including duplicates, requests for included cost estimates for services or setting a new 10 percent opacity limit extension of the public comment period, equipment associated with SCR that on Units 1–5; determining that it is not or requests for additional hearings). We were either not needed (e.g., mitigation necessary or appropriate at this time to do not consider or address letters or for increased sulfuric acid emissions or finalize a BART determination for PM comments unrelated to the rulemaking catalyst disposal), or not allowed under for Units 1–3; and revising the effective in this notice or in our response to the EPA Control Cost Manual (e.g., legal date of the PM emission limit for Units comments document. The unique fees). 4 and 5 to the next schedule major comments can be broken down by Our cost analysis relied primarily on outage rather than following installation general type as follows: 78 from private the highest cost estimates submitted by of new post-combustion NOX controls. citizens, eight from environmental APS. EPA accepted all site-specific costs We include the rationale for these advocacy groups, four from the owners provided by APS for cost categories revisions in our responses to comments. of FCPP, five from state/local (e.g., purchased equipment, installation) All comments we received are included government entities, four from public that are typically included in a cost in the docket and EPA has summarized interest advocacy groups, two from estimate conducted in accordance with tribes, four from utility industry the EPA Control Cost Manual, and only 2 We proposed to require phased installation of excluded line item costs that are not add-on NOX controls on at least 560 MW of 4 Notices of scheduled public hearings were explicitly included in the EPA Control generation within 3 years of the effective date of the published in the Farmington Daily Times and the Cost Manual or in a limited number of final rule, on at least 1310 MW of generation within Durango Herald on November 3, 2010 and February cases where EPA determined alternative 4 years of the effective date, and plant-wide within 17, 2011, and the Navajo Times on November 4, 5 years of the effective date. 2010 and February 17, 2011. Notices of the 3 We are finalizing the rule to require phased extended public comment period and 5 The OAQPS Control Cost Manual is now called installation of add-on NOX controls on at least 750 postponement of the December public hearings the EPA Control Cost Manual. The EPA Control MW of generation within 4 years of the effective were published in the Farmington Daily Times and Cost Manual is available from the following Web date and on the remaining units within 5 years of the Durango Herald on November 24, 2010 and in site: http://www.epa.gov/ttncatc1/ the effective date. the Navajo Times on December 2, 2010. products.html#cccinfo.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51623
costs were more appropriate (e.g., costs determining whether a given control specific 2010 cost estimates is of catalysts, interest rates). We note that technology was or was not cost inconsistent with its own criticisms of EPA’s cost estimate presented in the effective. The BART Guidelines do not the EPA Control Cost Manual. Technical Support Document (TSD)6 set a numerical definition for ‘‘cost In determining that a different level of ($718 million total for Units 1–5) is only effective’’, and the analysis of control than the presumptive limit was 18 percent lower than the highest B&V presumptive limits uses cost warranted as BART for FCPP, EPA cost estimate and less than 0.6 percent effectiveness as a means to broadly evaluated the five statutory factors in lower than the lowest and most recent compare control technologies, not as our assessment for FCPP. This B&V cost estimate. threshold for rejecting controls for an evaluation was detailed in the Technical Our detailed, line-by-line analysis 7 individual unit or facility that exceed Support Document for our proposed was included in the docket for our the average cost effectiveness of BART determination and included an proposed rulemaking and provided an combustion controls. analysis of cost effectiveness, energy explanation for why we retained, Additionally, a comparison of the and non-air quality impacts of controls, modified, or rejected each line item in average cost effectiveness estimates in existing controls at the facility, the the SCR cost estimate for each of the the 2005 BART guidelines against EPA’s remaining useful life of the facility, and five units at FCPP. cost effectiveness estimates in 2010 for the visibility improvement reasonably Comment: One of the owners of FCPP FCPP is not an ‘‘apples to apples’’ anticipated to result from controls. asserted that EPA’s estimate of the comparison. The technical support Therefore, EPA has not improperly average cost effectiveness of SCR at documentation for the 2005 BART disregarded the BART guidelines in our FCPP is significantly higher than the guidelines indicate that cost analysis for FCPP. level ($1,600 per ton of NOX removed) effectiveness of controls was not Comment: A number of commenters that EPA determined was not cost determined based on site-specific cost stated that EPA’s BART analysis for effective in the 2005 BART rules for estimates developed for each BART- FCPP was inconsistent with its own presumptive BART limits. The eligible facility; rather, cost estimates for regulations in that it failed to consider commenter asserted that there is no existing facilities were determined using control costs as a function of visibility basis for EPA to depart from its own assumptions for capital and annual improvement. These commenters rules by concluding that SCR is BART costs per kilowatt (kW) 8 or kilowatt- typically stated that EPA’s BART for FCPP when this technology is many hour (kW-hr), and then scaled according determination for FCPP must consider times more expensive than the costs to boiler size at the existing facilities. the cost effectiveness of control EPA rejected as presumptive BART in The supporting information for the 2005 technology options in terms of dollars the 2005 BART rules. The commenter BART Guidelines estimated SCR costs 9 per deciview-improved. noted that its cost analysis estimated for FCPP Units 4 and 5 that are Response: The BART Guidelines that the average cost effectiveness of comparable to SCR cost estimates require that cost effectiveness be combustion controls for the five units at generated by the National Park Service calculated in terms of annualized FCPP would range from $524 to $1,735 (NPS) in 2009 using the EPA Control dollars per ton of pollutant removed, or 12 per ton of NOX removed, while the Cost Manual.10 The same commenters $/ton. The commenters are correct in average cost effectiveness of SCR would have previously dismissed the NPS SCR that the BART Guidelines list the $/ range from $4,215 to $5,283 per ton. The cost estimates based on the EPA Control deciview ratio as an additional cost commenter also noted that EPA’s Cost Manual because it does not include effectiveness metric that can be estimate of average cost effectiveness for site-specific costs.11 In short, the employed along with $/ton for use in a SCR at FCPP ranged from $2,515 to commenter’s recommendation to use BART evaluation. However, the use of $3,163 per ton. The commenter stated generalized cost estimates from the 2005 this metric further implies that that, at the low end, only the estimate BART Guidelines as a bright line additional thresholds or notions of of the average cost effectiveness of threshold for comparison with site- acceptability, separate from the $/ton combustion controls is in line with metric, would need to be developed for EPA’s estimates of cost-effective 8 In the 2005 BART presumptive limit analysis, BART determinations. We have not controls for presumptive BART limits, EPA estimated capital costs at all facilities used this metric for BART purposes at while the estimate of average cost nationwide assuming that SCR costs were $100/kW, FCPP because (1) it is unnecessary in effectiveness of SCR is significantly and then scaling by the size of the facility (kW). judging the cost effectiveness of BART, 9 The 2005 BART guidelines estimated SCR higher. capital costs at FCPP to be $64 million and total (2) it complicates the BART analysis, Response: EPA disagrees with this annual costs to be $11 million. Cost effectiveness and (3) it is difficult to judge. In comment. Although the commenters calculations rely on total annual costs and annual particular, the $/deciview metric has argue that the BART guidelines NOX reductions from the control technology. not been widely used and is not well- established a threshold for cost 10 In the ANPRM, in addition to reporting APS’ understood as a comparative tool. In our cost estimates and EPA’s revisions to APS’ cost effectiveness against which future BART estimates, for reference, EPA also reported cost experience, $/deciview values tend to determinations must be compared, the estimates developed by NPS using the EPA Control be very large because the metric is based BART Guidelines did not establish a Cost Manual and provided to EPA during on impacts at one Class I area on one cost effectiveness threshold for all consultations with the FLMs prior to our ANPRM. day and does not take into account the NPS estimated SCR capital costs to be $53 million BART determinations. In developing the and total annual costs to be $10 million. See Table number of affected Class I areas or the presumptive NOX limits for BART in 9 in the October 2010 TSD for the proposed BART number of days of improvement that 2005, EPA did not set the cost determination for FCPP. In its comments on the result from controlling emissions. In effectiveness values estimated for ANPR, NPS revised its cost estimates for SCR on addition, the use of the $/deciview Units 4 and 5 to $114 million (capital cost) and $18 combustion controls as the threshold for million (total annual cost)—see Table 12 in the TSD suggests a level of precision in the for the proposed BART determination. CALPUFF model that may not be 6 See ‘‘TSD Proposal—Technical Support 11 APS and other entities provided comments to warranted. As a result, the $/deciview Document 10–6–10’’, Document No. EPA–R09– EPA on the NPS cost estimates reported in the can be misleading. We conclude that it OAR–2010–0683–0002. ANPRM, see document titled ‘‘Comments on 7 See ‘‘TSD ref [40] Four Corners SCR Cost ANPRM 09 0598 APS Comments and Exhibits’’ is sufficient to analyze the cost Analysis (EPA) 8–26–10’’, Document No. EPA–R09– document ID number EPA–R09–OAR–2009–0598– OAR–2010–0683–0033. 0195. 12 70 FR 39167.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51624 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
effectiveness of potential BART controls compliance for installing SCR on Units technically feasible controls is for FCPP using $/ton, in conjunction 4 and 5, including a consideration of the identified as the ‘‘best system of with an assessment of the modeled impacts of closing Units 1–3. continuous emission reduction’’. visibility benefits of the BART control. Response: EPA disagrees that we Therefore, in conducting our BART EPA considered cost of controls, should perform a detailed cost analysis determination for FCPP, EPA’s top- including the total capital costs, annual of the alternative emission control down approach for assessing the five costs, and $/ton of NOX pollution strategy put forth in the Supplemental factors was consistent with the reduced in our proposed BART Proposal. The Regional Haze Rule, in discretion allowed under the BART determination. Additionally, in assessing an alternative measure in lieu guidelines. EPA additionally notes that response to comments received on our of BART (40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)) requires the TSD for our proposed rulemaking proposal, EPA included calculations several elements in the alternative plan included analyses of the costs, non-air and consideration of incremental cost (e.g., a demonstration that the impacts, and visibility improvements effectiveness (see Section 3.2 of the alternative will achieve greater associated with combustion controls at Response to Comments document in the reasonable progress than BART, and FCPP, but that there is no requirement docket for this final rulemaking). EPA that reductions are surplus to the for a five-factor analysis on all considered visibility impacts, including baseline date of the SIP), but does not potentially available control options if the degree of impairment, the number of require an analysis of the cost of the the top down approach is used and the Class I areas affected by FCPP, the alternative plan. top level of technically feasible controls deciview improvement resulting from Similarly, an affordability analysis of is selected (70 FR 39130). controls, and the percent change in the alternative emission control strategy Comment: One of the owners of FCPP improvement. EPA determined that is not required under the Regional Haze asserted that the BART rules require an these metrics are sufficient in Rule; however, at the request of the incremental cost analysis and provided completing our five-factor analysis for Navajo Nation, pursuant to EPA’s an analysis comparing the costs of FCPP. customary practice of engaging in combustion controls to the costs of SCR. Comment: One commenter stated that extensive and meaningful consultation According to the commenter’s analysis, BART must be determined in the with tribes, EPA commissioned a study the incremental cost effectiveness of context of reasonable progress rather to estimate potential adverse impacts to moving from combustion controls to than in isolation and that the cost the Navajo Nation of APS’s option to SCR ranges from $6,553 to $8,605 per effectiveness metric used by EPA (i.e., close Units 1–3 and will provide the ton of NOX reduced for the five units at $/ton of NOX reduced) does not satisfy report to the Navajo Nation by letter as FCPP. This commenter and another the statutory requirement to consider a follow-up to our consultation. FCPP owner asserted that this the cost to comply with the Regional 2. Comments on Top-Down Analysis ‘‘extraordinarily high’’ incremental cost Haze program because it does not Versus Incremental Cost Effectiveness highlights the fact that combustion include compliance costs related to controls, not SCR, satisfy the cost requirements for reasonable progress. Comment: A number of commenters effectiveness test applied by EPA in Response: Congress identified BART note that EPA’s proposed BART analysis adopting the presumptive BART limits as a key measure for ensuring was inconsistent with its own in the BART rules. reasonable progress. We disagree that regulations in that it used a top-down Response: EPA agrees that the BART BART must be determined in the analytic approach and failed to conduct Guidelines recommend consideration of context of reasonable progress. If an incremental cost evaluation. both average and incremental cost anything, reasonable progress depends Commenters indicated that in using the effectiveness, however, EPA disagrees on BART. Because the Class I areas top-down analysis, EPA failed to carry with the commenter that the affected by emissions from FCPP are not out the five-factor analysis for each of incremental cost effectiveness should be achieving the glidepath, it is important the technically feasible retrofit a comparison between combustion that states, tribes, and EPA require technologies as required by the BART controls and SCR for this particular reasonable measures to be implemented Guidelines (citing 40 CFR part 51, facility. As discussed at length in the to ensure that progress is made towards Appendix Y, section I.F.2.c), including TSD for our proposed BART the national visibility goal. combustion control technology which determination for FCPP, Region 9 has The BART guidelines specify that the the BART Guidelines identify as determined that combustion controls cost of controls be estimated by presumptive BART. (burner modifications and overfire air, identifying the emission units being Response: EPA disagrees with these including ROFA) will not be effective at controlled, defining the design comments. In the preamble to the final significantly reducing emissions at Four parameters for emission controls, and BART guidelines, EPA discusses two Corners without potential operational developing a cost estimate based on options presented in the 2001 proposal difficulties due to inherent design and those design parameters using the EPA and 2004 reproposal of the guidelines physical limitations of the boilers. Control Cost Manual while taking into for evaluating ranked control technology Therefore, in estimating incremental account any site-specific design or other options (See discussion at 70 FR 39130). cost, it is inappropriate and misleading conditions that affect the cost of a Under the first option, States would use to include combustion controls in the particular BART control option. The a sequential process for conducting the analysis for this particular facility. To BART guidelines do not require the analysis, beginning with a complete respond to this comment, EPA costs of compliance under BART to evaluation of the most stringent control conducted an incremental cost consider costs that may be associated option. The process described is a top- effectiveness analysis and included it in with reasonable progress. down approach analogous to the our docket for this final rulemaking.13 Comment: The Navajo Nation analysis we used in our proposed BART Based on our incremental cost analysis, commented that EPA should analyze the determination for FCPP. If the analysis EPA has determined that the affordability of controls under the shows no outstanding issues regarding incremental cost of SCR compared to supplemental proposal by performing a cost or energy and non-air quality detailed analysis, rather than an environmental impacts, the analysis is 13 See ‘‘Incremental cost.xlsx’’ in the docket for approximation, of the cost of concluded and the top level of this final rulemaking.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51625
selective non-catalytic reduction impacts to tourism resulting from loss of conducted an affordability analysis not (SNCR), the next most stringent option visibility. The commenters concluded typically included in a BART five-factor ($2,500 per ton to $3,300 per ton), is that the cost effectiveness metric used to analysis in order to assess whether reasonable and does not support the determine BART must account for requiring SCR on all five units at FCPP commenter’s conclusion that SCR is not health costs related to poor air quality. would cause the power plant to close. BART for FCPP. Response: EPA disagrees with the The model was designed to determine EPA estimated the total capital cost of comment that the cost effectiveness of which future alternative results in lower BART for NOX to be $718 million and BART must account for public health power costs: (a) Power produced at total annual costs (annualized capital costs associated with poor air quality. FCPP after installation of SCR or, (b) costs plus additional operating costs) to Neither Section 169A of the CAA, nor replacing the power from FCPP with the be $93 million per year. This final the BART Guidelines, require the BART appropriate amount of wholesale power BART determination is expected to analysis to include or quantify benefits purchases. As discussed in the TSD for reduce emissions of NOX by 80 percent, to health or tourism. Moreover, an our proposed BART determination, the from 43,000 tons per year to 8,500 tons analysis of health and tourism benefits model results suggested that even if the per year, resulting in a facility-wide is unlikely to alter the outcome of our owners of FCPP installed and operated average cost effectiveness of about BART determination, which already SCR on all five units, the facility could $2,700 per ton of NOX removed. EPA requires the most stringent control still produce power at a lower cost than anticipates that this investment will technology available for NOX. the cost to purchase replacement reduce the visibility impairment caused Comment: The Navajo Nation, one wholesale power on the open market. by FCPP by an average of 57 percent at federal agency, and two of the owners Thus, EPA concluded in our proposed 16 Class I areas within 300 km of the of FCPP stated that EPA must consider BART determination that requiring SCR facility. A detailed summary of the cost the collateral adverse effects on the as BART on all five units would not and visibility benefits were provided in Navajo Nation and the surrounding likely result in plant closure. No the Technical Support Document for the communities of its BART determination. information was provided by the proposed rulemaking. As discussed in The commenters provided background commenter to change this conclusion in our Supplemental Proposal, although on the substantial interest that the the proposal. APS did not provide a cost estimate for Navajo Nation has in the continued Comment: The Navajo Nation asserted the BART Alternative and the RHR does operation of FCPP. The commenters that EPA failed to consult with the not require an evaluation of costs indicated that FCPP and its coal Nation prior to publishing the associated with a BART Alternative, if supplier, the Navajo Mine operated by supplemental proposal and failed in its APS chooses to implement the BHP Billiton (BHP), together provide trust responsibility to consider the Alternative, EPA anticipates those costs income to the Navajo Nation that economic impacts of closing Units 1–3. to be approximately 39 percent lower contributes substantially to the Nation’s A federal agency commenter noted that than the cost of BART. The BART economic viability and its sustainability EPA’s current analysis focuses primarily Alternative is expected to reduce as an independent sovereign nation. The on increased costs to rate payers and the emissions of NOX by 87 percent, from commenters added that this resource companies’ profitability, and stated that 43,000 tons per year to 5,600 tons per extraction-based economy is the result the analysis needs to incorporate the year, resulting in a facility-wide average of a conscious effort of the United States loss in revenue, jobs, and royalties cost effectiveness of roughly $1,600 per dating from the 1950s to develop the resulting from the closure of Units 1–3 14 ton of NOX removed. EPA anticipates Nation’s coal resources. According to under the supplemental proposal. that implementation of the BART the commenter, if FCPP and the Navajo Response: A timeline of Alternative will reduce visibility Mine were to close as the result of the correspondence and consultation with impairment caused by FCPP by an imposition of cost-prohibitive emission the Navajo Nation and other tribes for average of 72 percent at 16 Class I areas controls, the resulting revenue and job EPA actions on FCPP and Navajo within 300 km of the facility. losses would be significant for the Generating Station is included in the B. Comments on Factor Two— Navajo Nation. docket for the final rulemaking.16 EPA Economic, Energy, and Non-Air Quality Response: EPA agrees with notes that the Regional Administrator of Environmental Impacts commenters that the operation of FCPP EPA Region 9 called President Joe and the Navajo Mine contribute Shirley on February 9, 2011 to inform We received a number of comments significantly to the economy of the him of EPA’s Supplemental Proposal. on the economic impacts and on the Navajo Nation and the Four Corners However, government-to-government energy and non-air quality Region. consultation with the Navajo Nation on environmental impacts. It is not EPA’s intention to cause FCPP did not occur until May 19, 2011, 1. Comments on Economic Impacts FCPP to shut down, nor is it within our with additional consultation occurring regulatory authority under the Regional a. General Comments on Economic on June 13, 2012, prior to issuing our Haze Rule to require shutdown or Impacts final rulemaking. The Navajo Nation redesign of the source as BART. As raised concerns about the potential Comment: Several commenters stated expressed in comments from the Navajo adverse impacts of the BART that EPA’s analysis of historical and Nation to our Advanced Notice of Alternative and requested that EPA expected costs of electricity from FCPP Proposed Rulemaking,15 EPA conduct an analysis to estimate those neglect to include public health costs understands that the Navajo Nation’s impacts. related to air pollution and the negative primary concern regarding the BART Although the Regional Haze Rule does determination is the potential for FCPP not require a cost analysis of a BART 14 EPA estimates facility-wide average cost closure. Therefore, as discussed in our alternative, at the request of the Navajo effectiveness of the BART Alternative to be lower than BART because under the BART Alternative, proposed BART determination, EPA Nation, as part of EPA’s customary Units 1–3 can be closed instead of retrofitted with new air pollution controls. On a per unit basis, the 15 Comment letter from President Joe Shirley, Jr. 16 See document titled: ‘‘Timeline of all tribal cost effectiveness of Units 4 and 5 is not expected dated March 1, 2010 in the docket for the ANPR: consultations on BART.docx’’ in the docket for this to differ between BART or the BART Alternative. EPA–R09–OAR–2009–0583–0209. final rulemaking.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51626 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
practice of engaging in extensive and production on a $/MWh basis by more be a higher cost option than purchasing meaningful consultation with tribes and than 50 percent which, in conjunction power. The commenter also raised the tribal authorities with regard to relevant with other market and regulatory concern that EPA’s analysis did not Agency actions, EPA did commission an uncertainties, may make the units examine different ‘‘payback periods,’’ analysis to estimate potential adverse uneconomical. The commenter also but instead relied on a payback period impacts on the Navajo Nation, with raised concerns related to the economic of 25 years, which may be inappropriate respect to coal- and power plant-related viability of Units 4 and 5 if SCR were because the useful life of the plant is far revenues, of the optional BART installed on those units. from certain. The commenter said that Alternative to retire Units 1–3. The Another of the owners of FCPP, who EPA should recognize that there is a real report will be provided to President also owns part of San Juan Generating risk that one or more owners may Shelly by letter as a follow-up to our Station and Navajo Generating Station, decide not to invest in SCR, which consultation with the Navajo Nation. indicated that if SCR was required on all would force the shutdown of FCPP Comment: One owner of FCPP stated three power plants, its customers would unless another owner could be found in that EPA’s proposal to require SCR at face a rate increase of 4 to 6 percent, a timely manner. The commenter also FCPP presents significant challenges which would be significant because the said that shutdown of FCPP would have and risks with regard to its resource local economy is fragile and has significant adverse consequences on the planning. The commenter pointed out endured an 8 percent rate increase (not Navajo Nation. that implementation of the BART adjusted for inflation) since 1992. Response: The commenter is correct proposal would require the commenter Response: EPA agrees with the first that EPA calculated rate impacts for to make a significant capital investment commenter that based upon our analysis only two of the four investor-owned in FCPP, which could only be recovered the potential increase to APS rate payers utilities that own FCPP and excluded through long-term operation of the as a result of SCR is expected to be less others, including an owner that operates plant. According to the commenter, this than 5 percent. EPA cannot assess the as a publicly owned utility. The analysis would have the effect of locking FCPP estimated residential and industrial rate estimating the increase in electricity into the commenter’s generation increase claimed by the second and generation costs is applicable to all portfolio for a considerable period or third commenters with our economic owners of FCPP, but the rate impact risk stranding those investments. analysis because the commenters did analysis provided in the model was not Response: EPA appreciates the not provide information for us to intended to capture the rate impacts of perspectives shared in this comment, evaluate their conclusions. However, all owners. APS and Southern California but we disagree that our five-factor EPA notes that the installation of Edison (SCE) were selected because BART analysis should consider the baghouses on Units 1–3 is no longer their combined ownership shares potential loss of an owner’s flexibility to relevant because EPA has determined account for nearly 75 percent of the respond to possible future economic or that it is not necessary or appropriate at plant’s output. In addition to our regulatory scenarios. EPA cannot give this time to set new PM limits for Units expectation that the utilities with the substantial consideration in our BART 1–3. This is because the Mercury and largest ownership share in FCPP would analysis to external factors that are of Air Toxics Standard (MATS) rule, generally experience greater ratepayer uncertain magnitude and that may or which sets a filterable PM limit of 0.03 impacts from capital expenditure may not occur. EPA further notes that lb/MMBtu, is now final 17 and EPA is projects like SCR installation, we also the RHR allows for the development of finalizing in this rulemaking the option assumed that ratepayers of investor- BART alternatives that achieve greater to allow APS to comply with either owned utilities would likely experience reasonable progress than BART and EPA BART or the BART alternative, which larger impacts than public power appreciates the fact that the owners of involves closure of Units 1–3. customers due to the fundamental FCPP put forth an alternative that gives Comment: One of the owners of FCPP difference between their respective them more flexibility and results in expressed concern that EPA’s analysis approaches to setting rates. Specifically, greater emission reductions at FCPP. focuses on the effects on APS and rates for public power utilities, in Southern California Edison ratepayers, contrast to investor-owned utilities, do b. Comments on EPA’s Economic and not on the other owners of FCPP. not include recovery for a margin above Analysis This commenter’s specific concerns cost allowed as part of a regulated rate Comment: One public interest include that the use of a ‘‘return on of return. Thus, all other variables being advocacy group concurred with the rate’’-based methodology would not equal, one would expect the same EPA’s analysis that the potential apply to organizations of the capital investment to result in a larger increase to APS rate payers as a result commenter’s type (a publicly owned rate impact for customers of investor- of SCR is expected to be less than 5 utility) because it is not an investor- owned utilities than for customers of percent, as described in the TSD. The owned utility. In addition, the public power entities. Therefore, EPA commenter stated that EPA’s estimates commenter stated that the EPA analysis continues to believe that our analysis of are reasonable and that the average did not attempt to determine the impact ratepayer impacts for only APS and SCE increase in the cost of generation at of different assumptions, such as an are appropriately conservative to FCPP as a result of SCR implementation uncertainty with the future price of coal, demonstrate worst-case impacts to would be 22 percent, or $0.0074 per on the conclusions of the analysis. ratepayers of all six owners. kWh, as stated in the TSD. Specifically, the ‘‘small difference’’ that EPA agrees with the commenter that One of the owners of FCPP stated that EPA estimates between FCPP with SCR there are many company-specific factors installation of BART controls would installed and the cost of purchasing and a wide range of assumptions that increase its average residential customer power to replace FCPP generation would affect a given owner’s decision to monthly bills by $5.10 (3.8 percent) and suggests that a small change in an make further substantial investments larger industrial customer monthly bills underlying assumption (return on rate, (such as SCR) at FCPP. Although many by $17,400 (6.4 percent). The coal price, carbon pricing, etc.) could of those factors were outside the focus commenter also indicated that installing result in model results that show SCR to of the modeling because they were SCR and baghouses on Units 1–3 would either unrelated to BART or were increase the cost of electricity 17 See 77 FR 9304, February 16, 2012. related to regulatory uncertainties in the
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51627
future, we included a qualitative its proposal.18 Decisions on investing in than 16 million tons per year (tpy) of discussion in Appendix B to the TSD pollution controls or shutting down CO2, and that such emissions contribute regarding decision variables that EPA units are made by the owners in significantly to climate change which is assumed each owner must consider conjunction with their oversight boards likely to result in increasing before making capital expenditures. or public utility commissions. These temperatures and increase drought in Additionally, EPA notes that the use of oversight bodies are also responsible for the Southwest. The commenter noted low, medium and high future projected assuring the adequacy of electrical that the supplemental proposal would prices for the Palo Verde Index in generating capacity, whether from coal, reduce emissions of both mercury and Appendix B to the TSD for the proposed gas or nuclear fuels or renewable CO2. rulemaking represents a sensitivity sources. One environmental advocacy group analysis for the market comparison. Comment: Thirty-seven private stated that a formal Health Impact With respect to the comment on the citizens commented that FCPP causes Assessment should be conducted by ‘‘payback period’’, the economic significant threats to public health due independent experts before EPA’s final analysis for the proposed BART to its effects on air quality. In addition, decision to answer such questions as determination did not identify ‘‘payback a number of environmental and public whether shutting down Units 1–3 is periods’’. Rather, the commenter interest advocacy groups provided sufficient to protect local health, and appears to be referring to the 25-year comments on health and ecosystem what health impacts would result from period used in the discounted cash flow impacts of the pollutants emitted by delaying pollution controls on Units 4 model. EPA does not disagree with the FCPP. and 5 until 2018. commenter’s stated concern that a Regarding health impacts, the Response: EPA agrees that there are shorter plant life, and thus shorter commenter noted that the same potential benefits to health and the discounting periods, would yield pollutants that contribute to visibility environment from reducing emissions of different economic results. However, impairment also harm public health— NOX. However, quantifying health EPA disagrees with commenters that a the fine particulates that cause regional benefits is not within the scope of the shorter useful life should be considered haze can cause decreased lung function, BART five factor analysis required in the economic analysis because there aggravate asthma, and result in under the CAA (§ 169A(g)). The BART is no enforceable obligation on APS to premature death in people with heart or Guidelines provide additional cease operations on a given (earlier) lung disease. The commenter added that information on how to analyze ‘‘non-air date. NOX and volatile organic compounds quality environmental impacts, and (VOCs) can also be precursors to focuses on adverse environmental 2. Comments on Energy and Non-Air ground-level ozone, which is associated impacts associated with control Quality Environmental Impacts with respiratory diseases, asthma technologies, i.e., generation of solid or Comment: One private citizen stated attacks, and decreased lung function. hazardous wastes and discharges of that no consideration was given to the According to the commenter, ozone polluted water, that have the potential effect of removing FCPP generation from concentrations in parks in the Four to affect the selection or elimination of the grid. According to the commenter, Corners region approach the current a control alternative’’ (see 70 FR 39169). health standards, and likely violate Thus, although the BART Guidelines do the events of February 2, 2011, show anticipated lower standards. state that relative environmental there are times when gas-fired The same commenter also contended impacts (both positive and negative) of generation cannot replace coal-fired that consideration of non-air quality alternatives can be compared with each generation because there is not enough impacts extends to impacts on wildlife other, they state that ‘‘if you propose to gas transportation capacity. and habitat as well as natural and adopt the most stringent alternative, Response: EPA disagrees with the cultural heritage. According to the then it is not necessary to perform this commenter that we should consider the commenter, haze-causing emissions also analysis of environmental impacts for effect of removing FCPP generation from harm terrestrial and aquatic plants and the entire list of technologies’’. EPA the grid. As stated elsewhere, it is not animals, soil health, and water bodies agrees with commenters that controlling EPA’s intention, nor is it within our by contributing to acid rain, ozone pollutant emissions may have co- regulatory authority, to require closure formation, and nitrogen deposition. benefits for reducing ozone production or require a redefinition of the source, With these health and environmental and acid deposition. EPA does not in order to comply with the BART considerations in mind, in addition to interpret the BART Guidelines to requirement of the Regional Haze Rule. visibility and economic considerations require quantification of human health Furthermore, the owners of FCPP did discussed in other sections of this or environmental co-benefits in not provide evidence that the document, the commenter urged the determining BART, particularly if the installation of SCR would cause FCPP to EPA to finalize more stringent BART most stringent BART option is finalized. close. determinations for FCPP. Similarly, EPA does not interpret the EPA also notes that APS proposed to The commenter noted that FCPP is a BART guidelines to require human purchase the shares of Units 4 and 5 significant source of mercury emissions health or environmental assessments of currently owned by Southern California and provided information on the health alternative compliance strategies as long Edison in order to close Units 1–3 (of and ecosystem effects of mercury, as as we have determined that the which APS is sole owner) and install well as on the deposition of mercury alternative strategy achieves better SCR on Units 4 and 5 as an alternative and the levels of mercury found in the progress towards the national visibility to BART. APS has received approval Four Corners area. In addition, the goal. from the Arizona Corporation commenter stated that FCPP emits more Comment: The commenter stated that Commission and the California Public human exposure to environmental Utilities Commission to purchase 18 On March 22, 2012, the California Public hazards is an important factor in Southern California Edison’s share of Utilities Commission (PUC) approved the sale of assessing impacts of FCPP. The Units 4 and 5. APS is also seeking SCE’s ownership share in FCPP to APS. On April 18, 2012, the Arizona Corporation Commission commenter encouraged EPA to pursue approval from the Federal Energy voted to allow APS to purchase SCE’s ownership health studies in collaboration with the Regulatory Commission to implement share in FCPP. Navajo Nation to study local risks
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51628 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
associated with exposure to criteria asserted, however, that as a result of decision on continuing operation or pollutants, indoor air pollutants, and substantial uncertainty related to shutting the units down by 2014. EPA other contributing air pollutants, from multiple factors, it is not at all clear that is finalizing a modified schedule for the which improved public health and the plant’s remaining useful life is at installation of add-on post combustion effective rulemakings under the CAA least 20 years. controls from what was originally may be achieved. Moreover, according to the proposed (phased-in installation of Response: Assessing human exposure commenter, one factor that should not controls within three to five years of and quantifying health benefits are be allowed to shorten the useful life effective date) by requiring one of the outside the scope of the requirements of under the BART rules is the choice of 750 MW units to comply with the BART the Regional Haze Rule. EPA sets BART itself—EPA cannot use a 20-year emission limit within 4 years of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards amortization period to justify a specified effective date of this final rule and the (NAAQS) to establish levels of air technology (e.g., SCR) if the application remaining units (Units 1–3 and either quality that are protective of public of the technology would be so costly as Unit 4 or 5) within 5 years of the health, including the health of sensitive to make the facility uneconomical and effective date of this final rule. populations, for a number of pollutants shorten its useful life (citing 70 FR Comment: One industry commenter including particulate matter. These 39164, 39171). stated that EPA, rather than evaluate ‘‘sensitive’’ populations include The commenter made a number of APS’ supplemental proposal as an asthmatics, children, and the elderly. At arguments related to the possibility of a alternative emission control strategy, this time the Navajo Nation is not shorter useful life at FCPP that are should instead ‘‘re-determine’’ BART for identified as out of attainment with any briefly summarized here. The excessive each of the five units at FCPP based on of the NAAQS. However, EPA cost of SCR will dramatically increase the APS-proposed shutdown scenario recognizes that there are significant the energy costs of the plant, potentially for Units 1–3, i.e., reducing the concerns about risk and exposure to air making it uneconomical. The proposed remaining useful life of Units 1–3 to pollutants on the Navajo Nation and ‘‘phase-in schedule’’ for SCR may force 2014 and then using the short remaining EPA will continue discussions with the closure of units because APS will not life of those units to determine that Navajo Nation and will involve other have certainty by the compliance BART for Units 1–3 is no additional federal agencies, as appropriate, to help deadline that the lease will be extended control. The commenter concluded that address these concerns. or that Southern California Edison’s a ‘‘better-than-BART’’ control strategy does not seem to be necessary for C. Comments on Factor Three—Existing ownership share will have been determining the appropriate Controls at FCPP successfully transitioned. Emerging environmental laws and regulations requirements for FCPP under the APS- Comment: One of the owners of FCPP present cost and operational uncertainty proposed shutdown scenario; instead, a agreed with EPA’s summary of the that may shorten FCPP’s useful life BART determination for each unit with existing controls at the plant, but noted (including new GHG laws and appropriate weighting of the statutory that the proposed FIP is only the most regulations, MATS, new ash-handling factors appears to present a logical and recent action in a long line of regulatory requirements, and new requirements for less-burdensome means of applying and voluntary efforts to reduce cooling water intake structures). section 169A(b)(2) of the CAA to FCPP. emissions of pollutants that impact Response: EPA disagrees that we must Response: EPA disagrees that APS’ visibility, including SO2, NOX, and PM consider a shorter useful life because of supplemental proposal should be emissions. The commenter asserted that uncertainty related to the factors cited evaluated in terms of a BART re- FCPP has a strong history of retrofitting by the commenter. It is inappropriate to determination rather than in terms of its pollution controls and recounted the consider a useful life shorter than 20 current status as a ‘‘better-than-BART’’ facility’s history of installing these years based solely on uncertainty or the alternative measure. The 2006 Regional controls and reducing emissions. possibility of shut down. EPA further Haze Rule (71 FR 60612) established the Response: EPA agrees that there have procedures described in 40 CFR notes that in its cost analysis on behalf been numerous installations of 51.308(e)(2) and (3) for scenarios of APS, B&V stated ‘‘the remaining pollution controls over the several involving programs that may make useful life of Units 1 through 5 was at decades that FCPP has been in greater reasonable progress than source- least 20 years’’.19 Unless there is an operation. The most recent voluntary by-source BART. These provisions were enforceable obligation for APS to cease effort by FCPP increased the SO specifically included to allow for the 2 operations or unless APS convincingly removal from its long-term level of 72 flexibility to consider alternative demonstrates that controls (rather than percent removal to 88 percent removal. measures such as the one proposed by uncertainty associated with future This was accomplished before the end APS, and EPA considers it the most requirements) will cause facility of 2004 and became effective as a appropriate method for evaluating APS’ closure, the default 20 year amortization regulatory requirement in June 2007. supplemental proposal. period represents the appropriate period The improvement in SO2 removal has Comment: One industry commenter for the remaining useful life. discussed the ‘‘remaining useful life’’ resulted in a decrease of over 22,000 EPA agrees that our proposed ‘‘phase- tons of SO2 per year since that time. statutory factor, noting that under the in’’ schedule for installation of add-on BART Guidelines remaining useful life D. Comments on Factor Four— post-combustion NOX controls on Unit is ignored in the majority of BART Remaining Useful Life at FCPP 1–3 for BART, which was added in the determinations (citing 40 CFR part 51, Comment: One of the owners of FCPP supplemental proposal, may have Appendix Y, section IV.D.4.k), which noted that the BART rules state that the allowed less than two years for the commenter asserted is normal amortization period (20 years for engineering and installation from the inappropriate. According to the date by which APS intends to make its NOX control devices) is appropriate to commenter, Congress designated the use as the remaining useful life if the remaining useful life of the source as an 19 See B&V Engineering Analysis for Units 1–5 at plant’s ‘‘remaining useful life will FCPP dated December 2007. Document number important consideration because it did clearly exceed’’ that amortization period 0011 in docket for proposed rulemaking: EPA–R09– not want to impose the burdens of (citing 70 FR 39169). The commenter OAR–2010–0683. control technology retrofits on sources
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51629
that were more than 15 years old at the impairment and must be addressed in The Navajo Nation expressed concern time the statute was enacted. Given that order to make progress towards the regarding discrepancies between EPA it is now 34 years after the BART national goal of remedying visibility and APS modeling inputs, given the requirements were enacted, the impairment from manmade pollution. commenter’s understanding that APS commenter stated that the ‘‘remaining Section 169A of the CAA requires BART obtained advance EPA approval for its useful life’’ statutory factor should determinations on BART-eligible EGUs modeling protocols. Some commenters weigh heavily in BART determinations regardless of trends or ambient visibility stated that EPA had earlier agreed to for older sources such as FCPP, instead conditions. Application of BART is one lower ammonia concentrations, and so of being ignored. means by which we can ensure that should not be using the higher IWAQM Response: EPA disagrees with the downward emission and visibility value now. commenter that we ignored the impairment trends continue. EPA In contrast, one public interest ‘‘remaining useful life’’ statutory factor identifies stationary sources as an advocacy group concurred with EPA’s in our BART decision. EPA considered important category to evaluate in a back-calculation method for ammonia this factor in our BART analysis (see BART analysis. background levels (citing the TSD, page pages 42–43 of the TSD for our Comment: Three of the owners of 60). The commenter added that the proposed BART determination). As FCPP, the Navajo Nation, and two requests to EPA from other commenters discussed in the TSD, the remaining utility industry associations argued that for additional ammonia monitoring data useful life of an Electric Generating Unit EPA’s use of Interagency Workgroup on are unrealistic in today’s budget (EGU) subject to BART is determined by Air Quality Modeling (IWAQM) Phase II environment. the utility. EPA cannot arbitrarily default background ammonia values is Response: EPA disagrees with decide that an EGU has less useful life not appropriate. They argued the commenter objections to the background when it is not within our BART following points: (1) Actual field ammonia concentrations used in our modeling. Our use of the 1 ppb IWAQM rulemaking authority to require closure measurements show lower ammonia Phase II default background ammonia of an EGU. If a utility used a shorter concentrations than used by EPA; (2) value is appropriate. Most of the useful life than one that would allow EPA is mistaken in its assumption that objections have already been discussed the full amortization of any necessary background ammonia concentrations in EPA’s TSD for the proposal; and pollution controls, EPA would take that along the path of the plant’s plume several of them concern the ‘‘back- into account in the cost analysis, determine nitrate concentrations and calculation’’ method that we used only provided that there was an enforceable their contribution to haze at the receptor obligation for the facility to cease as corroboration for using the 1 ppb site; (3) EPA’s ‘‘corroborating’’ approach operation by that time. results we principally relied on. Also, of ‘‘back-calculating’’ ammonia is even if the lower ammonia E. Comments on Factor Five— flawed because it erroneously assumes concentrations urged by some Anticipated Visibility Improvements that the ammonia associated with commenters were accepted, EPA’s Comment: One of the owners of FCPP measured sulfate and nitrate would all sensitivity modeling results provided in presented information on visibility be available to react with FCPP the TSD for our proposed BART conditions on the Colorado Plateau and emissions, whereas in reality those determination showed the visibility measurements reflect emissions from the role of NOX emissions in Western benefits would still support EPA’s visibility impairment. The commenter many sources; (4) EPA’s analysis of BART determination. EPA also provided nitrate predictions as a check on the noted that SO2 and NOX emissions have the results of modeling runs that used been decreasing in recent years. The ammonia values used is also flawed the lower ammonia background commenter also presented information because it erroneously assumes that the concentrations recommended by some that purported to show that whether resulting measured nitrate levels are commenters (see TSD Table 37). The solely due to FCPP emissions; (5) averaged over the haziest 20 percent of visibility benefits of the NOX controls days, the clearest 20 percent of days, or comparable analysis using the EPA for BART are substantial under all ammonia value shows substantial and all days, power plant NOX emissions ammonia scenarios, including the lower contribute less than 1.5 percent to the ‘‘physically impossible’’ over- background ammonia concentrations light extinction at Mesa Verde National predictions of nitrate. The commenters recommended by commenters. For 12 Park. conclude that the use of IWAQM values Class I areas, modeling even with those Another commenter questioned EPA’s invalidates EPA’s BART modeling and lower background concentrations assertion that NOX and PM from FCPP the BART determination that relied on showed improvements of 0.5 dv or are significant contributors to visibility the modeling. more, an amount recognized in the impairment in the numerous mandatory Another utility industry association BART Guidelines as significant (e.g. at Class I areas surrounding FCPP (citing stated that several measurement 70 FR 39120). 75 FR 64221), stating that coal-fired programs on the Colorado Plateau show The lack of ammonia and ammonium power plants, including FCPP, are that actual ammonia values in Class I measurements in the Class I areas of relatively small contributors to regional areas near FCPP are significantly lower concern requires that EPA estimate haze in the surrounding Class I Areas. than the IWAQM default value, background ammonia concentrations by Response: EPA modeling of FCPP indicating that these values typically some method, considering available showed visibility impacts ranging from range from 0.1 to 0.6 ppb. The data and approaches. As discussed in 1.2 to 6.0 deciviews (dv), depending on commenter noted that ammonia the BART proposal and its the Class I area, with the sum of impacts concentrations are lowest during the accompanying TSD, EPA understands at all sixteen Class I areas totaling 43 dv. cold season when the visibility impacts that there is no single accepted method This is a significant contribution to of NOX emissions are the highest. for estimating the background visibility impairment. Even if an Accordingly, the commenter asserted concentration of ammonia, and that any individual source category appears that using a single ammonia value method will have advantages and small to some commenters, the many throughout the year is not scientifically disadvantages. The lack of consensus on segments of the emissions inventory valid and should be replaced with a method was a factor in EPA’s decision together cause significant visibility seasonally variable values. to rely on the 1 part per billion (ppb)
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51630 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
default value in IWAQM, as was the fact plausibility argument applies despite in the absence of other sources. The that IWAQM is the only available the rapid nitrate-nitric acid equilibrium back-calculation method, therefore, is guidance on this issue. In summary, cited by the commenters, and in any used to corroborate that it is appropriate there is insufficient monitoring case was not relied on by EPA in using to use the 1 ppb IWAQM default for information available to use a different the 1 ppb default ammonia background. background ammonia concentrations. value, or to support any seasonally As the commenters stated under the In the fourth issue raised by varying values and, as described below, third issue, EPA used a back-calculation commenters, the commenters claim that these values are reasonable to use in this ammonia estimation method as an the assumption of full availability to analysis. alternative means of corroboration for FCPP of the back-calculated ammonia On the first issue, field measurements the 1 ppb IWAQM method, which is invalidates EPA’s comparison of cited by the commenters were not more fully explained in the TSD for the monitored nitrate levels with those performed in the Four Corners area, nor proposed rulemaking. Essentially, it modeled using the back-calculated at the Class I areas near FCPP, so they uses measured particulate ammonium ammonia (TSD p.73). As just discussed do not give appropriate ammonia sulfate and nitrate to estimate the for the third issue, EPA disagrees that background concentrations for modeling amount of ammonia that must have the assumption is invalid for of FCPP. In addition, the studies been present to form those ammonia corroboration of single-source BART provide only gaseous ammonia (NH3) compounds. The commenters object that assessment modeling. For single-source and not ammonium (NH4) that has the method assumes that all the BART modeling, on balance, it is reacted with SO2 or NOX emissions. For calculated ammonia is available to reasonable to assume all the ammonia is purposes of assessing FCPP impacts interact with the FCPP plume as available to the source, given the relative to natural background, per the background ammonia. However, this counterbalancing tendencies for over- BART Guidelines, both ammonia and assumption is reasonable for the single- and underestimation inherent in the ammonium should be assumed to be source CALPUFF modeling performed back-calculation method discussed available to interact with emissions under the BART Guidelines. It estimates above. In any case, this method mainly from FCPP. The ammonia-only ammonia concentrations that would be provided corroboration for the results measurements cited by the commenters monitored at the Class I area if only this from using the 1 ppb ammonia default. underestimate the available ammonia. single source existed; it includes The fifth issue about ‘‘physically Finally, as discussed in the TSD, field ammonia that is currently in the form of impossible’’ nitrate over-predictions measurements in the Four Corners area ammonium because of interaction with does not account for the fact that any showed ammonia measurements other sources’ emissions. It remains true model evaluation is expected to have ranging from 1.0 ppb to 1.5 ppb, and that some portion of the calculated under- and over-predictions, depending sometimes as high as 3.5 ppb.20 This ammonia would in reality not be on the meteorological conditions and provides some additional support for available for FCPP, because it arrives at the geographic location modeled, as the 1 ppb used by EPA. the monitor from a different direction well as on the location of the monitor On the second issue, in using a 1 ppb than FCPP’s pollutant plume; on the used for comparison. The commenter’s background EPA did not rely on an other hand, the data would also include apparent requirement for no over- assumption about the importance of directions contributing below-average predictions whatsoever would require a background ammonia along the path of ammonia, reducing that effect. model with the converse problem, a bias the plume, as claimed by the In addition, the back-calculated toward underprediction. While commenters. The 1 ppb background is a ammonia is based on measurements consistent over-prediction in a full representative value for areas in the only of particulate ammonium, the form model performance evaluation would west under existing EPA guidance, in associated with measured sulfate and indeed raise concerns over its validity, the IWAQM document. The nitrate; it does not include any gaseous as EPA stated, our nitrate comparison commenters’ objection is based on the ammonia that may also be present. In was not intended as a model rapidity of the nitrate-nitric acid this sense, the back-calculated ammonia performance evaluation, but rather as a equilibrium, which they state implies is a lower bound on the ammonia that ‘‘rough check’’ for the back-calculation that ammonium nitrate can only be may be available to interact with source corroboratory method (TSD p.73). EPA estimated using ammonia measurements emissions; that is, the method may found that the modeled and monitored right at the Class I area, and not the underestimate ammonia concentrations. values, for both the maximum values ammonia that occurs earlier along the This possible underestimation tends to and the 98th percentiles, were generally plume’s path to the area. EPA’s TSD for offset possible overestimation discussed in agreement. the proposed rulemaking did state (TSD above. Finally, contrary to the commenter’s p.62) that the Federal Land Managers EPA does not claim that the back- assertion, EPA did not receive a partly relied on this assumption as one calculation method is dispositive; it modeling protocol in advance of of the rationales for the back-calculation incorporates various assumptions and modeling by APS’s contractor. EPA method, discussed below; EPA also imperfections that make clear it is only disagrees with commenters that EPA expressed support for the idea that the an estimate. However, it is based on real committed to use the same ammonia method can be viewed as a 24-hour measured data at Class I areas, and has concentrations used by APS’s contractor temporal integration, not just a spatial some counterbalancing tendencies for in our own modeling analysis for our integration over the plume path, and over- and under-estimation. After BART determination. that this aspect can be viewed as weighing various lines of argument Comment: Three of the owners of desirable for the 24-hour average about the back-calculation method, EPA FCPP and a utility industry association visibility estimate that CALPUFF disagrees with the commenters who asserted that CALPUFF version 5.8 used provides (TSD pp.71–72). This recommended that it be rejected in EPA’s BART analysis is outdated. altogether. The method provides a Because of enhancements to the model’s 20 Mark E. Sather et al., 2008. ‘‘Baseline ambient useful estimate of ammonia for BART chemistry, the commenters asserted that gaseous ammonia concentrations in the Four modeling, by providing concentrations CALPUFF version 6.4 represents the Corners area and eastern Oklahoma, USA’’. Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 2008, 10, 1319–1325, representative of the high values that best application that is currently DOI: 10.1039/b807984f. would be observed at the Class I areas available. A number of the commenters
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51631
mentioned a December 2010 meeting In addition, the latest version of area of the affected Class I area) is between the CALPUFF developer and CALPUFF, 6.4, incorporates a detailed addressed in the BART rules, and the FLMs where the FLMs reportedly treatment of chemistry. EPA’s posited that their introduction into the supported an expedited review and promulgation of CALPUFF (68 FR BART process is intended to inflate the approval of CALPUFF version 6.4. 18440, April 15, 2003) as a ‘‘preferred’’ estimated visibility benefits of the Another owner of FCPP stated that the model approved it for use in analyses of control options at FCPP. Regarding the version of CALPUFF used by EPA has Prevention of Significant Deterioration percent improvement metric, the a tendency to over-predict nitrate increment consumption and for commenter stated that these values concentrations, which is compounded complex wind situations, neither of (unlike values of the haze index in dv) by EPA’s use of what the commenter which involve chemical have no consistent relationship to the stated are overestimated ammonia transformations. For visibility impact human perception of haze changes and background values. The commenter analyses, which do involve chemical no consistent relationship to changes in asserted that this combination of errors transformations, CALPUFF is ambient visibility-impairing particle results in a significant over-prediction considered a ‘‘screening’’ model, rather concentrations. of visibility improvements for more than a ‘‘preferred’’ model; this Similarly, one of the owners of FCPP stated that cumulative change in dv is stringent NOX BART control options. ‘‘screening’’ status is also described in Further, the commenter stated that this the preamble to the BART Guidelines (at not an appropriate metric to describe disproportionately affects the 70 FR 39123, July 6, 2005). The change visibility improvement and should be incremental visibility benefits predicted to CALPUFF 6.4 is not a simple model withdrawn. This commenter made a number of points which are briefly for SCR over Low NOX Burners (LNB) update to address bug fixes, but a compared to LNB over baseline. significant change in the model science described here. The peak impact from a In contrast, one federal agency was that requires its own rulemaking with source occurs at different times in generally supportive of the modeling public notice and comment. different Class I areas because a methods employed by EPA with the Furthermore, it should be noted that facility’s emissions cannot result in the U.S. Forest Service and EPA review peak concentrations in all directions at regulatory approved version 5.8 of the of CALPUFF version 6.4 results for a once. Thus, this metric really does not CALPUFF modeling system. limited set of BART applications represent a cumulative regional impact Response: EPA disagrees with the showed that differences in its results of the source (and hence the benefit of commenters that any new CALPUFF from those of version 5.8 are driven by controls); rather it simply produces a version should be used for the BART two input assumptions and not mathematical summation of the peak determination. EPA relied on version associated with the chemistry changes impacts occurring at different times at 5.8 of CALPUFF because it is the EPA- in 6.4. Use of the so-called ‘‘full’’ various Class I areas. It is inappropriate approved version in accordance with ammonia limiting method and finer to add improvements over all Class I the Guideline on Air Quality Models horizontal grid resolution are the areas. A 0.5 dv improvement in one (‘‘GAQM’’, 40 CFR 51, Appendix W, primary drivers in the predicted Class I area and a 0.5 dv improvement section 6.2.1.e); EPA updated the differences in modeled visibility in another area does not result in a 1 dv specific version to be used for regulatory impacts between the model versions. improvement—the improvement is a 0.5 purposes on June 29, 2007, including These input assumptions have been dv improvement, which occurs in two minor revisions as of that date; the previously reviewed by EPA and the different locations. Any one observer approved CALPUFF modeling system FLMs and have been rejected based on would experience only a 0.5 dv includes CALPUFF version 5.8, level lack of documentation, inadequate peer improvement; he or she can only 070623, and CALMET version 5.8 level review, and lack of technical experience the visibility improvement 070623. CALPUFF version 5.8 has been justification and validation. in the Class I area being visited. thoroughly tested and evaluated, and EPA intends to conduct a Conversely, one environmental has been shown to perform consistent comprehensive evaluation of the latest advocacy group commenter supported with the version from the time of the CALPUFF version along with other the use of a cumulative impact analysis. initial 2003 promulgation, in the ‘‘chemistry’’ air quality models in The commenter asserted that the analytical situations CALPUFF has been consultation with the Federal Land cumulative impact of a source’s approved for. Any other version would Managers, including a full statistical emissions on visibility, as well as the be considered an ‘‘alternative model’’, performance evaluation, verification of cumulative benefit of emission subject to the provisions of GAQM its scientific basis, determination of reductions, is a necessary consideration section 3.2.2(b), requiring full model whether the underlying science has as part of the fifth step in the BART documentation, peer-review, and been incorporated into the modeling analysis, particularly in cases such as performance evaluation. No such system correctly, and evaluation of the FCPP where the source causes or information for the later CALPUFF effect on the regulatory framework for contributes to visibility impairment at a versions that meet the requirements of its use, including in New Source Review significant number of Class I areas. The section 3.2.2(b) has been submitted to or permitting. CALPUFF version 5.8 has commenter stated that failing to account approved by EPA. Experience has already gone through this for a source’s cumulative impairment shown that when the full evaluation comprehensive evaluation process and and the cumulative pollution control procedure is not followed, errors that remains the EPA-approved version, and benefit would result in a failure to are not immediately apparent can be is thus the appropriate version for EPA’s acknowledge the regional approach to introduced along with new model BART determination for FCPP. reducing haze. features. For example, changes Comment: Some commenters argued Response: EPA believes that it is introduced to CALMET to improve against the visibility metrics that EPA important to consider the visibility simulation of over-water convective introduced in the BART proposal. One impact on multiple Class I areas. The mixing heights caused their periodic commenter noted that none of the goal of the visibility program is to collapse to zero, even over land, so that metrics (percent improvement in dv remedy visibility impairment at all CALPUFF concentration estimates were impacts, cumulative changes in dv, and Class I areas. CAA 169A(a)(1). One no longer reliable. dv impacts scaled by the geographic approach to account for the benefits to
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51632 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
all affected Class I areas is the to consider less-than-perceptible EPA assumed in our BART proposal cumulative ‘‘total dv’’ metric. EPA contributions to visibility impairment that a 3+1 system (four layers of relied on the modeled impacts and would ignore the CAA’s intent to have catalyst) would achieve 80 percent NOX benefits at each Class I area BART requirements apply to sources removal. Greater reduction efficiencies individually, the number of Class I areas that contribute to, as well as cause, such would likely require an additional layer affected, and also considered, but did impairment.’’ (70 FR 39129) That is, of catalyst, which models indicate not rely on, the sum of visibility impacts impacts smaller than 0.5 dv do would increase sulfuric acid emissions. and benefits across all 16 Class I areas. contribute to impairment. Conversely, Based on the SO2 to SO3 conversion rate Comment: Two commenters an improvement of 0.5 dv or even less guarantee we received from Hitachi for questioned EPA’s use of 0.5 dv as the contributes to improvement in visibility its CX series catalyst (ultra-low threshold of a humanly perceptible impairment. As stated in the proposal, conversion) of 0.167 percent per layer, change in visibility (citing 75 FR 64228). the modeled improvements in visibility the use of an additional catalyst layer One commenter added that the are large enough to warrant requiring would equal five layers of catalyst and establishment of a specific deciview the proposed BART controls. While the a 0.835 percent conversion rate. EPA is threshold as a ‘‘bright line’’ to define actual improvements may be larger, not aware of SCR systems that use five whether a certain control will be from 0.6 to 2.8 dv, even as small an layers of catalyst, and the addition of a imposed as BART is contrary to the improvement as 0.5 dv is a contribution fifth layer would also affect the cost and intent of the BART rules and the toward improving visibility, especially operation of the unit. objectives of the Regional Haze program, when the benefits at multiple Class I Although EPA agrees that the which require EPA to consider the cost areas are considered. In conjunction modeling referenced by the commenter of each control option in relation to the with improvements from other sources, indicates greater visibility improvement associated visibility benefit. this will help and is necessary for from an SCR system achieving 90 One of the owners of FCPP expressed progress toward the CAA goal of percent removal compared to 80 percent the belief that application of SCR at remedying manmade visibility removal despite higher sulfuric acid FCPP would result in no perceptible impairment. emissions,21 EPA does not agree that visibility improvement and therefore Comment: One environmental this requires EPA to determine that a cannot be BART. greater level of control is required as Response: EPA disagrees with the advocacy group commenter stated that EPA underestimated visibility BART. The level of control commenters that the visibility benefit recommended by the commenter is from the proposed BART controls is too improvement from installing NOX controls because it overestimated the equivalent to those required as the Best small to warrant requiring the controls; Available Control Technology (BACT) in addition, EPA is not using a production of sulfuric acid by the SCR and underestimated the amount of for new facilities. As discussed in perceptibility threshold in this BART responses to other comments, the determination. EPA agrees that sulfuric acid removed downstream of Regional Haze Rule requires a case-by- thresholds should not be considered a the SCR. The commenter cited reports case BART determination, which need ‘‘bright line’’ in making BART attached to the comments to argue that not be equivalent to BACT for new decisions. In the BART Guidelines, EPA sulfuric acid does not limit SCR NOX facilities. As discussed in our proposed described 1 dv as the threshold for an control efficiency. The reports also state BART determination and in our impact that ‘‘causes’’ visibility that modeling shows that greater NOX Supplemental proposal, given the boiler impairment, and 0.5 dv as a threshold removal rates are not offset by sulfuric size and configuration at FCPP that limit for an impact that ‘‘contributes’’ to acid emissions but instead yield greater use of combustion controls, and other visibility impairment, for determining visibility improvements than those considerations related to ash content of whether a source is subject to BART, proposed by EPA. The commenter states though States were accorded discretion that this would result in a significant coal, EPA is finalizing its determination to use different thresholds (70 FR 39118, visibility benefit from increasing the that 80 percent control is appropriate as BART for FCPP. July 6, 2005; also 39120–39121). These SCR NOX efficiency from 80 percent to thresholds do not apply to BART 90 percent and therefore concludes that F. Comments on BART Determinations determinations for sources that have a higher level of NOX control than 80 been found subject to BART; States or percent should be determined BART. 1. Comments on the Proposed BART EPA could consider visibility impacts Response: EPA disagrees that we Determination for NOX less than 0.5 dv to warrant BART overstated the production of sulfuric Comment: A number of commenters, controls. To the extent that the comment acid from the SCR catalyst and including owners of FCPP, the Navajo is questioning the BART eligibility of underestimated the amount of sulfuric Nation, and a utility industry FCPP, EPA has already established that acid removed downstream of the SCR. association, assert that EPA’s BART FCPP is BART eligible and the In the TSD for our proposed BART analysis was inconsistent with its own commenter did not provide evidence to determination, we estimated sulfuric regulations in that it did not give proper the contrary. acid emissions using the Electric Power weight to the ‘‘presumptive BART’’ Even if the commenters are correct Research Institute (EPRI) methodology limits for NOX that it established for that 0.5 dv change is not perceptible, and provided detailed explanations for EGUs through notice-and-comment EPA noted that ‘‘[e]ven though the all of the assumptions we applied (see rulemaking (generally citing 70 FR visibility improvement from an TSD p. 55–59, 64–65, and 68). While we 39104, July 6, 2005). The commenters individual source may not be fully acknowledge and understand that noted that these presumptive BART perceptible, it should still be considered the generalized EPRI methodology does limits are based on the use of in setting BART because the not precisely represent true sulfuric acid contribution to haze may be significant emissions for a given facility, this 21 EPA notes that the baghouses on Units 4 and relative to other source contributions in method is a commonly used calculation 5 are assumed to provide a significant amount of control of sulfuric acid emissions, therefore, such the Class I area. Thus, we disagree that methodology for estimating sulfuric acid slight increases in sulfuric acid emissions would the degree of improvement should be emissions under a future operating not be expected on units that are not equipped with contingent upon perceptibility. Failing scenario involving SCR. baghouses.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51633
combustion controls, and that EPA had Commenters argue that EPA did not presumptive emission limits for subject considered and rejected establishing carefully consider the BART factors and to BART sources. The RHR states: presumptive BART limits based on SCR. then conclude that an alternative to For each source subject to BART, 40 CFR A brief summary of these comments presumptive BART limits is 51.308(e)(1)(ii)(A) requires that States follows. appropriate. Instead, commenters state identify the level of control representing In establishing presumptive BART that EPA dismissed the presumptive BART after considering the factors set out in limits for NOX emissions from EGUs, BART limits before even considering the CAA section 169A(g), as follows: EPA concluded that combustion BART factors. States must identify the best system of control-based presumptive limits ‘‘are Response: EPA disagrees with the continuous emission control technology for extremely likely to be appropriate for all commenters’ assertions that we did not each source subject to BART taking into greater than 750 MW power plants give sufficient weight to presumptive account the technology available, the costs of subject to BART’’ (a category that compliance, the energy and non-air quality BART NOX limits, or that the BART environmental impacts of compliance, any includes FCPP), that they are ‘‘highly determination for FCPP was performed pollution control equipment in use at the cost-effective controls,’’ and that they in a manner inconsistent with the RHR. source, the remaining useful life of the ‘‘would result in significant As noted in other responses in this source, and the degree of visibility improvements in visibility and help to document, the presumptive NOX limits improvement that may be expected from ensure reasonable progress toward the established in the BART Guidelines are available control technology.25 national visibility goal (citing 70 FR determined to be cost effective and EPA’s site-specific five-factor analysis 39131). Additionally, EPA has made appropriate for most units. The performed for FCPP demonstrates that, clear that ‘‘the presumptions represent a establishment of presumptive BART in considering the expected remaining reasonable estimate of a stringent case limits, and the corresponding useful life of FCPP and the existing BART * * *’’ (citing 71 FR 60612, technology upon which those limits are controls, SCR is cost effective, results in 60619, Oct. 13, 2006). based, does not preclude States or EPA Commenters argue that EPA was not the most visibility improvement of all from setting limits that differ from those feasible control technologies, and does correct in stating in the proposed BART presumptions. Indeed, the five statutory determination for FCPP that in setting not cause energy or non-air quality factors enumerated in the BART environmental impacts that warrant its presumptive BART limits, it ‘‘did not Guidelines provide the mechanism for consider the question of what more elimination as the top control option. As establishing different requirements. We a result, regardless of the stringent control technologies might be note the RHR states: appropriately determined to be BART’’ appropriateness of SCR as a control (citing 75 FR 64226). Rather, EPA’s 2005 States, as a general matter, must require technology for most units on a national owners and operators of greater than 750 MW scale, or the extent to which EPA rules were clear that the Agency had power plants to meet these BART emission considered—and rejected—establishing considered SCR in establishing the limits. We are establishing these presumptive limits, the site-specific presumptive BART limits based on SCR requirements based on the consideration of (citing 70 FR 39136). Thus, EPA certain factors discussed below. Although we five-factor analysis performed for FCPP established through rulemaking that believe that these requirements are extremely justifies a different NOX BART limit SCR is not an appropriate basis for likely to be appropriate for all greater than than the presumptive NOX BART limit. presumptive BART limits and that 750 MW power plants subject to BART, a EPA disagrees with commenters’ combustion controls should generally be State may establish different requirements if assertions that we disregarded deemed BART. the State can demonstrate that an alternative presumptive NOX BART limits. Commenters also argue that a BART determination is justified based on a Although we do not rely upon the consideration of the five statutory factors.22 analysis must begin with and take into numerical values of the presumptive account the presumptive BART limits The RHR also states: NOX limits listed in the BART and EPA’s rationale for setting them. If If, upon examination of an individual EGU, Guidelines, the technological basis for a source is able to meet the limit a State determines that a different emission presumptive NOX BART limits, such as through the application of combustion limit is appropriate based upon its analysis the use of combustion control controls, there should be an exceedingly of the five factors, then the State may apply technology, boiler type, and coal type, strong presumption that such controls a more or less stringent limit.23 were considered in the site-specific five- constitute BART. Therefore, the presumptive emission factor analysis. Combustion control Commenters state that EPA’s limits in the BART Guidelines are technology was specifically considered analytical approach disregarded the rebuttable.24 The presumptive emission as a potential retrofit technology, and presumptive limits entirely. By using a limits apply to power plants with a total costs and visibility improvements top-down approach in which it started generating capacity of 750 MW or associated with combustion controls its analysis by evaluating SCR and then greater insofar as these sources are were calculated and included in the determined that SCR is BART for FCPP, required to adopt emission limits at TSD in order to provide a comparison EPA never undertook an assessment of least as stringent as the presumptive to other NOX control technologies. combustion controls. limits, unless after considering the five In addition, EPA disagrees that the Commenters further argue that in its statutory factors, the State determines rule directs authorities to consider non- BART analysis, APS demonstrated that that the presumptive emission limits are combustion control technology only each unit at FCPP can meet the not appropriate. Moreover, the RHR and when presumptive limits cannot be met presumptive BART limits through the BART Guidelines do not exempt States using combustion control technology. application of advanced combustion from a five factor BART analysis, and While a BART determination deviating control technologies. that BART analysis may result in a from presumptive BART must be Under the BART rules, a deviation determination of BART emission limits supported by the results of the five- from presumptive BART, either that are more or less stringent than the factor analysis, the rule does not restrict upwards or downwards, is authorized if the ability of States (or in this case, an alternative control level is justified 22 70 FR 39131. EPA) to initiate a five-factor analysis. based on ‘‘careful consideration of the 23 70 FR 39132. statutory factors’’ (citing 70 FR 39131). 24 71 FR 60619. 25 70 FR 39158.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51634 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Comment: Two of the owners of FCPP TSD for our 2010 BART proposal, we percent SCR efficiency estimate. The and the Navajo Nation asserted that have concluded that combustion main points are summarized below. advanced combustion controls controls will not be effective at EPA took into account the constitute BART for FCPP because such significantly reducing NOX emissions at degradation of the SCR catalyst over its controls will result in meaningful FCPP. lifetime and calculated the emission emission reductions and will contribute EPA disagrees that installation of SCR limit to reflect the capability of the to reasonable progress toward visibility will not result in humanly perceptible catalyst just prior to its replacement on improvement. impacts. As noted above, EPA’s a 3-year cycle. Commenters assert this One of these commenters noted that visibility modeling of the impacts of issue is not a technical limitation on EPA has ‘‘determined that combustion SCR installation at FCPP indicates SCR, but is simply a cost item to be controls are not likely to be effective visibility improvements at the sixteen accounted for in the proper design and control technologies at FCPP’’ (citing 75 nearby Class I areas ranging from 0.9 to operation of the SCR. FR 64226). The commenter asserted that 2.5 dv. EPA stated that pursuing NOX control EPA’s determination is based on EPA agrees with certain aspects of efficiencies of greater than 80 percent on superficial analysis and is mistaken. comments from the Navajo Nation Units 4 and 5 is limited by formation of This commenter cited its comments regarding a phased implementation H2SO4 from the SCR catalyst because which contain a detailed analysis of the strategy to attaining national visibility the additional layers of catalyst needed use of LNB and OFA on FCPP’s units. goals. In 40 CFR 51.308(f), States are to increase NOX control efficiency According to the commenter, this required to revise their regional haze would increase emissions of H2SO4, analysis confirms that the use of implementation plans every ten years, most affecting nearby Mesa Verde advanced combustion controls on the which is a process that involves National Park. The commenter gave five units at FCPP will reduce plant- evaluating their ability to attain several reasons why this argument is incorrect. wide NOX emissions by 34 percent and, reasonable progress goals and EPA stated that the high ash content for those units that are subject to potentially updating their long-term (approximately 25 percent) of the coal presumptive BART limits, the strategy for regional haze. The periodic reductions more than satisfy the burned at FCPP may adversely affect the revision requirement described in 40 capability of SCR to reach the highest presumptive limits in the BART rules. CFR 51.308(f), however, does not extend Two of the commenters added that end of the control efficiency range to the implementation plan for BART considering that neither SCR nor without the use of additional layers of requirements. The phased approach advanced combustion controls will catalyst or more frequent catalyst described by the Navajo Nation has produce humanly perceptible visibility replacement. According to the certain benefits, and a phased approach improvements in the nearby Class I commenter, this is not consistent with areas, control technologies that result in is incorporated into the alternative previous EPA proposals for SCR limits that meet presumptive BART emission control strategy. emissions limits at facilities that use should be determined BART and that Comment: Two federal agencies and coal with similar ash content. Unless these reductions will contribute to two groups of environmental advocacy the FCCP ash contains some unusual reasonable progress toward the national groups assert that the NOX emission catalyst poison, the 25 percent ash visibility goal. limit for the units at FCPP should be content is not a technical feasibility The Navajo Nation stated that a 0.05 lb/MMBtu based on the capabilities issue that would affect SCR phased approach to emissions controls of SCR. The federal agency commenters effectiveness, but is a matter of proper at FCPP, beginning with combustion stated that, given that BART is meant to SCR design, operation, and controls, is fully consistent with both achieve the best possible emissions maintenance. the CAA and the RHR, and is the reductions, EPA should not base its This federal agency commenter also approach that the EPA should take as a emission limits on the ‘‘minimum asserted that NOX BART for Units 1–3 prudent trustee of the Navajo Nation. reduction expected from SCR, estimated should be 0.05 lb/MMBtu on an annual This commenter added that the BART by Hitachi Power Systems America’’ basis. The commenter noted that component of the CAA and RHR was (citing the TSD for our proposed unsuccessful attempts to reduce NOX meant to provide for a measured rulemaking) because real-world emissions at FCPP with combustion response to emissions from aging power application of SCR indicates that lower controls occurred over a decade ago plants; thus, requiring the most NOX emission limits are routinely when this technology was not as fully expensive controls is inconsistent with reached. Regarding the emission limits developed as now, and pointed out that the law and regulations governing the for Units 4 and 5, the commenters noted APS’S BART analysis concluded that BART process. The commenter also that of the 20 cell burners with SCR in such controls are technically feasible asserted that requiring a power plant 2010, 12 had lower NOX limits than and would reduce NOX emissions over which EPA has exclusive proposed by EPA for FCPP, with 3 EGUs significantly. jurisdiction to bear a greater regulatory at less than 0.06 lb/MMBtu. Based on The commenter evaluated Clean Air burden than similarly situated plants this information, the original APS BART Markets Division (CAMD) data for regulated by the States is contrary to the analysis of SCR at 0.06 lb/MMBtu 2000—2009 and found 33 dry-bottom, purposes of the Act, the RHR, and to the (annual and 24-hour average), and the wall-fired boilers with NOX emissions economic interests of the Navajo Nation. ‘‘common knowledge’’ that SCR can rates similar to FCPP Units 1–3 (0.6— Response: EPA disagrees with the achieve at least 90 percent reduction, 0.8 lb/MMBtu) that had been reduced to comment that advanced combustion the commenters concluded that the 0.4 lb/MMBtu or less by application of controls on all five units at FCPP will installation of SCR at FCPP is capable of modern combustion controls. The reduce plant-wide NOX emissions by 34 reducing annual NOX emissions by 90 commenter asserted that because the percent. APS has provided conflicting percent to 0.05 lb/MMBtu on an annual typical approach is to first reduce NOX information regarding whether or not average basis. emissions by combustion controls advanced combustion controls will be One of the federal agency commenters before adding SCR, these real-world effective at significantly reducing NOX specifically refuted EPA’s rationale in CAMD data support the belief that using emissions at FCPP. As outlined in the the supplemental proposal for its 80 combustion controls and SCR could
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51635
reduce NOX at FCPP Units 1–3 to 0.05 a technology is determined as BART, In its comments, the National Park lb/MMBtu on an annual basis. the BART Guidelines require Service provided examples of 3 cell The commenter asserted that modern establishment of an emission limit that burner boilers currently equipped with SCRs are routinely designed and reflects the BART requirements, but SCR: Cardinal Units 1 and 2 and Belews operated to achieve 90 percent NOX does not specify that the emission limit Creek Unit 1. Based on NOX data from control and that based on this well- must represent the maximum level of the Clean Air Markets Division (CAMD), accepted industry standard, NOX control achieved by the technology EPA notes that over 2009–2011, NOX control of at least 90 percent is BART. selected as BART. The BART Guidelines emissions from Cardinal Unit 1 showed The commenter also contended that and the Regional Haze Rule do not an increasing trend. Cardinal Unit 2 LNB and OFA are feasible for all five preclude selection of the maximum shows a similar pattern as Unit 1, with units at FCPP. The commenter rejected level of control achieved by a given an increasing trend in minimum and EPA’s statement that it would be technology as BART, however, the maximum 30-day calendar averages. difficult to retrofit Units 4 and 5 with emission limit set to reflect BART must Belews Creek 1 also showed a similar modern LNB technology (citing 76 FR be achievable by the specific source and pattern of generally increasing 10534) and pointed out that the operator should be determined based on minimum and maximum 30-day of FCPP has stated that the combination consideration of site-specific factors. calendar average emission rates. of LNB and OFA is technically feasible Therefore, limits set as Best Available Although commenters are correct in for these units. The commenter Control Technology (BACT) during stating that the best performing units indicated that the use of LNB/OFA on Prevention of Significant Determination can achieve 30-day rolling emission Units 1–5 would reduce NOX emissions (PSD) review (e.g., Desert Rock) may rates of 0.05 lb/MMBtu or lower, CAMD by 27 to 46 percent, making SCR with provide relevant information, but data show significant variability in a removal efficiency of 90 percent should not be construed to emission rates, both over time for a sufficient to satisfy a 0.05 lb/MMBtu automatically represent the most given unit, and between the best NOX limit. appropriate BART limits representative performing units. Some of this The commenter stated that a 0.05 lb/ of a given technology for every facility. variability may be related to catalyst MMBtu limit is consistent with EPA’s While some commenters asserted that aging, or may be related to the determinations elsewhere, such as for combustion controls would be feasible participation of these units in trading the San Juan Generating Station upstream of SCR to further reduce NOX programs (therefore these units operate (proposed limit of 0.05 lbs/MMBtu, 30- emissions to meet a limit of 0.05 lb/ without an absolute limit on individual day rolling average) and for Desert Rock MMBtu, in its comment letter, the boilers). Regardless of the cause of this (final permit limit of 0.035 lbs/MMBtu, National Park Service (NPS) agreed with variability, EPA notes that significant 365-day rolling average). According to EPA that the addition of combustion variability over a 30-day average, even the commenter, an EPA-issued permit controls may ‘‘not (be) worth the small among the best performing units, does exist, and EPA disagrees that an containing a lower NOX limit creates a incremental reduction in NOX presumption of technical feasibility for emissions’’. As discussed in the TSD for emission limit set in association with a purposes of BART. Commenters also our proposed BART determination, BART determination must represent the argued that emission limits should be because additional combustion controls lowest rate achieved on 30-day rolling based on a 30-boiler operating day at FCPP would not achieve significant average basis from the best performing rolling average. reductions in NO and may cause unit using that technology. X EPA examined the most recent Clean Response: EPA disagrees with the operability issues for the boilers, EPA Air Markets Division (CAMD) emission commenter’s assertion that emission determined that SCR, without the rate data for 12 cell burner boilers limits associated with BART must meet addition of new combustion controls, is currently operating with SCR over the lowest emission rate achieved with BART for FCPP. 2009–June 2011.28 In order to determine that technology at any coal-fired power Several environmental organizations what might be an appropriate percent plant. The Regional Haze Regulations at argued that a 30-day rolling average reduction to represent all cell burner 40 CFR § 51.308(e)(1)(ii)(A) state that: emission limit of 0.05 lb/MMBtu should boilers currently using SCR, we be determined BART for FCPP and The determination of BART must be based calculated the average percent reduction provided supporting documentation.26 on an analysis of the best system of from the highest emission rate achieved EPA disagrees that an emission limit set continuous emission control technology over all 12 units. The percent reduction available and associated emission reductions in association with a BART achieved from the monthly calendar achievable for each BART-eligible source that determination must represent the lowest average emission rate over 2009–June is subject to BART * * * achieved emission rate from the best 2011 from the 12 units ranged from 48 performing unit using that technology. Additionally, the BART Guidelines state to 90 percent, with an average value of that: ‘‘[i]n assessing the capability of the EPA notes that, after further 27 78 percent. control alternative, latitude exists to examination of the commenters’ Commenters claim that emissions of consider special circumstances supporting documentation, the sulfuric acid mist and the high ash pertinent to the specific source under maximum 30-day calendar average content of coal used by FCPP, and review, or regarding the prior emission rates for the 17 top performing considerations of catalyst life are not application of the control alternative’’, units exhibited significant variability barriers to achieving higher NO (0.056—1.1 lb/MMBtu), even though the X (70 FR 39166) and that ‘‘[t]o complete reduction efficiencies than proposed by annual average emission rates listed are the BART process, you must establish EPA. EPA disagrees with comments that all below 0.07 lb/MMBtu. enforceable emission limits that reflect our statement regarding the impact of the BART requirements * * *’’ (70 FR additional layers of catalyst on 39172). The five-factor BART analysis 26 See items (2 and 3) in collection of documents increasing sulfuric acid emissions is described in the Guidelines is a case-by- titled ‘‘Public Comment_8 Environmental Groups (Barth)_Letter 5–2–11’’. Document Number EPA– unsupported. EPA understands from our case analysis that considers site specific R09–OAR–2010–0182. factors in assessing the best technology 27 See the Response to Comments, Section 8.1 in 28 See the Response to Comments Section 8.1 in for continuous emission controls. After the docket for this final rulemaking. the docket for this final rulemaking.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51636 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
correspondence with Hitachi Power Rock Energy Facility (Desert Rock).30 If effective. The commenter asserted that Systems America that each layer of constructed, Desert Rock would have this proposal does not afford adequate catalyst used results in an incremental used the same coal as FCPP from the time to properly design, engineer, and increase in the conversion rate of SO2 to BHP Navajo Mine and the final PSD construct the controls before the SO3. The EPRI method used for permit set a NOX limit of 0.05 lb/ compliance deadline. calculating sulfuric acid requires the MMBtu (on a rolling 365-day average). Response: EPA partially agrees with input of a SCR catalyst oxidation rate. Commenters argue that if Desert Rock this comment. We revised the BART This oxidation rate varies depending on was required to meet a limit of 0.05 lb/ compliance date for one 750 MW unit catalyst type and number of layers used. MMBtu using the same coal as FCPP, to within 4 years from the effective date For the ultra low SO2 to SO3 oxidation the ash content should not hinder FCPP of this final rule. The remaining 750 catalysts offered by Hitachi, each layer from achieving similarly low NOX MW unit and Units 1–3 must meet a contributed roughly 0.167 percent emission rates. EPA notes that if compliance date of within 5 years of the conversion, with three layers totaling constructed, Desert Rock would have effective date of the final rule. The 0.5 percent. The use of an additional been a new, state-of-the-art facility revised compliance time within 4 and 5 layer, such as in a 3+1 system, would specifically designed with boiler years allows time for design, engineer, thus increase the conversion rate to characteristics, combustion controls, and construct controls. nearly 0.7 percent when all four catalyst and post-combustion controls to meet Comment: One environmental layers are in operation. Further NOX the Best Available Control Technology advocacy group stated that the proposed reductions achieved from the addition (BACT) requirements for numerous plant-wide BART limit of 0.11 lb/ of a 5th layer of catalyst would likely criteria and non-criteria pollutants. MMBtu across all five FCPP units exacerbate pluggage and back-pressure FCPP is an existing, over 40-year-old violates Executive Order 12898 on concerns related to the ash content of power plant. The Regional Haze Rule environmental justice. Specifically, the the coal and may affect cost and requires a case-by-case BART (best commenter asserted that given the operation of the unit. Commenters have available retrofit technology) significant differences in pollution not submitted information to refute this. determination, which need not be control systems among FCPP’s five The ash content of coal has an equivalent to BACT for new facilities. units, allowing a plant-wide average important effect on the effectiveness of Based on the significant 30-calendar could create pollution ‘‘hotspots’’ with SCR because high ash content in coal day average variability exhibited by the respect to co-pollutants. As an example, can cause pluggage and catalyst erosion top performing units cited by the commenter noted that while Units 4 and thus reduce available catalyst area commenters, and the variability in 30- and 5 have baghouses, Units 1–3 use and activity for NOX reduction. calendar day average and the 2009–June less efficient venturi scrubbers for Commenters point to San Juan 2011 30-calendar day average percent control of sulfur dioxide, particulate Generating Station (SJGS) and Desert NOX reduction of 78 percent exhibited matter, and mercury. The commenter Rock as facilities with lower SCR-based by 12 cell burner boilers equipped with asserted that the plant-wide average NOX emission limits that use high ash SCR, EPA continues to affirm that a limit for NOX would allow increased content coal. EPA Region 6 recently limit representing an 80 percent emissions from Units 1–3 in the event finalized a FIP for SJGS with a limit of reduction in NOX emissions reflects of a temporary outage or reduced output 0.05 lb/MMBtu, representing an 83 what is achievable using the technology from one or both of the larger units. The percent reduction in NOX emissions. determined as BART for FCPP. commenter stated that while this may The emission limit EPA Region 6 set for Comment: One of the owners of FCPP not increase the total NOX emissions SJGS is lower than the limit we set for stated a willingness to support a NOX from the plant, it would increase the FCPP because SJGS uses a different emission limit of 0.098 lb/MMBtu for amount of mercury and other toxic co- boiler type than FCPP and modern Units 4 and 5 under the alternative pollutants emitted into the surrounding combustion controls have already been proposal, but only in the context of an community, which is a low-income installed and have reduced NOX alternative emission reduction strategy community of color. emissions at SJGS by 29–33 percent.29 that includes resolution of the related Response: EPA disagrees with the EPA has determined that because Units issues. commenter that a plant-wide BART 4 and 5 at FCPP are cell burner boilers, The Navajo Nation similarly endorsed limit of 0.11 lb/MMBtu across all five modern combustion controls would not the proposed 80 percent reduction in FCPP units violates Executive Order significantly reduce NOX emissions NOX emissions from Units 4 and 5, with 12898 on environmental justice. This from FCPP. Even though the emission a limit of 0.098 lb/MMBtu, under the final rule will not have limit differs, the reduction efficiency supplemental proposal, based on the disproportionately high and adverse from the installation and operation of site-specific parameters at FCPP. human health or environmental effects SCR at FCPP and SJGS are generally Response: EPA agrees that the on minority or low-income population consistent, particularly when appropriate limit for Units 4 and 5 because it increases the level of considering the similarly high ash under the alternative strategy is 0.098 environmental protection for all affected content of coal (greater than 20 percent) lb/MMMtu (based on a rolling average populations in the area including any used at both facilities. In 2008, EPA of 30 successive boiler operating days). minority or low-income population. Region 9 issued a pre-construction The final rule reflects this limit. The commenter is correct that in the Prevention of Significant Deterioration Comment: One of the owners of FCPP event of a temporary outage or reduced (PSD) permit to allow construction of a opposed EPA’s proposal to ‘‘phase in’’ output from Unit 4 or 5 the operator new coal-fired power plant on the NOX controls at FCPP under a could continue to operate FCPP units 1– Navajo Nation, known as the Desert traditional BART FIP, commencing 3 3 under the original BART proposal years from the date the FIP becomes provided that they maintain compliance 29 See page 4–3 of report titled ‘‘PNM BART with the plant-wide emission limit of _ _ 30 Report for SJGS final to PNM June 18, 2007.pdf’’ in Desert Rock has not been constructed. EPA 0.11 lb/MMBtu for NOX. In order to the docket for this final rulemaking. Pre-consent requested a voluntary remand of the Desert Rock maintain compliance with the plant- decree emission rates on Units 1–4 at SJGS ranged PSD permit in 2009 to incorporate new applicable from 0.42–0.45 lb/MMBtu. Post-consent decree requirements. The developers of Desert Rock have wide emission limit, Units 1–3 would emission limits for those units were 0.30 lb/MMBtu. not yet submitted a revised PSD application to EPA. have to operate at a lesser capacity than
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51637
they would normally operate if Unit 4 Regarding the EPA’s proposed 10 existing units that reconstruct or and 5 were functioning because units 1– percent opacity standard for each unit, modify, Subpart Da establishes an 3 have higher NOX emission rates than two of the owners of FCPP stated that emissions limit of 0.015 lb/MMBtu. For Units 4 and 5. The NOX emission rates the EPA has not specified any costs or both standards, EPA retained a 20 from Units 1–3 with SCR, based on 80 predicted any improvement in visibility percent opacity standard as being percent control of current emission rates that would result from such limits. The sufficient to ensure compliance with would be 0.16, 0.13, and 0.12 lb/MMBtu commenters asserted that without such either the 0.090 (0.097) lb/MMBtu or respectively which are higher than the basis, the EPA cannot justify the 0.015 lb/MMBtu PM emission limit. proposed plant-wide emission limit. proposed opacity limits. EPA’s MATS rule, which was finalized Therefore, to maintain compliance with Response: As stated in our proposed just a few months ago, also retained a 20 the plant-wide NOX emission limit BART determination for PM, the percent opacity standard as being (which is based upon a 30-calendar day existing venturi scrubbers on Units 1–3 sufficient to ensure compliance with the rolling average), Units 1–3 would have at FCPP do not constitute BART. In our PM emission limit that will be required to operate at a reduced capacity in any proposed BART determination for for electric generating units subject to 30-day period in which Units 4 and 5 FCPP, EPA proposed a PM emission that rule. are operating a reduced capacity, so as limit for Units 1–3 that can be achieved The importance of the opacity limit is to maintain the balance among the five through the installation of any of four that a certain percentage opacity is an units. This reduced capacity would different PM control options. At the instantaneous demonstration that a unit result in an overall lower rate of time of our BART proposal, the MATS is in compliance with its PM emission emission for mercury and other co- Rule for electric utility steam generating limit. If a unit does not install and pollutants from Units 1–3. Therefore, units had not yet been proposed, nor operate a PM continuous emissions there would be no increased emissions had APS suggested its alternative monitor, then EPA ensures compliance of mercury or other co-pollutants and no emission control strategy to close Units with the PM emission limit by requiring ‘‘hot-spots’’ or disproportionately high 1–3 in lieu of complying with BART for an episodic source test. For the periods and adverse human health or NOX. Because the final MATS rule has between episodic source testing, EPA 31 environmental effects on minority or been issued and sets filterable PM and can reasonably assure continuous low-income population. mercury limits that would be applicable compliance with the PM emission limit to the units at FCPP, and because EPA by observing that the unit’s stack 2. Comments on the Proposed BART is finalizing this rule to allow APS to emissions do not exceed a set opacity. Determination for PM either comply with the alternative EPA’s recent rulemakings have Comment: One of the owners of FCPP emission control strategy or BART for determined that 20 percent opacity is asserted that the existing controls at NOX, EPA is determining that it is not sufficient to ensure compliance with a FCPP constitute BART for PM necessary or appropriate at this time to PM emission limit lower than the emissions. The commenter contended finalize our proposal to set new PM emission limit we have determined is that the impact of PM controls on the limits for Units 1–3. BART for Units 4 and 5. Accordingly, Regarding our proposed BART visibility in the neighboring Class I EPA is determining the 20 percent determination for PM for Units 4 and 5, areas would be ‘‘vanishingly small’’ opacity limit that we promulgated in we are finalizing the proposed 0.015 lb/ while the cost would be ‘‘exorbitant’’ our 2007 FIP for FCPP as being adequate MMBtu emission limit based upon the (resulting in cost effectiveness ranging to ensure continuous compliance with proper operation of the existing the PM BART limit or 0.015 lb/MMBtu. from $51,500–$148,659 per ton reduced baghouses. However, we have EPA concludes that this change is a and from $1.4 billion–$3.7 billion per determined based on the comments we logical outgrowth of the comments dv improvement). received from the operator of FCPP that received on the proposal. The Navajo Nation stated that EPA it is not necessary or appropriate to take Comment: One commenter indicated acknowledged the high incremental cost final action on the proposed 10 percent that EPA has proposed a BART limit of new PM controls on Units 1–3 (citing opacity limit. We have determined that only for PM, which appears to be only 75 FR 64230), yet justified the cost imposing a 10 percent opacity limit will filterable particulate matter. The effectiveness of baghouses by not provide greater assurance that Units commenter asserted that the BART comparison with similar retrofit projects 4 and 5 at FCPP are meeting the PM guidelines specify that BART should be in EPA Region 9. This commenter emission limit of 0.015. We have evaluated and defined for both PM10 asserted that EPA failed to properly determined previously that a 20 percent and PM2.5 (citing 40 CFR part 51, evaluate the costs associated with opacity limit is sufficient to ensure the Appendix Y, section IV.A) and, installation of baghouses using site- PM emission limit is being continuously consequently, that EPA must evaluate specific parameters, thereby deviating met. The 10 percent opacity limit was and define BART limits for both PM10 from the BART Guidelines. The generally supported by the Navajo and PM2.5. The commenter also asserted commenter asserted that continued Nation and environmental groups. EPA that as part of the PM2.5 BART operation of venturi scrubbers to meet has promulgated some recent rules for determination, EPA must impose emission limits of 0.03 lb/MMBtu and electric generating units that have emission limits on condensable an opacity limit of 20 percent satisfies retained a 20 percent opacity standard particulate matter, which is typically in BART for Units 1–3. rather than reducing that limit to 10 the size range of 2.5 micrometers or The Navajo Nation expressed support percent. Specifically, EPA’s revised the smaller. Thus, the commenter stated for the supplemental proposal to require New Source Performance Standard for that in addition to a filterable PM BART a PM emission limit of 0.015 lb/MMBtu large electric generating units at 40 CFR limit, EPA should impose a BART limit and 10 percent opacity limit on Units 4 Part 60, Subpart Da, to lower the PM on total PM2.5. and 5. The commenter presumed that emission limit for new units to 0.09 lb/ One public interest advocacy group FCPP can readily meet these standards MMBtu for gross energy output or 0.097 supported EPA’s proposal and prior to installation of SCR since the lb/MMBtu for net energy output. For supplemental proposal to require a PM limits can be achieved with the existing limit and a 10 percent opacity limit on baghouses. 31 See 77 FR 9304, February 16, 2012. Units 4 and 5. The commenter indicated
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51638 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
that these limits should become technical analysis to support its operator of FCPP, and Sierra Club effective prior to SCR installation, conclusion. sought judicial review of our 2007 FIP. regardless of whether the BART or A public interest advocacy group The comments on this action alternative emission control plan is stated that the SO2 limits need to be essentially repackage the comments we implemented. tightened for FCPP to further reduce received and provided a response for on Response: EPA disagrees with the visibility impairment and to reduce the the 2007 FIP. The comments have not commenters’ recommendation that the acidification of rainfall caused by the presented any new facts or legal condensable fraction must be included formation of H2SO4. The commenter considerations that have arisen or in the PM BART limits. EPA has stated that because the damaging effects changed since we responded to previously outlined our rationale for of H2SO4 in precipitation on ancestral comments requesting a BART why an H2SO4 limit is not appropriate Puebloan sandstone dwellings and determination for SO2 in 2007. pictographs are not fully understood, it at this time (it will be addressed through 4. Other Comments on BART the pre-construction permitting process is disappointing for the FCPP proposals Comment: One group of if needed) and EPA expects that H2SO4 not to address SO2. will be the main component of Response: EPA finalized a FIP in May environmental advocacy groups stated condensable PM that would be expected 2007 that required significant SO2 that as an alternative to a condensable from a coal-fired EGU with an SCR. emissions reductions from FCPP and PM2.5 limit, EPA could set limits on the EPA agrees with commenters that PM established continuous SO2 emissions pollutants which form condensable limits on Units 4 and 5 should become limits for FCPP. See 72 FR 25698 (May PM2.5, such as sulfuric acid mist (H2SO4) effective prior to SCR installation, as 7, 2007). The 2007 FIP required FCPP to and ammonia, as EPA proposed as part Units 4 and 5 generally already meet the increase the removal efficiency of its of the San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) BART rulemaking (citing 76 FR 0.015 lb/MMBtu limit.32 EPA is SO2 emissions controls from 72 percent 503–4, January 5, 2011). If EPA adopts finalizing a compliance date for PM to 88 percent, resulting in an SO2 this approach, the commenter urged emission limits on Units 4 and 5 to be emissions reduction of approximately EPA to set an emission limit for H SO within 6 months after restart following 22,000 tons per year. EPA had proposed 2 4 no higher than the limit of 1.06 x 10¥4 the next scheduled major outages in this FIP in September 2006. The 2006 lb/MMBtu for each unit as proposed for 2013 and 2014. As discussed proposed FIP stated that ‘‘EPA believes SJGS based on the use of low reactivity previously, EPA has determined that that the SO2 controls proposed today for catalyst and the most current finalizing the proposed opacity limit of FCPP are close to or the equivalent of information from the Electric Power 10 percent on Units 4 and 5 is not a regional haze BART determination of Research Institute. If CEMS are necessary or appropriate at this time. SO2. This takes into consideration the early reductions this action will achieve unavailable for this pollutant, the 3. Comments on BART for SO2 and the modification to the existing SO2 commenter urged EPA to require stack Comment: Some commenters stated scrubbers.’’ 72 FR 25700. In finalizing test monitoring for H2SO4 on a more that SO BART should be required for that rulemaking in the 2007 FIP, EPA frequent basis than annual monitoring. 2 The commenter also requested that FCPP, while one commenter simply stated that it was exercising its authority EPA set emission limits for ammonia at noted that FCPP is subject to BART for pursuant to Section 49.11 of the TAR to a rate no higher than the 2.0 parts per SO One federal agency commenter implement measures that are necessary 2. million as proposed at SJGS, to be stated that FCPP is subject to BART for or appropriate to protect air quality in monitored with CEMs. SO . The commenter stated that Units 4 Indian country. Id. EPA determined that 2 Response: EPA disagrees with the and 5 should be able to meet a limit of the SO2 emissions reductions would be comment that Region 9 should set the 0.12 lb/MMBtu on an annual average federally enforceable as soon as the 2007 FIP was finalized, which would be same emission limits for ammonia and basis by upgrading the existing potentially five years before EPA could sulfuric acid as Region 6 in its proposed scrubbers. achieve enforceable SO emissions BART determination for SJGS. One set of environmental advocacy 2 reductions through making a BART In its January 5, 2011 proposed groups discussed the Regional Haze determination. See id. EPA also rulemaking for SJGS, Region 6 proposed rules, the TAR, and the SO emissions 2 considered the Navajo Nation’s request an ammonia slip limit of 2.0 ppmvd on from FCPP and concluded that EPA is for EPA to establish enforceable SO an hourly average and requested under a legal obligation to conduct a 2 emissions reductions immediately that, comment on a range from 2.0 ppmvd to BART analysis for SO emissions from 2 in the opinion of the Navajo Nation, 6.0 ppmvd. In its final BART FCPP and, to the extent EPA has failed ‘‘appear[] to be equivalent to BART.’’ Id. rulemaking (76 FR 52388, August 22, to make a finding that it is ‘‘necessary Therefore, EPA’s determination on this 2011), Region 6 determined that an
or appropriate’’ to regulate SO2 issue in finalizing the 2007 FIP was emission limit and monitoring were not emissions from the FCPP, such a failure ‘‘that it is neither necessary nor warranted for ammonia and did not is arbitrary, capricious, and not appropriate at this time to undertake a finalize its BART determination for supported by the administrative record. BART determination for SO from FCPP SJSG with the proposed 2.0 ppmvd According to the commenter, EPA 2 given the timing of the substantial SO2 ammonia limit. argues that FCPP’s current SO2 reductions resulting from this FIP.’’ Id. In its proposal for SJGS, Region 6 emissions limits are ‘‘close to or In addition, we stated that ‘‘given that proposed an emission limit for sulfuric equivalent’’ to the limit that would be × ¥4 the SO2 controls for FCPP immediately acid of 1.06 10 lb/MMBtu on an established under BART. The achieve significant reductions in SO2 hourly average, and requested comment commenter asserted that this conclusion comparable to what could ultimately be on a range from 1.06 × 10¥4 to 7.87 × is arbitrary and capricious because EPA achieved through a formal BART 10¥4 lb/MMBtu. In its final rulemaking, has failed to undertake any scientific or determination, EPA believes that it will Region 6 finalized an emission limit for not be necessary or appropriate to sulfuric acid of 2.6 × 10¥4 lb/MMBtu to 32 See document titled: ‘‘TSD ref. [2–3, 95] FCPP_ BART_Scenarios_Emissions_EPA_Proposal.xlsx’’ in develop a regional haze plan to address minimize its contribution to visibility the docket for this proposed rulemaking at EPA– SO2 for the Navajo Nation in the near impairment. Region 6 calculated this R09–OAR–2010–0683–0017. term.’’ Id. 25700–701. Both APS, as emission limit using an estimation
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51639
methodology from EPRI, assuming the According to the commenter, such MW unit within 4 years of the effective use of an ultra-low activity catalyst (0.5 periods should be subject to separate date, and the remaining 750 MW unit percent total conversion of SO2 to SO3), limits set at the pre-SCR uncontrolled and Units 1–3 within 5 years of the zero ammonia slip, no sorbent injection, level to encourage good work practice effective date. Based on all of the factors and EPRI-recommended values for standards during these periods while that will be involved in the design, removal by existing downstream control allowing the SCR and other emission purchase and operation of the SCR equipment. control technologies to be operated at an controls, Region 9 considers this Actual measurements of baseline efficient and continuous capacity in schedule to be appropriate and sulfuric acid emissions have not yet compliance with BART. expeditious. been determined at FCPP and the Response: EPA agrees that the NOX calculation of projected sulfuric acid limit under the alternative emission G. Comments on APS’s Alternative and emissions after installation and control strategy should be set for 30 EPA’s Supplemental Proposal operation of SCR using the EPRI successive boiler operating days and Comment: One of the owners of FCPP methodology is dependent on future that a ‘‘boiler operating day’’ should be pointed out that the November 2010 decisions made by the facility on the defined as any day in which the boiler APS proposal included two critical type of SCR catalyst and number of fires fossil fuel. Because the NOX components: (1) A proposal to close layers used, as well as numerous emission limit under the alternative Units 1–3 and install SCRs on Units 4 assumptions about loss to downstream emission control strategy already and 5; and (2) EPA’s contemporaneous components, such as air preheaters and includes periods of startup and agreement that these activities resolve baghouses, the true values of which are shutdown, separate limits are not any liability FCPP may have under currently not yet defined or known for required. The final rule reflects this regional haze BART, Reasonably FCPP. Furthermore, EPA Region 9 is the approach. Attributable Visibility Impairment Best permitting authority for preconstruction For the original proposed BART Available Retrofit Technology (RAVI permits on the Navajo Nation, and an determination, EPA does not find it BART), NSR, and New Source increase in sulfuric acid emissions from necessary to define boiler operating day Performance Standard (NSPS). The the installation of SCR may trigger major because the BART limit is a heat input- commenter asserted that EPA’s modification PSD permit requirements weighted plant-wide limit. Only supplemental proposal addresses only at a low threshold of 7 tpy (see 40 CFR operating hours for any of the five units half of APS’S proposal—the half that 52.21) or Tribal minor new source would be included. When a unit is not achieves better than BART emission review (NSR) permit requirements at a operating, those hours are not included reductions, plant-wide reductions of all threshold of 2 tpy (see 40 CFR Part 49 in the plant-wide 30-day average. other emissions, and greater visibility Subpart C). Preconstruction permitting Additionally, the heat input-weighted improvement at nearby Class I areas— review may also be triggered from plant-wide limit also includes periods but ignores the other half of the APS significant emissions increases of PM2.5 of startup and shutdown; therefore, proposal—the half that provides APS from SCR installation at FCPP. If one of separate limits are not required. and the FCPP co-owners with needed these pollutant triggers PSD, the Comment: One environmental regulatory certainty. Unless there is a permitting authority must provide an advocacy group stated that EPA should contemporaneous resolution of these Additional Impact Analysis under the require FCPP to install all control key issues with EPA, the commenter PSD program. The PSD program also equipment within 3 years of the date of cannot and does not support EPA’s requires the permitting authority to a final FIP, as EPA did at SJGS. The supplemental proposal. determine BACT for pollutants that commenter stated that there is ample Response: EPA understands that the triggered PSD. A similar control data to support the contention that all owners of FCPP were seeking to resolve technology review may also be required this emission control technology can be any potential regulatory noncompliance at the discretion of the permitting installed and operational within 3 years issues simultaneously. However, EPA authority under the Tribal Minor NSR or less. must use different mechanisms for program. For these reasons, Region 9 Response: EPA disagrees with the promulgating rules and resolving has determined that for FCPP, emission comment that Region 9 should set a 3- enforcement issues. The comment limits and monitoring requirements for year compliance timeframe because requests resolution of potential past sulfuric acid are more appropriately Region 6 proposed a 3-year compliance non-compliance with NSR and NSPS reviewed in the preconstruction timeframe for SJGS. In its proposed requirements. Potential past non- permitting process. rulemaking for SJGS,33 Region 6 compliance can be resolved through Comment: Citing the BART proposed a 3-year timeframe for SJGS to entering into a Consent Decree Guidelines at 40 CFR part 51, Appendix comply with the proposed limits but containing a judicially approved release Y, section V, one environmental requested comment on a compliance from liability. Such a Consent Decree advocacy group stated that BART range of 3–5 years. In its final under the CAA must be approved by the emission limits and compliance rulemaking,34 Region 6 finalized a United States Department of Justice and schedules must be based on ‘‘boiler compliance timeframe of 5 years and must also be lodged in a United States operating day.’’ determined that because of site District Court where the public is The commenter asserted that the congestion at SJGS, a longer timeframe allowed to comment on it. Consent ‘‘very high’’ proposed BART emission than average (37–43 months) to install Decrees must be entered by the United limits suggest that EPA set these limits SCR on the 4 units at SJGS would be States District Court for a release of to encompass spikes that occur during required. The final BART determination liability of potential past non- startups and shutdowns. The for FCPP requires retrofit of five existing compliance to be effective. Accordingly, commenter asserted that setting and units at FCPP. In the final rule for FCPP, this rulemaking action cannot effectuate enforcing limits based on boiler Region 9 is requiring installation and any release of liability for potential past operating day would necessarily operation of SCR controls for one 750 non-compliance with NSR or NSPS. exclude spikes that occur before and EPA is aware that several after outages, such as startups, 33 See 76 FR 491, January 5, 2011. environmental groups have petitioned shutdowns, and malfunctions. 34 See 76 FR 52388, August 22, 2011. the Department of Interior to make a
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51640 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
finding that impairment at Class I areas described in the TSD for our proposed 81 percent 39 for Units 4 and 5 under the is reasonably attributable to FCPP.35 BART determination, SCR is cost alternative emission control strategy.40 The NPS, on behalf of Department of effective and results in the greatest This analysis shows that in 2014 and Interior, has declined to make such a anticipated improvement in visibility. 2015, the alternative emission control finding based on EPA’s work in this One of the owners of FCPP notes that strategy results in lower NOX emissions rulemaking.36 The environmental the ‘‘better-than-BART’’ outcome is a than BART due to the closure of Units groups also filed a Complaint in the result of the closure of Units 1, 2, and 1–3 at the end of 2013. In 2016, 2017, United States District Court for the 3. However, the closure of Units 1–3 and 2018, BART results in lower District of Columbia 37 contending that alone does not result in greater emission emissions than the alternative, and in the Department of Interior was reductions than EPA’s proposed BART 2019 and beyond, the alternative unreasonably delaying making a finding determination, and represents only a emission control strategy (5,556 tpy), of reasonable attribution from FCPP. On roughly 30 percent reduction from with phased-in controls on Units 4 and June 30, 2011, the Court dismissed the baseline emissions. The closure of Units 5 by the end of 2018, results in lower Complaint 38 holding that the NPS’s 1–3, in combination with SCR on Units emissions than BART (8,479 tpy). In letters refusing to make the finding of 4 and 5, results in the ‘‘better-than- total, the BART Alternative results reasonable attribution constituted BART’’ outcome. lower emissions from FCPP over more denying the Petitioners’ request for a The voluntary nature of the calendar years (2014–2015, and 2019 RAVI finding. Therefore, there are no alternative emission control strategy and beyond) than does BART (2016– pending petitions with the Department does not negate EPA’s BART 2018). Even if APS operated Units 4 and of Interior requesting a finding that determination because (1) EPA must 5 at 100 percent capacity, EPA visibility impairment at any Class I first determine what BART is in order calculates that emissions under the areas is reasonably attributable to FCPP. to fulfill the requirements of the alternative emission control scenario in In any event, a BART determination alternative program to BART as 2019 and beyond to be 6,859 tpy, which under RAVI would likely be the same as prescribed in the Regional Haze Rule, is still lower than under BART (8,479 under this BART determination. and (2) EPA cannot require the full or tpy). On a cumulative basis, i.e., the Comment: One of the owners of FCPP partial closure of a facility as a BART sum total of NOX emissions over 2011 stated that it is imperative to note that alternative, therefore the alternative to 2064, the BART Alternative also its support of the supplemental proposal emission control strategy remains an results in lower emissions than BART, (if other potential liabilities are resolved optional business choice of the owners both at an 81 percent capacity factor and as discussed above) is based solely on of FCPP to implement in lieu of BART, at 100 percent capacity. the rationale that this achieves a result if they see fit. Commenters argue that if the BART better than the proposed BART FIP, and Comment: One environmental emission limit were lower, the that this ‘‘better than BART’’ outcome is advocacy group and one federal agency alternative would not be better than a result of the closure of Units 1, 2, and asserted that the supplemental proposal BART. For example, if EPA required an 3. The commenter stressed that in no is not better than BART for NOX. emission limit representing a 90 percent case—either in the original BART FIP Generally, commenters argue that based reduction in NOX emissions, annual proposal or in the supplemental on the extended compliance timeframe NOX emissions would be lower than proposal—does the commenter support for the alternative emission control 5,000 tpy. However, as discussed in any determination that SCR constitutes strategy, the use of an artificially responses to similar comments, EPA has BART for FCPP. A second FCPP owner inflated baseline, the potential increase determined that an 80 percent reduction stated that its acceptance of the in output from Units 4 and 5, and in NOX emissions is BART for FCPP. It supplemental proposal upon resolution assuming that SCR can achieve 0.05 lb/ is inappropriate to compare the of the other potential issues would be a MMBtu of NOX on an annual basis, the alternative emission control strategy voluntary action based on its own BART alternative fails to achieve greater against a target for BART that business interests; the commenter does cumulative NOX reductions than would commenters would like to see based on not support any BART determination installation of BART (SCR) on all five maximum emission reductions achieved that calls for installation of SCR at units. without consideration of site-specific FCPP. Response: EPA disagrees with the characteristics of FCPP that EPA has Response: EPA disagrees with the comment that the alternative emission determined are not appropriate for commenters that SCR is not BART. control strategy is not better than BART, FCPP. Based on our five-factor analysis, as but agrees that a reexamination of Commenters further argue that by baseline emissions and projected offering FCPP a BART compliance 35 See National Parks Conservation Association, capacity factors in the future is deadline of July 2018, EPA is illegally et al., Petition to United States Department of extending a mandatory deadline under Interior, United States Department of Agriculture, warranted. As reported in the TSD for and United States Forest Service, February 16, our proposed BART determination, the CAA, and that installation of SCR at 2010, in the docket for this rulemaking. facility-wide NOX emissions over 2001– Units 4 and 5 can easily be 36 See letter from Will Shafroth, Department of 2009 ranged from 40,331 to 47,300 tpy. accomplished within 2 years. EPA Interior to Stephanie Kodish, NPCA, March 8, 2011 While the baseline emissions provided disagrees and notes that the compliance in the docket for this proposed rulemaking. timeframe for EPA’s BART 37 See National Parks Conservation Association, by APS and used by EPA in our et al., Petition to United States District Court for the Supplemental Proposal was within the determination requiring SCR District of Columbia, January 20, 2011, in the range of annual NOX emissions, in docket for this final rulemaking. response to these comments, we 39 In testimony to the ACC, Mark Schiavoni of 38 See National Parks Conservation Association, APS testified that he anticipates capacity factors et al., Plaintiffs, v. United States Department of conducted an additional analysis to over 2015–2030 to range from 75–81 percent for Interior and United States Department of compare the alternative emission Units 4 and 5. See document titled ‘‘Schiavoni Agriculture, Defendants. Civil Action No. 11–130 control strategy against our final BART Testimony_TRANSCRIPT.pdf’’ in the docket for this final rulemaking. (GK). United States District Court for the District of determination for NOX using the 2001– Columbia, June 30, 2011, 794 F. Supp. 2d 39; 2011 40 See document titled ‘‘BART vs U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70170; 74 ERC (BNA) 1015. In the 2010 average as the baseline emission Alternative.xlsx’’ in the docket for this final docket for this final rulemaking. rate and an assumed capacity factor of rulemaking.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51641
installation on all 5 units is within 5 commissioned or shut down of its decision-making process. (The years of the effective date of the final immediately. commenter asserted that advanced rule, consistent with the maximum time In addition to other CAA programs, combustion controls, rather than SCR, allowed under the CAA § 169A(g)(4) in EPA assesses air quality with respect to properly represent BART for FCPP.) the definition of ‘‘as expeditiously as NAAQS. The Four Corners area is Thus, the commenter stated that as the practicable’’. The commenter is designated attainment for each of the Nation’s trustee and ‘‘stand-in’’ for the confusing requirements under BART NAAQS.41 This means that the air BART determination for FCPP, the EPA and requirements under the alternative quality in the Four Corners area is should not select a more stringent BART to BART. EPA is not extending the meeting the national health-based than the commenter stated is required BART compliance deadline beyond a 5- standards set by EPA. by the Regional Haze Rule to achieve year period. Rather, EPA is allowing For this action, EPA finds that under ‘‘reasonable progress’’ where doing so additional time to implement the 40 CFR 49.11, it is necessary or would likely have substantial adverse alternative emission control strategy, as appropriate to achieve emissions impacts on the Navajo Nation. allowed under the provisions of the reductions of NOX from FCPP required The commenter also stated that EPA RHR for the implementation of ‘‘other by the CAA’s Regional Haze program. has a duty to undertake government-to- alternative measure rather than to NOX is a significant contributor to government consultations with the require sources subject to BART to visibility impairment in the numerous Navajo Nation, and that EPA must install, operate, and maintain BART’’ mandatory Class I Federal areas coordinate with the Navajo Nation in its (See 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)). In our surrounding FCPP. The emission relationship with, and reliance on, other Supplemental Proposal, EPA cited the reductions finalized will help achieve federal agencies. The commenter requirement (under 40 CFR the goals of the Regional Haze Rule. The pointed out that EPA relies on data 51.308(e)(2)(iii)) that ‘‘all necessary Regional Haze Rule however does not provided by the NPS, another federal emission reductions take place during require nor does it authorize EPA to de- trustee of the Nation, but has not the period of the first long-term strategy commission or shut down facilities to coordinated consultation between NPS for regional haze’’. achieve the goals of the rule. and the Navajo Nation on this EPA disagrees with commenters that EPA agrees with commenters who rulemaking. The commenter indicated reductions under the alternative to stated that renewable energy sources that the May 2011 EPA Tribal Policy BART violates 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(iii). can be used in place of coal-fired power recognizes that such coordination is The requirement simply states the plants. However, the Regional Haze required under Executive Order 13175 reductions take place during the period Rule does not require that coal-fired and asserted that EPA should coordinate of the first long term strategy and does facilities use or switch to renewable consultation with the U.S. Forest not specifically prescribe that those energy sources to meet the goals of the Service (who provided data used in the reductions must take place at the rule. proposed rulemaking) as well as various beginning, middle, or end of the period Comment: The Navajo Nation pointed Department of the Interior (DOI) of the first long-term strategy. out that as a federal agency, EPA has a agencies that have an interest in this trust responsibility to the Navajo Nation rulemaking, including NPS, the Bureau H. Other Comments that requires it to give special of Indian Affairs, the U.S. Fish and Comment: Forty-five private citizens consideration to the Nation’s best Wildlife Service, the Office of Surface and several private citizens who interests in any action.42 Because of the Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, submitted written comments at a public significant economic interest of the and potentially the Bureaus of Land hearing explicitly stated that they Navajo Nation in FCPP the commenter Management and Reclamation. The support EPA’s efforts to clean up FCPP. asserted that the BART proposal clearly commenter added that consultation Many of these commenters asked for the implicates the Nation’s tribal trust with Department of Energy (DOE) may strictest regulations. Another private interests. The commenter further be important in regard to including citizen implied that EPA should act to contended that since EPA is adopting a FCPP in a study that DOE is proposing clean up emissions from FCPP and FIP for BART in lieu of a TIP by the to carry out for NGS, which also is noted that cleaner air will result in a Navajo Nation, the EPA is essentially located on the Navajo reservation and cleaner Colorado snow pack, which will ‘‘standing in the shoes’’ of the Nation for uses Navajo coal. result in cleaner water in the Colorado purposes of making the BART Response: It is EPA’s policy (EPA River. determination and should, therefore, Policy on Consultation and Twelve private citizens and a few defer to tribal views when making Coordination with Indian Tribes, May 4, environmental policy decisions and give 2011, (EPA Tribal Consultation private citizens who submitted written 43 comments at a public hearing stated that the same weight to the BART factors Policy)) to consult on a government- FCPP should be de-commissioned. that the Navajo Nation would in to-government basis with federally Several of these commenters asserted determining BART for FCPP; that is, to recognized tribal governments when that the plant should only be shut down the extent that the Nation recommends EPA actions and decisions may affect if it cannot cease emitting pollutants, a particular control technology as BART tribal interests. Consultation is a process while others stated the plant should be for power plants located on the Nation’s of meaningful communication and shut down immediately. lands, EPA should give substantial coordination between EPA and tribal officials prior to EPA taking actions or Nine private citizens and some of the weight to that recommendation as part implementing decisions that may affect private citizens who submitted written 41 Please see http://www.epa.gov/region09/air/ tribes. One of the primary goals of the comments at a public hearing stated that maps/maps_top.html for EPA Region IX air quality EPA Tribal Policy is to fully implement renewable energy sources can be used in designations. both Executive Order 13175 and the place of coal-fired power plants. 42 To support this assertion, the commenter cited 1984 Indian Policy, with the ultimate Response: EPA acknowledges the Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000; EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination comments supportive of our proposals With Indian Tribes, section IV ‘‘Guiding 43 See ‘‘EPA Policy on Consultation and but disagrees with commenters that Principles,’’ May 4, 2011 (EPA Tribal Policy); and Coordination with Indian Tribes’’, May 4, 2011, in suggest that FCPP should be de- the 1984 EPA Indian Policy. the docket for this final rulemaking.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51642 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
goal of assuring tribal concerns and there is a potential substantial adverse available from DOI 46 and will be interests are considered whenever EPA’s economic impact to the Navajo Nation. included in the docket for EPA’s actions may affect tribes by We disagree however that the Agency upcoming proposed rulemaking for strengthening the consultation, must ‘‘defer to tribal views when NGS. coordination, and partnership between making environmental policy Comment: One public interest tribal governments and EPA. decisions’’. EPA is carrying out the advocacy group, the Navajo Nation, and For this action, EPA consulted with requirements of the CAA and the one environmental advocacy group Navajo Nation in accordance with the Regional Haze Rule pursuant to our supported establishment of a 20 percent Executive Order and EPA’s Indian authority to implement these opacity limit for material handling. The Policies on numerous occasions. A requirements in the absence of an EPA- public interest advocacy group stated record of all consultations with tribes is approved program. EPA notes that the that the FCPP site is subject to included in the Docket for this final CAA and the TAR provide mechanisms numerous dust-storm events originating rulemaking.44 As stated in the 2011 EPA for eligible Indian tribes to seek in northwestern Arizona, and the Tribal Consultation Policy, as a process, approval of tribal programs should they additional fugitive dust that could be consultation includes several methods wish to administer CAA requirements. picked up by these strong winds at the of interaction that may occur at different For this action EPA carefully FCPP property added to the incoming levels.45 EPA consulted with the Navajo considered the unique location of FCPP dust from the west makes breathing and Nation at various times throughout the with respect to proximate Class I areas outdoor activity miserable on from 4 to process at various levels of government, as well as its economic importance to 12 days per year for residents of including in-person meetings with the Navajo Nation. We conducted a detailed Montezuma County, CO and San Juan President of the Navajo Nation on May analysis of available emission control County, NM. 19, 2011, and June 13, 2012. technologies against the five-factors One of the owners of FCPP noted that EPA acknowledges the significant specified in the BART Guidelines. EPA in addition to the proposed BART interest of the Navajo Nation in FCPP. also conducted extensive air modeling requirements, EPA proposed separate Based on the results from the original (included in the Supplemental fugitive dust control requirements and a analysis for the proposed BART Proposal). Additionally, we have 20 percent opacity limitation for certain determination, EPA concluded that the considered the numerous comments we material handling operations, which are installation and operation of SCR on all received on our proposals. In making unrelated to the CAA visibility program. five units at FCPP would not adversely our final decision we have had to The commenter laid out the history of affect the competitiveness of FCPP’s balance the findings of our analysis EPA’s past attempt to apply fugitive cost to generate electricity compared to along with the interests of various dust controls to FCPP. The commenter the cost to purchase electricity on the stakeholders, our unique government-to- argued that the proposed requirements open market. Thus, EPA infers that a are arbitrary and should not be finalized government relationship with tribes, BART determination requiring SCR on because the facts upon which EPA relies and our responsibility to carry out the all five units, in itself, should not force are inadequate to support the requirements of the CAA and Regional the closure of FCPP. EPA notes that we conclusion that fugitive dust control Haze Rule to achieve reasonable do not expect adverse impacts to the requirements are ‘‘necessary or progress towards visibility Navajo Nation if FCPP continues appropriate’’ to protect air quality at improvements. operating all units and complies with FCPP. This final FIP strikes a reasonable BART. However, potential adverse Response: EPA acknowledges support balance between reducing emissions to impacts to the Navajo Nation may result for establishing a 20 percent opacity improve visibility while allowing for the if the owners of FCPP choose to limit for material handling and a Dust implement the optional BART facility to implement those reductions Control Plan at FCPP. EPA has finalized Alternative. At the request of the Navajo in a manner that is consistent with its both these requirements. EPA notes that Nation during consultation, EPA continued operation and economic the Dust Control Plan shall include a commissioned a study to examine viability. description of the dust suppression potential adverse impacts to Navajo EPA has received information and methods for controlling dust from site Nation from the BART Alternative. The comments from numerous federal activities including coal handling and results of this analysis were discussed agencies for this rulemaking and storage facilities, ash handling, storage, with President Shelly during a considered these in our final decision and landfills, and road sweeping consultation meeting on July 13, 2012 (all information and comments are activities. The 20 percent opacity and will be provided to President Shelly included in the docket). EPA plans to standard will apply to any crusher, by letter as a follow-up to our coordinate with the Department of grinding mill, screening operation, belt consultation. Interior or other federal agencies, as conveyor, or truck loading or unloading EPA agrees that we are acting to appropriate, in any future tribal operation. implement the BART requirements for a consultations related to BART for FCPP EPA agrees with the commenter that facility located on the Navajo or the Navajo Generating Station, the the fugitive dust and 20 percent opacity Reservation in circumstances in which other coal-fired power plant located in limit are unrelated to the CAA visibility the Tribe has not applied, or been Navajo Nation. program. EPA also agrees with the approved, to administer the applicable EPA acknowledges that the history laid out by the commenter on CAA program. EPA is mindful of the Department of Interior has contracted fugitive dust controls at FCPP. EPA Navajo Nation’s views and with the National Renewable Energy included these dust control recommendations, particularly where Lab (NREL) of the Department of Energy requirements in the previous FIP to examine renewable energy options for finalized in 2007 because EPA 44 See document ‘‘Timeline of all Tribal the Navajo Generating Station, which is considered them necessary or Consultations on BART.docx’’ in the docket for this also located on the Navajo Nation and appropriate under the TAR to assure final rulemaking. uses coal from the Kayenta Mine, 45 See ‘‘EPA Policy on Consultation and that dust from this facility does not Coordination with Indian Tribes’’, May 4, 2011, in located on Navajo and Hopi land. the docket for this final rulemaking. Information on the NREL study is 46 http://www.doi.gov/navajo-gss/index.cfm.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51643
contribute to possible violations of the material handling emissions to 20 Utah the general opacity limit for NAAQS for PM10. The commenter is percent or less is being set forth in this facilities built before the CAA in 1971 correct that EPA withdrew the 2007 FIP rulemaking. EPA has promulgated a 20 is a 40 percent opacity limit. However, requirements on dust when APS percent opacity limit for all new coal all of Utah’s large coal-fired EGUs were appealed the rule. EPA had not handling operations built after the mid constructed after 1971 and are subject to adequately documented in the record 1970s in the New Source Performance a 20 percent general opacity limit, i.e., for the 2007 FIP our basis for Standards. This NSPS standard applied the NSPS. Therefore, if FCPP had been establishing the 20 percent opacity to any coal handling equipment built a few years later or a few miles in regulation. For the 2007 FIP, EPA chose processing more than 200 tons per day a different direction, it would be subject not to defend our position based on the of coal. Because FCPP receives to the NSPS or a SIP provision limiting record for that rulemaking and instead approximately 10 million tons of coal its coal material handling and storage chose to address the issue in a per year for combusting in Units 1–5, it operations to 20 percent opacity. subsequent FIP action, such as this one. may be processing more than 27,000 Because FCPP is located on the EPA disagrees with the commenter tons per day. This is more than 100 Navajo Nation where generally that the fugitive dust and opacity times the smallest size coal handling applicable limits that often are included requirements are arbitrary or that our operation subject to the NSPS, and in SIPs do not exist and because it was argument is inadequate to support our which EPA considered necessary for constructed nearly 40 years ago, and conclusion that fugitive dust control protecting public health and welfare. As because dust control measures at coal- requirements are necessary or mentioned before, FCPP’s massive fired power plants are important for appropriate to protect air quality at quantity of coal moves by conveyor belt maintaining the PM10 NAAQS in the FCPP.47 across FCPP’s property line, passing areas adjacent to the power plant EPA’s basis for finding that it is through numerous transfer points before properties, EPA finds that it is necessary necessary or appropriate for FCPP to the coal is loaded into the storage silos or appropriate to impose measures to comply with a requirement to limit its that feed the individual pulverizers and limit the amount of PM emissions from material handling emissions to 20 combustion units. Each of these transfer these material handling and storage percent or less is being set forth in this points along with the conveyor belts has emission sources. EPA recently imposed rulemaking. FCPP receives the potential for PM emissions. The PM similar dust control requirements at the approximately 10 million tons of coal can be minimized by collection devices Navajo Generating Station, which is also per year for combusting in Units 1–5. or dust suppression techniques such as on the Navajo Nation. 75 FR 10174. This massive quantity of coal moves by covered conveyors or spraying devices Comment: One environmental conveyor belt across FCPP’s property at the transfer points. advocacy group stated that the EPA line through numerous transfer points FCPP and the BHP Navajo Mine that must consult in accordance with before the coal is loaded into the storage provides FCPP’s coal are within close sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the silos that feed the individual proximity to Morgan Lake which is a Endangered Species Act (ESA) with combustion units. Each of these transfer recreational lake with public access just regards to the proposed FIP because of points along with the conveyor belts has beyond the FCPP’s property line. Excess the impacts of FCPP on threatened and the potential for PM emissions. The PM dust can blow over the FCPP property endangered fish, wildlife, and plants can be minimized through the use of line to Morgan Lake and adjacent and their designated critical habitats, collection devices or dust suppression properties. EPA and Navajo Nation EPA which the commenter discussed at some techniques such as covered conveyors receive numerous complaints from length. The commenter added that EPA or spraying devices at the transfer Navajo Tribal members concerning has discretion under the TAR to limit points. EPA first promulgated dust excess dust emissions generated from emissions of mercury, selenium, and control requirements for new coal the ash landfill FCPP maintains, as well other pollutants that may adversely handling equipment on January 15, as from the other material handling and affect the razorback sucker and Colorado 1976 (41 FR 2232). This rule affected storage operations. pikeminnow, and these species’ critical EPA concludes that it is necessary or habitats. According to the commenter, equipment constructed or modified after appropriate to set enforceable fugitive this discretion is part of what triggers the 1970s that affected facilities built or dust/PM suppression measures to the Agency’s obligation to consult modified after October 24, 1974. The protect ambient air quality because (1) pursuant to sections 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) purpose of these New Source there is a large potential for dust of the ESA. Performance Standards (NSPS) was: emissions from the facility coal and ash Response: EPA disagrees with the NSPS implement CAA section 111(b) and operations to be emitted and blow commenter that determining BART and are issued for categories of sources which across the property line, (2) EPA and promulgating this FIP for FCPP have been identified as causing, or Navajo Nation EPA have received necessitates ESA Section 7 consultation. contributing significantly to, air pollution numerous complaints concerning excess EPA understands that the U.S. Fish and which may reasonably be anticipated to Wildlife Service (FWS) is primarily endanger public health or welfare. The dust from the ash landfill and other primary purpose of the NSPS are to help operations, and (3) these activities are concerned about the effects of mercury States attain and maintain ambient air quality occurring in close proximity to a public and selenium on endangered fish by ensuring that the best demonstrated access area. species in the San Juan River. EPA notes emission control technologies are installed as EPA disagrees with the commenter that under the BART Alternative, the industrial infrastructure is modernized. that the 20 percent opacity limit is mercury and selenium emissions will be See 74 FR 51951 (October 8, 2009). arbitrary and capricious. While EPA reduced from FCPP due to the closure acknowledges that New Mexico does of Units 1–3. Additionally, EPA’s EPA’s basis for finding that it is not have a general opacity limit that national MATS rule set new emission necessary or appropriate for FCPP to applies to dust, the other three Four limits for mercury that would apply to comply with a requirement to limit its Corners States do. In Arizona and Units 1–3 at FCPP if those units 47 For example, see document titled ‘‘Four Colorado a general 20 percent opacity continue operation. EPA further notes Corners Power Plant Complaint to MSHA’’ in the limit applies at all facilities including that the goal of the Regional Haze Rule docket for this final rulemaking. ‘‘grandfathered’’ coal-fired EGUs. In is to reduce emissions of visibility-
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51644 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
impairing pollutants in order to restore EPA’s authority to promulgate a consideration of reasonable progress visibility to natural conditions at the source-specific FIP in Indian County is goals in determining BART for a given mandatory Federal Class I areas, and based on CAA sections 301(a) and (d)(4) facility. mercury and selenium do not affect and section 49.11 of the TAR provides EPA also disagrees that the minimum visibility. Therefore, EPA does not have EPA with broad discretion to amount of reasonable progress that authority to regulate emissions of promulgate regulations directly for BART needs to achieve in a given Class mercury or selenium under BART. sources located in Indian country, I area cannot be determined until the Comment: The coal supplier for FCCP including on Indian reservations if we amount of reasonable progress achieved questioned the legality of EPA’s determine such Federal regulations are by other CAA and state programs is approach to the Regional Haze program ‘‘necessary or appropriate’’ and the subtracted from that area’s reasonable at FCPP. According to the commenter, Tribe has not promulgated a TIP. progress goal. Neither the CAA nor EPA’s BART and better-than-BART Specifically, in 40 CFR 49.11, EPA Regional Haze regulations set any proposals are not authorized because interpreted CAA section 301(d)(4) to quantitative presumptive targets for the BART is not ‘‘reasonably separable’’ authorize EPA to promulgate ‘‘such amount of reasonable progress that must from the remainder of a regional haze Federal implementation plan provisions be achieved. Rather, the regulations implementation plan for the Navajo as are necessary or appropriate to allow for flexibility in determining the Nation under the TAR. The commenter protect air quality’’. As such, because amount of reasonable progress towards concluded that the minimum amount of the Navajo Nation has not adopted a TIP the ultimate goal of returning to natural reasonable progress that BART needs to for Regional Haze, the TAR provides background conditions. achieve in a given Class I area cannot be discretion to EPA to determine which EPA disagrees with the commenter determined until the amount of requirements of the Regional Haze Rule that EPA must consider the reasonable reasonable progress achieved by other are necessary or appropriate to protect progress already achieved by past FCPP CAA and state programs is subtracted air quality, and to promulgate just those emission reductions and that previously from that area’s reasonable progress implementation plan provisions uncontrolled SO2, NOX, and PM goal. The commenter asserted that the accordingly. Because two stationary emission rates prior to previous FIPs for FCPP should serve as the baseline for NOX emission reductions that would be sources on the Navajo Nation meet the achieved under the supplemental BART eligibility criteria, EPA has measuring visibility improvements. In its own five-factor BART analysis, APS proposal are in excess of the amount determined that it is necessary or used actual NO emissions from 2001– required to achieve the reasonable appropriate at this time to evaluate X 2003 as baseline emissions for progress goals in the area. source-specific FIPs to implement the determining visibility improvement The commenter added that EPA must BART requirement of the RHR for each BART-eligible facility located on the from NOX controls. NOX emissions from consider the reasonable progress already 2001–2003 were generally consistent Navajo Nation. The basis for our achieved by past FCPP emission with and representative of NO determination is discussed in several X reductions. The commenter concluded emissions over the past ten years. EPA prior responses (See, e.g., Sections 2.1, that any necessary reasonable progress agrees with APS in its use of actual 4.1.2, and 8.1). The Courts have agreed remaining to be achieved by NOX BART emissions over a recent time frame, with EPA that it may implement at FCPP cannot be determined until the rather than attempting to rely on requirements that are necessary or reasonable progress achieved by prior previously uncontrolled emissions appropriate without providing for all emissions reductions at FCPP is emission rates from FCPP as a baseline. considered. aspects of the CAA programs at a single Additionally, nothing in the BART The commenter stated that EPA’s time. See Arizona Public Service v. regulations or guidance requires that BART determination did not properly EPA, 562 F.3d 1116 (10th Cir. 2009). EPA consider past emission reductions weigh the statutory factors. Specifically, EPA disagrees with the comment that in determining BART under the RHR. the commenter indicated that individual BART must be established in relation to However, as part of the required five- Class I area visibility improvements reasonable progress goals. State or factor analysis for BART EPA did from SCR have not been compared with Tribal Implementation Plans for evaluate and consider the current respect to the statutory factors to Regional Haze must establish goals that pollution control equipment in use at visibility improvements from LNB, and provide for reasonable progress towards FCPP. the actual amounts of those achieving natural visibility conditions EPA disagrees with the comment that improvements have not been measured for each mandatory Class I Federal area EPA’s BART determination did not against the amounts of improvements located within its borders (40 CFR properly weigh the statutory factors. As needed to meet reasonable progress 51.308(d)(1). FCPP and NGS are both discussed elsewhere in this document, goals. located within the Navajo Nation Indian the BART Guidelines allow the Response: EPA disagrees with the Reservation, and for the reasons reviewing authority (State, Tribe, or commenter who questioned the legality outlined above, EPA is conducting EPA) the discretion to determine how to of our approach and that stated that BART determinations for each facility. weigh and in what order to evaluate the EPA’s BART and ‘‘better-than-BART’’ There are no mandatory Class I Federal statutory factors (cost of compliance, the proposals are not authorized because areas as designated by Congress located energy and non air quality BART is not ‘‘reasonably separable’’ within the Navajo Nation.48 EPA further environmental impacts of compliance, from the remainder of a regional haze notes that the five-factor analysis any existing pollution control implementation plan for the Navajo outlined in the BART Guidelines, which technology in use at the source, the Nation under the TAR. We also disagree were promulgated as a notice and remaining useful life of the source, and that our approach to the Regional Haze comment rulemaking, does not require the degree of improvement in visibility program impermissibly isolates BART which may reasonably be anticipated to from the context of the overall 48 EPA notes that Navajo Nation has established result from the use of such technology), its own parks and monuments, including reasonable progress goal in violation of Monument Valley, Canyon de Chelly, and the Four as long as the reviewing authority the CAA, and that our proposed BART Corners Monument, however, these parks are not justifies its selection of the ‘‘best’’ level for FCPP should be withdrawn. mandatory Class I Federal Areas as set by Congress. of control and explains the CAA factors
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51645
that led the reviewing authority to requirements; train personnel to be able year. Thus, this rule is not subject to the choose that option over other control to respond to a collection of requirements of sections 202 or 205 of levels (see 70 FR 39170, July 6, 2005). information; search data sources; UMRA. This action is also not subject to EPA provided a detailed justification for complete and review the collection of the requirements of section 203 of our BART evaluation process and five- information; and transmit or otherwise UMRA because it contains no regulatory factor analysis in the TSD for our disclose the information. requirements that might significantly or proposed BART determination. An agency may not conduct or uniquely affect small governments. This EPA also disagrees with the comment sponsor, and a person is not required to rule will not impose direct compliance that individual Class I area visibility respond to a collection of information costs on the Navajo Nation, and will not improvements from SCR have not been unless it displays a currently valid OMB preempt Navajo law. This final action compared with respect to the statutory control number. The OMB control will reduce the emissions of two factors to visibility improvements from numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 pollutants from a single source, the Four LNB. In the preamble to our October 19, CFR are listed in 40 CFR Part 9. Corners Power Plant. 2010, proposed BART determination C. Regulatory Flexibility Act E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism and in the accompanying TSD, EPA compared the anticipated visibility The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) This action does not have federalism improvement from SCR with the generally requires an agency to prepare implications. It will not have substantial anticipated improvement from a regulatory flexibility analysis of any direct effects on the States, on the combustion controls (LNB or rule subject to notice and comment relationship between the national LNB+OFA) (See 75 FR 64230, Table 3, rulemaking requirements under the government and the States, or in the and TSD Tables 36–39), and noted that Administrative Procedure Act or any distribution of power and EPA modeled the visibility other statute unless the agency certifies responsibilities among the various improvement from SCR to far exceed the that the rule will not have a significant levels of government, as specified in modeled improvement from combustion economic impact on a substantial Executive Order 13132. This final action controls. number of small entities. Small entities requires emission reductions of NOX at include small businesses, small a specific stationary source located in IV: Administrative Requirements organizations, and small governmental Indian country. Thus, Executive Order A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory jurisdictions. 13132 does not apply to this action. For purposes of assessing the impacts Planning and Review and Executive of today’s rule on small entities, small F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation Order 13563: Improving Regulation and entity is defined as: (1) A small business and Coordination With Indian Tribal Regulatory Review Governments as defined by the Small Business This action will finalize a source- Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13 Subject to the Executive Order 13175 specific FIP for a single generating CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) EPA source. This type of action is exempt jurisdiction that is a government of a may not issue a regulation that has tribal from review under Executive Orders city, county, town, school district or implications, that imposes substantial 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) special district with a population of less direct compliance costs, and that is not and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, than 50,000; and (3) a small required by statute, unless the Federal 2011). organization that is any not-for-profit government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance B. Paperwork Reduction Act enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not costs incurred by tribal governments, or This action does not impose an dominant in its field. EPA consults with tribal officials early information collection burden under the After considering the economic in the process of developing the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction impacts of this action on small entities, proposed regulation and develops a Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Under the I certify that this final action will not tribal summary impact statement. Paperwork Reduction Act, a ‘‘collection have a significant economic impact on EPA has concluded that this action of information’’ is defined as a a substantial number of small entities. will have tribal implications. However, requirement for ‘‘answers to * * * The Four Corners Power Plant is not a it will neither impose substantial direct identical reporting or recordkeeping small entity and the FIP for Four compliance costs on tribal governments, requirements imposed on ten or more Corners Power Plant being finalized nor preempt Tribal law. This final rule persons * * *’’ 44 U.S.C. 3502(3)(A). today does not impose any compliance requires FCPP, a major stationary source Because the final FIP applies to a single requirements on small entities. See Mid- located on the Navajo Nation, to reduce facility, Four Corners Power Plant, the Tex Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. FERC, emissions of NOX under the BART Paperwork Reduction Act does not 773 F.2d 327 (D.C. Cir. 1985). requirement of the Regional Haze Rule. apply. See 5 CFR 1320(c). The owners of FCPP submitted a BART Burden means the total time, effort, or D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Alternative to EPA for consideration financial resources expended by persons (UMRA) that would provide compliance to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose This rule will impose an enforceable flexibility to the owners and result in or provide information to or for a duty on the private sector owners of greater reasonable progress than BART Federal agency. This includes the time FCPP. However, this rule does not toward the national visibility goal. This needed to review instructions; develop, contain a Federal mandate that may BART Alternative involves closure of acquire, install, and utilize technology result in expenditures of $100 million Units 1–3 at FCPP and installation of and systems for the purposes of (in 1996 dollars) or more for State, local, add-on pollution controls to Units 4 and collecting, validating, and verifying and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 5. EPA issued a Supplemental Proposal information, processing and or the private sector in any one year. to allow the owners of FCPP the option maintaining information, and disclosing EPA’s estimate for the total annual cost to implement BART or the BART and providing information; adjust the to install and operate SCR on all five Alternative. Because the BART existing ways to comply with any units at FCPP does not exceed $100 Alternative involves the optional previously applicable instructions and million (in 1996 dollars) in any one closure of Units 1–3 and an associated
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51646 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
decline in the amount of coal mined and market. Based on our analysis, we April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: combusted, taxes and royalties paid to determined that electricity generation (1) Is determined to be economically the Navajo Nation by the owners of costs resulting from installation of SCR significant as defined under Executive FCPP and BHP Billiton, operator of the would not make FCPP uneconomical Order 12866, and (2) concerns an coal mine that supplies FCPP, are compared to the wholesale power environmental health or safety risk that expected to decline. The closure of market; therefore, we concluded that EPA has reason to believe may have a Units 1–3 is not expected to result in our proposed BART determination was disproportionate effect on children. If layoffs, but is expected to result in a unlikely to cause FCPP to close. the regulatory action meets both criteria, reduction in workforce at the mine and The Navajo Nation provided the Agency must evaluate the power plant over time through attrition. comments on our proposed rule and environmental health or safety effects of EPA consulted with tribal officials Supplemental Proposal, in consultation the planned rule on children, and early in the process of developing this and by letter, which EPA considered in explain why the planned regulation is regulation to permit them to have developing this final rule. The Navajo preferable to other potentially effective meaningful and timely input into its Nation also expressed concern about the and reasonably feasible alternatives development. EPA proposed to potential adverse impacts of the BART considered by the Agency. determine that it was necessary or Alternative to the Navajo Nation and This rule is not subject to Executive appropriate to implement the BART requested that EPA conduct an analysis Order 13045 because it requires requirement of the Regional Haze Rule to estimate potential adverse impacts to emissions reductions of NOX from a for the Navajo Nation to protect air the Navajo Nation. Pursuant to EPA’s single stationary source. Because this quality and improve visibility at the customary practice of engaging in action only applies to a single source sixteen mandatory Class I Federal areas extensive and meaningful consultation and is not a rule of general applicability, surrounding FCPP and the eleven Class with tribes and tribal authorities with it is not economically significant as I areas surrounding NGS. EPA first put regard to relevant Agency actions, EPA defined under Executive Order 12866, forth an Advanced Notice of Proposed commissioned an analysis of the and does not have a disproportionate Rulemaking (ANPR) on August 28, 2009 optional BART Alternative to estimate effect on children. However, to the to accept comment on preliminary potential adverse impacts to the Navajo extent that the rule will reduce information provided by FCPP and NGS Nation if the owners of FCPP chose to emissions of NOX, which contributes to and to begin the consultation process retire Units 1–3. EPA communicated ozone formation, the rule will have a with affected tribes and the Federal these potential impacts to the Navajo beneficial effect on children’s health by Land Managers. EPA has consulted on Nation in our consultation meeting with reducing air pollution that causes or numerous occasions with officials of the President Shelly on June 13, 2012. The exacerbates childhood asthma and other Navajo Nation in the process of report will be provided to President respiratory issues. developing this FIP, including meetings Shelly by letter as a follow-up to our with the President Ben Shelly of the H. Executive Order 13211: Actions consultation with the Navajo Nation. Concerning Regulations That Navajo Nation and his staff on May 19, The Navajo Nation also expressed 2011, after the close of the public Significantly Affect Energy Supply, support for phased-implementation of Distribution, or Use comment period for our proposed BART controls to provide compliance determination and Supplemental flexibility to FCPP. The final rule allows This action is not subject to Executive Proposal, and on June 13, 2012, prior to the owners of FCPP to choose between Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, our final action. The agendas for these BART or the BART Alternative and 2001)), because it is not a significant two consultation meetings are provided provides timeframes for phased- regulatory action under Executive Order 49 in the docket for this final rulemaking. implementation of control options. 12866. A timeline of correspondence and EPA summarized and responded to I. National Technology Transfer and consultation with tribes on both power comments from the Navajo Nation and Advancement Act plants is included in the docket for this the Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Section 12(d) of the National final rulemaking. Community received on the ANPR in Technology Transfer and Advancement Several tribes, including the Navajo the Technical Support Document for our Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– Nation, submitted comments on the proposed rulemaking. Following our 113, 12 (10) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs ANPR, which we considered in meeting with President Shelly on May EPA to use voluntary consensus developing our proposal and the 19, 2011, EPA sent a follow up letter standards (VCS) in its regulatory accompanying Technical Support summarizing and responding to the activities unless to do so would be Document. The main concern expressed concerns expressed by the Navajo inconsistent with applicable law or by the Navajo Nation was that requiring Nation.50 In coordination with this final otherwise impractical. VCS are the top NOX control option, selective rulemaking, EPA will also be sending a technical standards (e.g., materials catalytic reduction (SCR) as BART letter to President Shelly that specifications, test methods, sampling would cause FCPP to close. In summarizes and responds to the procedures and business practices) that developing our proposed BART comments raised in his letter to EPA are developed or adopted by the VCS determination, EPA conducted an dated June 2, 2011. analysis to examine whether requiring bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to SCR on Units 1–5 at FCPP would cause G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of provide Congress, through annual electricity generation costs to exceed the Children From Environmental Health reports to OMB, with explanations cost to purchase power on the wholesale Risks and Safety Risks when the Agency decides not to use Executive Order 13045: Protection of available and applicable VCS. 49 Consistent with the NTTAA, the See document number 0222 in docket EPA– Children From Environmental Health R09–OAR–2011–0683 titled ‘‘Agenda May 19, 2011 Agency conducted a search to identify Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, Meeting; Gov to Gov Consultation with Navajo potentially applicable VCS. For the Nation’’, and document titled: ‘‘2012_0613 Consultation with Navajo Nation agenda and 50 See document 0231 in docket EPA–R09–OAR– measurements listed below, there are a attendees.pdf’’ in the docket for this final 2011–0683 titled ‘‘EPA response to Navajo Nation number of VCS that appear to have rulemaking. dated 09/06/2011’’. possible use in lieu of the EPA test
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51647
methods and performance specifications that before a rule may take effect, the paragraphs (a) through (h) of this (40 CFR part 60, Appendices A and B) agency promulgating the rule must section. All definitions and testing and noted next to the measurement submit a rule report, which includes a monitoring methods of this section requirements. It would not be practical copy of the rule, to each House of the apply to the limits in this paragraph (i) to specify these standards in the current Congress and to the Comptroller General except as indicated in paragraphs (i)(1) rulemaking due to a lack of sufficient of the United States. Section 804 through (4) of this section. The interim data on equivalency and validation and exempts from section 801 the following NOX emission limit in paragraph because some are still under types of rules (1) rules of particular (i)(2)(ii) of this section shall be effective development. However, EPA’s Office of applicability; (2) rules relating to agency 180 days after re-start of the unit after Air Quality Planning and Standards is management or personnel; and (3) rules installation of add-on post-combustion in the process of reviewing all available of agency organization, procedure, or NOX controls for that unit and until the VCS for incorporation by reference into practice that do not substantially affect plant-wide limit goes into effect. The the test methods and performance the rights or obligations of non-agency plant-wide NOX limit shall be effective specifications of 40 CFR part 60, parties. 5 U.S.C 804(3). EPA is not no later than 5 years after October 23, Appendices A and B. Any VCS so required to submit a rule report 2012. The owner or operator may elect incorporated in a specified test method regarding today’s action under section to meet the plant-wide limit early to or performance specification would 801 because this action is a rule of remove the individual unit limits. then be available for use in determining particular applicability. This rule Particulate limits for Units 4 and 5 shall the emissions from this facility. This finalizes a source-specific FIP for a be effective 60 days after restart will be an ongoing process designed to single generating source. following the scheduled major outage incorporate suitable VCS as they for Units 4 and 5 in 2013 and 2014. become available. L. Petitions for Judicial Review (1) Particulate Matter from Units 4 Particulate Matter Emissions—EPA Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean and 5 shall be limited to 0.015 lb/ Methods 1 though 5; Air Act, petitions for judicial review of MMBtu for each unit as measured by the Opacity—EPA Method 9 and this action must be filed in the United average of three test runs with each run Performance Specification Test 1 for States Court of Appeals for the collecting a minimum of 60 dscf of Opacity Monitoring; appropriate circuit by October 23, 2012. sample gas and with a duration of at NOX Emissions—Continuous Filing a petition for reconsideration by least 120 minutes. Sampling shall be Emissions Monitors. the Administrator of this final rule does performed according to 40 CFR Part 60 Appendices A–1 through A–3, Methods J. Executive Order 12898: Federal not affect the finality of this rule for the 1 through 4 and Method 5 or Method 5e. Actions To Address Environmental purposes of judicial review nor does it The averaging time for any other Justice in Minority Populations and extend the time within which a petition demonstration of the particulate matter Low-Income Populations for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of compliance or exceedance shall be Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, such rule or action. This action may not based on a 6-hour average. Particulate February 16, 1994), establishes federal be challenged later in proceedings to testing shall be performed annually as executive policy on environmental enforce its requirements. (See CAA required by paragraph (e)(3) of this justice. Its main provision directs section 307(b)(2).) section. This test with 120 minute test federal agencies, to the greatest extent runs may be substituted and used to practicable and permitted by law, to List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 49 demonstrate compliance with the make environmental justice part of their Environmental protection, particulate limits in paragraph (d)(2) of mission by identifying and addressing, Administrative practice and procedure, this section. as appropriate, disproportionately high Air pollution control, Indians, (2) Plant-wide nitrogen oxide and adverse human health or Intergovernmental relations, Reporting emission limits. environmental effects of their programs, and recordkeeping requirements. (i) The plant-wide nitrogen oxide policies, and activities on minority limit, expressed as nitrogen dioxide Dated: August 6, 2012. populations and low-income (NO2), shall be 0.11 lb/MMBtu as populations in the United States. Lisa P. Jackson, averaged over a rolling 30-calendar day EPA has determined that this final Administrator. period. NOX emissions for each calendar rule will not have disproportionately Title 40, chapter I, of the Code of day shall be determined by summing high and adverse human health or Federal Regulations is amended as the hourly emissions measured as environmental effects on minority or follows: pounds of NO2 for all operating units. low-income populations because it Heat input for each calendar day shall increases the level of environmental PART 49—[AMENDED] be determined by adding together all protection for all affected populations hourly heat inputs, in millions of Btu, ■ 1. The authority citation for part 49 without having any disproportionately for all operating units. Each day the continues to read as follows: high and adverse human health or rolling 30-calendar day average shall be environmental effects on any Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. determined by adding together that population, including any minority or ■ 2. Section 49.5512 is amended by day’s and the preceding 29 days’ low-income population. This rule adding paragraphs (i) and (j) to read as pounds of NO2 and dividing that total requires emissions reductions of two follows: pounds of NO2 by the sum of the heat pollutants from a single stationary input during the same 30-day period. source, Four Corners Power Plant. § 49.5512 Federal Implementation Plan The results shall be the rolling 30- Provisions for Four Corners Power Plant, calendar day-average pound per million K. Congressional Review Act Navajo Nation. Btu emissions of NOX. The Congressional Review Act, 5 * * * * * (ii) The interim NOX limit for the first U.S.C 801 et seq., as added by the Small (i) Regional Haze Best Available 750 MW boiler retrofitted with add-on Business Regulatory Enforcement Retrofit Technology limits for this plant post-combustion NOX control shall be Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides are in addition to the requirements of 0.11 lb/MMBtu, based on a rolling
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51648 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
average of 30 successive boiler operating requirements of this paragraph to notify the Regional Administrator by days. control NOX emissions from Units 4 and letter whether it will comply with (iii) Schedule for add-on post- 5. By July 31, 2018, Units 4 and 5 shall paragraph (i)(2) of this section or combustion NOX controls installation be retrofitted with add-on post- whether it will comply with paragraph (A) Within 4 years of the effective combustion NOX controls to reduce (i)(3) of this section and shall submit a date of this rule, FCPP shall have NOX emissions. Units 4 and 5 shall each plan and time table for compliance with installed add-on post-combustion NOX meet a 0.098 lb/MMBtu emission limit either paragraph (i)(2) or (3) of this controls on at least 750 MW (net) of for NOX expressed as NO2 based on a section. The owner or operator shall generation to meet the interim emission rolling average of 30 successive boiler amend and submit this amended plan to limit in paragraph (i)(2)(ii)(A) of this operating days. A ‘‘boiler operating day’’ the Regional Administrator as changes section. is defined as any 24-hour period occur. (B) Within 5 years of the effective date between 12:00 midnight and the of this rule, FCPP shall have installed following midnight during which any (5) The owner or operator shall follow the requirements of 40 CFR part 71 for add-on post-combustion NOX controls fuel is combusted at any time at the on all 2060 MW (net) of generation to steam generating unit. Emissions from submitting an application for permit meet the plant-wide emission limit for each unit shall be measured with the 40 revision to update its Part 71 operating permit after it achieves compliance with NOX in paragraph (i)(2)(i) of this CFR part 75 continuous NOX monitor section. system and expressed in the units of lb/ paragraph (i)(2) or (3) of this section. (iv) Testing and monitoring shall use MMBtu and recorded each hour. A valid (j) Dust. Each owner or operator shall the 40 CFR part 75 monitors and meet hour of NOX data shall be determined operate and maintain the existing dust the 40 CFR part 75 quality assurance per 40 CFR part 75. For each boiler suppression methods for controlling requirements. In addition to these 40 operating day, every valid hour of NOX dust from the coal handling and ash CFR part 75 requirements, relative lb/MMBtu measurement shall be handling and storage facilities. Within accuracy test audits shall be performed averaged to determine a daily average. ninety (90) days after promulgation of for both the NOX pounds per hour Each daily average shall be averaged this paragraph, the owner or operator measurement and the heat input with the preceding 29 valid daily shall develop a dust control plan and measurement. These shall have relative averages to determine the 30 boiler submit the plan to the Regional accuracies of less than 20 percent. This operating day rolling average. The NOX Administrator. The owner or operator testing shall be evaluated each time the monitoring system shall meet the data shall comply with the plan once the 40 CFR part 75 monitors undergo requirements of 40 CFR 60.49Da(e)(2) (at plan is submitted to the Regional relative accuracy testing. least 90 percent valid hours for all Administrator. The owner or operator (v) If a valid NOX pounds per hour or operating hours over any 30 successive shall amend the plan as requested or heat input is not available for any hour boiler operating days). Emission testing needed. The plan shall include a for a unit, that heat input and NOX using 40 CFR part 60 Appendix A description of the dust suppression pounds per hour shall not be used in the Method 7E may be used to supplement methods for controlling dust from the calculation of the 30 day plant-wide any missing data due to continuous coal handling and storage facilities, ash rolling average. monitor problems. The 40 CFR part 75 handling, storage, and landfills, and (vi) Upon the effective date of the requirements for bias adjusting and data road sweeping activities. Within 18 plant-wide NO average, the owner or X substitution do not apply for adjusting months of promulgation of this operator shall have installed CEMS and the data for this emission limit. paragraph each owner or operator shall COMS software that complies with the (4) By January 1, 2013, the owner or not emit dust with opacity greater than requirements of this section. operator shall submit a letter to the 20 percent from any crusher, grinding (3) In lieu of meeting the NOX Regional Administrator updating EPA of requirements of paragraph (i)(2) of this the status of lease negotiations and mill, screening operation, belt conveyor, section, FCPP may choose to regulatory approvals required to comply or truck loading or unloading operation. permanently shut down Units 1, 2, and with paragraph (i)(3) of this section. By [FR Doc. 2012–19793 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] 3 by January 1, 2014 and meet the July 1, 2013, the owner or operator shall BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUR2.SGM 24AUR2 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Vol. 77 Friday, No. 165 August 24, 2012
Part III
Department of Transportation
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 571 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Motorcycle Brake Systems; Final Rule
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51650 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (Telephone: (202) 366–0846) (Fax: (202) modern technologies. The National 493–2290). Highway Traffic Safety Administration National Highway Traffic Safety For legal issues: Mr. David Jasinski, (NHTSA) seeks to keep its standards up Administration Office of the Chief Counsel (NCC–112) to date. This final rule updates FMVSS (Email: [email protected]) No. 122 based on the Motorcycle Brake 49 CFR Part 571 (Telephone: (202) 366–2992) (Fax: (202) Systems Global Technical Regulation 366–3820). (GTR), which reflects the capabilities of [Docket No. NHTSA–2012–0123] You may send mail to these officials current in-use technologies. Updating RIN 2127–AK16 at National Highway Traffic Safety the standard to reflect modern Administration, 1200 New Jersey technologies would help prevent the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. introduction of unsafe motorcycle brake Standards; Motorcycle Brake Systems SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: systems on the road. Moreover, benefits from harmonization, including AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Table of Contents decreased testing costs and ease of Safety Administration, Department of I. Executive Summary market entry, would accrue to current Transportation (NHTSA). II. Background and new manufacturers, and would in ACTION: Final rule. A. Current Requirements of FMVSS No. turn get passed on to consumers. 122 The substantive performance tests and SUMMARY: This final rule amends the B. Harmonization Efforts requirements of FMVSS No. 122 have Federal motor vehicle safety standard C. Comments Received in Response to the not been updated since their adoption (FMVSS) on motorcycle brake systems Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in 1972. Since that time, motorcycle to add and update requirements and test III. General Improvements to FMVSS No. 122 brake system technology has procedures and to harmonize with a A. New Terminology B. Measurement of Performance Using significantly changed and improved global technical regulation (GTR) for Stopping Distance such that FMVSS No. 122 no longer motorcycle brakes. The GTR was C. Motorcycle Test Speed and Corrected reflects the current performance of developed under the United Nations Stopping Distance motorcycle brake system technologies. 1998 Global Agreement with the U.S. as D. Peak Braking Coefficient In order to address modern braking an active participant, and it was derived E. Test Sequence technologies, the agency sought to from various motorcycle braking F. Brake Application Force Measurement improve the requirements and test regulations from around the world, G. Brake Temperature Measurement procedures of FMVSS No. 122. These including the U.S. motorcycle brake H. Burnishing Procedure efforts coincided with the 2002 systems standard. This final rule I. Notice of Wear adoption of the initial Program of Work IV. Specific Performance Test Improvements includes numerous modifications to the to FMVSS No. 122 under the 1998 United Nations’ test procedures for motorcycle brake A. Dry Stop Test—Single Brake Control Economic Commission for Europe systems, but does not change the scope, Actuated (UNECE) Agreement Concerning the applicability, and safety purpose of the B. Dry Stop Test—All Service Brake Establishment of Global and Technical motorcycle brake systems FMVSS. Controls Actuated Regulations for Wheeled Vehicles, DATES: This final rule is effective C. High-Speed Test Equipment and Parts Which Can Be October 23, 2012. Petitions for D. Wet Brake Test Fitted And/or Be Used On Wheeled E. Heat Fade Test Vehicles (1998 Agreement).1 That reconsideration must be received by F. Parking Brake System Test October 9, 2012. program included motorcycle brake G. Antilock Brake System (ABS) systems as one of the promising areas The various compliance dates for Performance Test these regulations are set forth, as 1. Low Friction Surface for ABS Testing for the establishment of a GTR. The applicable, in § 571.122, S3. Optional 2. Wheel Lock agency sought to work collaboratively early compliance is permitted on and 3. Tests With ABS Electrical Failure on modernizing motorcycle brake after October 23, 2012. 4. Other ABS-Related Comments regulations with other Contracting The incorporation by reference of H. Partial Failure Test—Split Service Brake Parties to the 1998 Agreement certain publications listed in this rule is System (Contracting Parties), particularly I. Power-Assisted Braking System Failure Canada, the European Union and Japan. approved by the Director of the Federal Test Register as of October 23, 2012. Through the exchange of information on V. Other Comments and Technical ongoing research and testing and ADDRESSES: Amendments Petitions for reconsideration through the leveraging of resources for A. Labeling Requirements must be submitted to: Administrator, testing and evaluations, the agency National Highway Traffic Safety B. Versions of ASTM Standards C. Terminology participated in successful efforts that Administration, 1200 New Jersey culminated in the establishment of the Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. VI. Compliance Date VII. Costs and Benefits Motorcycle Brake Systems GTR under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: VIII. Regulatory Analyses and Notices For technical issues: Mr. George 1 The 1998 UNECE Agreement Concerning the Soodoo, Division Chief, Vehicle I. Executive Summary Establishment of Global and Technical Regulations Dynamics (NVS–122), Office of Crash Currently, motorcycles must comply for Wheeled Vehicles, Equipment and Parts Which Can Be Fitted And/or Be Used On Wheeled Avoidance Standards (Email: with a series of performance Vehicles (1998 Agreement) was concluded under [email protected]) (Telephone: requirements established in Federal the auspices of the United Nations and provides for (202) 366–2720) (Fax: (202) 366–5930) Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) the establishment of globally harmonized vehicle regulations. This 1998 Agreement, whose or Mr. Ezana Wondimneh, Division No. 122, Motorcycle Brake Systems, in conclusion was spearheaded by the United States, Chief, International Policy and the early 1970’s. While the current entered into force in 2000 and is administered by Harmonization (NVS–133), Office of motorcycle brake performance the UNECE’s World Forum for the Harmonization International Policy, Fuel Economy and requirements have ensured a minimum of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29). See http:// www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/wp29wgs/ Consumer Programs (Email: level of braking performance, they have wp29gen/wp29age.html (last accessed September [email protected]) not kept pace with the advancement of 28, 2011).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51651
the 1998 Agreement. We believe that the implement a more stringent high speed Motorcycles are vehicles that are provisions of the GTR NHTSA is test requirement by specifying a slightly prepared for the world market. It will be adopting in today’s final rule will higher rate of deceleration. Third, the more economically efficient to have improve the current requirements and rule replaces the existing wet brake test manufacturers using the same test test procedures of FMVSS No. 122 by with one that better simulates actual in- procedures and meeting the same updating them to more closely reflect service conditions, by spraying water performance requirements worldwide. the capabilities of modern technologies onto the brake disc, instead of This rule will help achieve these that are already being used in most submerging the brake system before benefits and thus reduce the amount of motorcycles sold in the U.S. testing. Fourth, the rule specifies an resources utilized to test motorcycles. This final rule makes improvements improved heat fade test procedure based Although this final rule adds and to FMVSS No. 122, but retains many on European and Japanese national updates FMVSS No. 122 performance fundamental elements of the current regulations, which share the same test requirements and provides benefits from standard. For example, this final rule procedure and performance harmonization, we anticipate that adopts new terminology and includes requirements. Fifth, the rule specifies virtually all motorcycles currently sold definitions for terms used in the performance requirements for antilock in the U.S. can meet the requirements, regulatory text, including adopting five brake systems (ABS), if present. Until without the need for any changes to categories for motorcycles based on the now, FMVSS No. 122 did not contain their brake systems. Thus, we are not number of wheels and maximum speed performance criteria for ABS, where able to quantify direct safety benefits of the motorcycle. This final rule retains present on motorcycles.2 Finally, the from this final rule. stopping distance as the sole rule contains a new test requirement to We have considered whether this compliance criterion for several evaluate the motorcycle’s performance final rule will impose additional costs performance tests in FMVSS No. 122. in the event of a failure in the power- on manufacturers, including costs The current FMVSS No. 122 is assisted braking system, if so equipped. associated with certifying motorcycles improved by specifying a tolerance for This final rule responds to public as compliant with these new tests. We the initial test speed for compliance comments on the notice of proposed expect that a limited number tests, recognizing that even professional rulemaking 3 (NPRM) and adopts the (approximately 8,000) of three-wheeled test drivers cannot attain the exact requirements, test procedures, and motorcycles will require upgraded brake speed specified in every test. This final performance criteria of the NPRM systems at a cost of $13.38 per rule incorporates by reference an ASTM without significant deviations from the motorcycle. As a result, the total cost International method for the proposal. motorcycle manufacturers will incur as measurement of the coefficient of Notably, we have retained labeling a result of today’s final rule is friction of the test surface that is already requirements for brake systems approximately $107,040 per year. All used in NHTSA’s other brake standards. components that were in FMVSS No. costs that manufacturers may incur if This final rule, like the existing version 122, but were not in the GTR. NHTSA they choose to certify compliance based of FMVSS No. 122, specifies the order feels strongly that those required labels on NHTSA’s test procedures will be in which NHTSA will conduct its identify important safety features and offset by cost savings from the compliance tests, but it moves the brake safety-related information, and they elimination of test procedures under the fade test to the end of the test sequence have longstanding applicability in current version of FMVSS No. 122. For in order to eliminate a re-burnishing FMVSS No. 122. The parties involved in those manufacturers that choose to procedure, resulting in a more efficient developing the GTR understood that certify compliance by following test sequence. The procedure for the national regulations would continue to NHTSA’s test procedures, we anticipate initial burnish is retained with minor apply labeling and warning that this final rule would result in a cost alteration. requirements of this sort when each savings of less than one-tenth of a cent The rule includes several tests that national regulatory body adopted the per motorcycle. would enhance the safe operation of a provisions of the GTR. Since the vast While the agency has not been able to motorcycle: Tests both at gross vehicle majority of benefits from harmonization quantify safety benefits for this rule weight rating (GVWR) and lightly are achieved because of the since virtually all motorcycles sold in loaded vehicle weight, which ensure harmonization of test procedures and the U.S. can currently meet the adequate braking performance at the performance criteria, the retention of proposed requirements, the agency is two extremes of the loading conditions; unique FMVSS No. 122 labeling considering taking several other actions a wet brake test that is more requirements does not reduce the to attempt to decrease motorcycle representative of the manner in which benefits of international harmonization. fatalities.4 Given the sources and brakes are wetted during real world Besides updating requirements and magnitude of the safety problem posed riding in wet conditions; a variety of test procedures to help ensure the safety by increased motorcycle fatalities, the ABS performance tests to ensure that of motorcycle brake systems, today’s Department of Transportation intends to motorcycles equipped with ABS have final rule also provides benefits from address motorcycle safety adequate antilock performance during harmonization. Motorcycle emergency braking or on slippery road manufacturers, and ultimately, 4 See U.S. Department of Transportation, ‘‘Action conditions; and a new requirement that consumers, both here and abroad, can Plan to Reduce Motorcycle Fatalities,’’ (October 2007), available at http://www.nhtsa.gov/DOT/ addresses failure in the power-assisted expect to achieve cost savings through NHTSA/Communication%20&%20Consumer%20 braking system. the formal harmonization of differing Information/Articles/Associated%20Files/4640- Specifically, the rule will improve the sets of standards when the Contracting report2.pdf (last accessed April 10, 2012) FMVSS No. 122 requirements in several Parties implement the new GTR. (hereinafter ‘‘Action Plan to Reduce Motorcycle Fatalities’’); National Highway Traffic Safety areas. First, it will make the dry brake Administration (NHTSA) & Motorcycle Safety test requirement more stringent by 2 Note, though, that we are not mandating in this Foundation (MSF), ‘‘National Agenda for specifying testing of each service brake rule that motorcycles be equipped with ABS brakes. Motorcycle Safety,’’ available at http://www.nhtsa. 3 control individually, with the See Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, gov/people/injury/pedbimot/motorcycle/00-NHT- Motorcycle Brake Systems, Notice of Proposed 212-motorcycle/index.html (last accessed April 10, motorcycle in the fully loaded Rulemaking, 73 FR 54020 (Sept. 17, 2008) 2012); see generally http://www.nhtsa.gov/Safety/ condition. Second, the rule will (hereinafter ‘‘FMVSS No. 122 NPRM’’). Motorcycles (last accessed April 10,2012).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51652 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
comprehensively, focusing on wheeled motorcycles.9 In 2001, the burnished by making 200 stops from 30 regulatory, as well as behavioral and minimum hand lever force requirements mph at 12 feet per second per second roadway, countermeasures and for the heat fade test and water recovery (fps2). The service brake system must strategies. In October 2007, the test were decreased to facilitate the then be capable of stopping at specified Department announced the ‘‘Action manufacture of motorcycles with distances from 80 mph and from a speed Plan to Reduce Motorcycle Fatalities,’’ combined braking systems.10 Except for divisible by 5 mph that is 4 mph to 8 which will help reduce motorcycle the above changes, FMVSS No. 122 has mph less than the maximum motorcycle fatalities with new national safety and not been amended to keep pace with the speed. The post-burnish tests are training standards, a curb on the use of advancement of modern brake conducted in the same way as the pre- counterfeit labeling on helmets, a new technologies. burnish stops, and the service brakes focus on motorcycle-specific road must be capable of stopping the A. Current Requirements of FMVSS improvements, training for law motorcycle within the post-burnish No. 122 enforcement officers on how to spot specified stopping distances. unsafe motorcyclists, and a broad public FMVSS No. 122 applies to both two- Fade and recovery test. The fade and awareness campaign on rider safety.5 wheeled and three-wheeled recovery test compares the braking motorcycles. Among other performance of the motorcycle before II. Background requirements, the motorcycle and after ten 60-mph stops at a FMVSS No. 122, Motorcycle brake manufacturer must ensure that each deceleration of not less than 15 fps2. As systems, 49 CFR 571.122, took effect on motorcycle can meet performance a check test, three baseline stops 11 are January 1, 1974.6 FMVSS No. 122 requirements under conditions specified conducted from 30 mph at 10 to 11 fps2, specifies performance requirements for in paragraph S6, Test conditions, and as with the maximum brake lever and motorcycle brake systems. The purpose specified in paragraph S7, Test maximum pedal forces recorded during of the standard is to provide safe procedures. The tests in S7 include pre- each stop, and averaged over the three motorcycle brake performance under and post-burnishment effectiveness baseline stops. Ten 60-mph stops are normal and emergency conditions. The tests, a fade and recovery test, a partial then conducted at a deceleration rate of safety afforded by a motorcycle’s failure test, a water recovery test, and not less than 15 fps2, followed braking system is determined by several parking brake test. At the end of the test immediately by five fade recovery stops factors, including stopping distance, procedure sequence, the brake system from 30 mph at a deceleration rate of 10 linear stability while stopping, fade must pass a durability inspection. All to 11 fps2. The maximum brake pedal resistance, and fade recovery. A safe stops must be made without lockup of and lever forces measured during the system should have features that both any wheel. fifth recovery stop must be within plus guard against malfunction and stop the Equipment. Each motorcycle is 20 pounds and minus 10 pounds of the motorcycle if a malfunction should required to have either a split service baseline average maximum brake pedal occur in the normal service system. brake system or two independently and lever forces. FMVSS No. 122 was originally actuated brake systems. The former Partial failure test. In the event of a conceived to cover each of these aspects system encompasses a service brake pressure component leakage failure, the of brake safety by specifying equipment system combined with a hand operated remaining portion of the service brake and performance requirements parking brake system for three-wheeled system must continue to operate and appropriate for both two-wheeled and motorcycles. If a motorcycle has a shall be capable of stopping the three-wheeled motorcycles. Because hydraulic service brake system, it must motorcycle from 30 mph and 60 mph motorcycles differ significantly in also have a reservoir for each brake within specified stopping distances. The configuration from other motor vehicles, circuit, and a master cylinder reservoir brake failure indicator light must the agency established a separate brake label advising the proper grade of brake activate when the master cylinder fluid standard applicable only to this vehicle fluid. If the service brake system is a level decreases below the minimum category. Many of the FMVSS No. 122 split hydraulic type, a failure indicator specified level. test procedures are, however, similar to lamp is required. Additionally, three- Water recovery test. The water those for passenger cars.7 wheeled motorcycles must be equipped recovery test compares the braking Only a few changes have been made with a friction type parking brake with performance of the motorcycle before to the regulation since it was a solely mechanical means to retain and after the motorcycle brakes are established. In response to petitions, a engagement. The service brake system immersed in water for two minutes. 1974 final rule changed the application must be installed so that the lining Three baseline stops are conducted from of FMVSS No. 122 requirements for thickness of the drum brake shoes may 30 mph at 10 to 11 fps2, with the low-speed motor-driven cycles be visually inspected, either directly or maximum brake lever and pedal forces (motorcycles with 5-brake horsepower by using a mirror without removing the recorded during each stop, and averaged or less whose speed attainable in one drums, and so that disc brake friction over the three baseline stops. The mile is 30 miles per hour or less).8 In lining thickness may be visually motorcycle brakes are then immersed in 1978, NHTSA amended the FMVSS No. inspected without removing the pads. water for two minutes, followed 122 parking brake test to clarify the test Pre- and post-burnish tests. The immediately by five water recovery conditions and incorporate an service brake system and each stops from 30 mph at a deceleration rate independently actuated service brake interpretation applicable to three- of 10 to 11 fps2. The maximum brake system on each motorcycle must be pedal and lever forces measured during capable of stopping within specified 5 Id. at 1. the fifth recovery stop must be within 6 Response to Petitions for Reconsideration, distances from 30 miles per hour (mph) Motorcycle Brake Systems, 37 FR 11973 (June 16, and 60 mph. The brakes are then 11 The baseline check is used to establish a 1972). specific motorcycle’s pre-test performance to 7 See Brake Systems on Motorcycles Proposed 9 Final Rule, Motorcycle Brake Systems, 43 FR provide a basis for comparison with post-test Motor Vehicle Safety Standard, 36 FR 5516 (Mar. 46547 (Oct. 10, 1978). performance. This comparison is intended to ensure 24, 1971). 10 Final Rule, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety adequate brake performance, at reasonable lever 8 Final Rule, Motor-Driven Cycles, 39 FR 32914 Standards, Motorcycle Brake Systems, 66 FR 42613 and pedal forces, after numerous high speed or wet (Sept. 12, 1974). (Aug. 14, 2001). brake stops.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51653
plus 20 pounds and minus 10 pounds performance requirements, the informal published periodically by the agency of the baseline average maximum brake group reviewed comparative data on the and UN Web site.16 See the NPRM for pedal force and the lever force. relative stringency of the requirements additional discussion of the Parking brake test. For motorcycles from the research and studies and harmonization process.17 required to be equipped with a parking included the most stringent options. brake system, such system must be able C. Comments Received in Response to Additional testing was conducted to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to hold the motorcycle on a 30 percent confirm or refine the testing and grade, in both forward and reverse performance requirements. Qualitative The U.S., as a Contracting Party of the directions, for 5 minutes. A parking issues, such as which wet brake test to 1998 Agreement that voted in favor of brake indicator lamp must be provided. include, were discussed on the basis of establishing this GTR at the November 15, 2006 Session of the Executive B. Harmonization Efforts the original rationales and the appropriateness of the tests to modern Committee of the 1998 Agreement, is Globally, there are several existing conditions and technologies. In each of obligated under the 1998 Agreement to regulations, directives, and standards these steps, specific technical issues initiate the process for adopting the 18 that pertain to motorcycle brake were raised, discussed, and resolved, as provisions of the GTR. On September systems. As all share similarities, the discussed in the NPRM and below. The 17, 2008, NHTSA published a notice of Contracting Parties to the 1998 informal working group held a total of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to update Agreement under WP.29 tentatively eight meetings concerning the FMVSS No. 122 that was based on the determined that the development of a development of the GTR. In November Motorcycle Brake Systems GTR, which GTR under the 1998 Agreement would 2006, WP.29 approved the GTR on satisfied the U.S. obligations under the be beneficial. Motorcycle Brake Systems, and 1998 Agreement noted above. In an effort to select the best of established it in the Global Registry as In response to the NPRM, NHTSA existing performance requirements for a received comments from the following Global Technical Regulation No. 3. GTR, the U.S. and Canada conducted As explained in the NPRM, the GTR parties: The Motorcycle Industry analyses of the relative stringency of Council (MIC),19 American Honda on motorcycle brake systems consists of three national motorcycle brake system Motor Company, Inc. (Honda),20 Harley- a compilation of the most stringent and regulations. These were the UNECE Davidson Motor Company (Harley- relevant test procedures and Regulation No. 78, FMVSS No. 122, and Davidson),21 Robert Bosch LLC performance requirements from current the Japanese Safety Standard JSS 12–61. (Bosch),22 the Insurance Institute for standards and regulations. As a result of The subsequent reports, along with Highway Safety (IIHS),23 ASTM the comparison process, the selected proposed provisions of a GTR, were International (ASTM),24 SMO Group, performance requirements of the GTR presented at meetings of the Working L.L.C. (SMO),25 and the American are mainly drawn from the UNECE Party for Brakes and Running Gear Association for Justice (AAJ).26 (GRRF),12 and were made available in Regulation No. 78, the FMVSS No. 122 and the Japanese Safety Standard JSS the NPRM docket.13 While using 16 See Recommendations for Establishing Global different methodologies, the results 12–61 (JSS 12–61). The GTR is Technical Regulations Under the United Nations/ from the U.S./Canada report were comprised of several fundamental tests, Economic Commission for Europe 1998 Global Agreement, Motor Vehicle Safety, 66 FR 4893, similar to an industry led report that each with their respective test procedures and performance Docket No. NHTSA–00–7538 (Jan. 18, 2001); examined the issue under the GRRF.14 NHTSA’s Activities Under the United Nations These studies completed by the U.S., requirements. These tests and Economic Commission for Europe 1998 Global Canada, and the industry provided the procedures are listed below along with Agreement, 69 FR 60460, Docket No. NHTSA–03– basis for the development of the the national regulation on which they 14395 (Oct. 8, 2004); NHTSA’s Activities Under the are based: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe technical requirements of the GTR. 1998 Global Agreement, 71 FR 59582, Docket No. The informal group used the feedback • Burnish procedure (FMVSS No. 122) NHTSA–2003–14395 (Oct. 10, 2006); see also from the GRRF presentations to assist • Dry stop test with each service brake http://www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/wp29wgs/ with the completion of the proposed control actuated separately (UNECE wp29grrf/grrf-infmotobrake7.html for a record of all GRRF meetings and documents presented therein GTR, a copy of which can be found in Regulation No. 78/JSS 12–61) (last accessed April 26, 2010). 15 • the NPRM docket. Where national Dry stop test with all service brake 17 FMVSS No. 122 NPRM, 73 FR at 54022. regulations or standards address the systems applied simultaneously 18 While the 1998 Agreement obligates such same subject, e.g. dry stop or heat fade (FMVSS No. 122) Contracting Parties to initiate rulemaking within • High speed test (JSS 12–61) one year of the establishment of the GTR, it leaves the ultimate decision of whether to adopt the GTR 12 • The GRRF is made up of delegates from many Wet brake test (UNECE Regulation No. into their domestic law to the parties themselves. countries around the world, and who have voting 78/JSS 12–61) 19 Motorcycle Industry Council Inc. Comments, privileges. Representatives from manufacturing and • Heat fade test (UNECE Regulation No. Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0150–0017.1 (hereinafter consumer groups also attend and participate in the ‘‘MIC Comments’’). GRRF and informal working groups that are 78/JSS 12–61) 20 developing GTRs. Those that chose not to • Parking brake test (UNECE Regulation American Honda Motor Co., Inc. Comments, participate are kept apprised of the GTR progress No. 78/JSS 12–61) Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0150–0018.1 (hereinafter from progress reports which are presented at the ‘‘Honda Comments’’). • ABS tests (UNECE Regulation No. 78/ 21 GRRF meetings and then posted on the UN’s Web Harley-Davidson Motor Company, Docket No. JSS 12–61) NHTSA–2008–0150–0012 (hereinafter ‘‘Harley- site. • 13 See Docket Nos. NHTSA–2008–0150–0005.1, Partial failure test—split service brake Davidson Comments’’). NHTSA–2008–0150–0006.1. systems (FMVSS No. 122) 22 Robert Bosch LLC Comments, Docket No. 14 See Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0150–0007.1. • NHTSA–2008–0150–0016.1 (hereinafter ‘‘Robert Power-assisted braking system failure Bosch Comments’’). 15 See Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0150–0002.1. test (new) 23 The first formal proposal for a GTR concerning Insurance Institute for Highway Safety motorcycle brake systems was presented during the The GTR process was transparent to Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0150–0015.1. 58th GRRF session in September 2005. A more country delegates, industry 24 ASTM International Comments, Docket No. detailed report on the technical details, representatives, public interest groups, NHTSA–2008–0150–0011.1. deliberations and conclusions, which led to the 25 SMO Group, L.L.C. Comments, Docket No. proposed GTR, was provided separately as informal and other interested parties. Information NHTSA–2008–0150–0013.1. document No. GRRF–58–16. See Docket No. regarding the meetings and negotiations 26 American Association for Justice Comments, NHTSA–2008–0150–0004.1. was publicly available through notices Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0150–0014.1.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51654 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
All comments received were timely, III. General Improvements to FMVSS the antilock brake systems tests, and the and they are each considered in this No. 122 partial failure test.32 These proposed final rule and discussed below, with one Here, we discuss the proposed general terms, some of which may be similar or exception. The AAJ commented on the amendments and improvements to equivalent to existing terms defined language of the preamble concerning FMVSS No. 122, any comments elsewhere in 49 CFR Part 571, are used in the motorcycle brakes GTR in an implied preemption, and its comment received on these proposed effort to streamline the GTR and was neither related to the proposed improvements, and the agency’s regulatory text, nor to motorcycle maximize harmonization benefits. response to those comments. Where no Additionally, the proposed rule braking nor to motorcycle safety.27 comments were received on a proposed divided motorcycles into five categories, Because that comment did not amendment, or a certain aspect of an which are referenced in the GTR. These specifically relate to the proposal, and amendment, NHTSA has generally motorcycle categories are based on because NHTSA has already responded adopted those proposals in accordance number of wheels and maximum speed, to a similar AAJ comment in the context with the rationale detailed in the NPRM. and were originally defined in the UN of another Federal Register notice,28 we Although this final rule states as such Doc. S.R.1, as amended in May 2007.33 do not address the AAJ comment any for each amendment, we generally will We included these categories in the further here. not repeat the rationale and justification definitions portion of proposed FMVSS for aspects of the proposal that did not Comments were generally supportive No. 122 because under the GTR some receive comment. We refer readers to of NHTSA’s intent to harmonize FMVSS performance tests do not apply to the NPRM for the basis for those certain motorcycle categories, and No. 122 with other nations’ and amendments.29 regulatory bodies’ standards through the certain motorcycle categories have adoption of the GTR. The substantive A. New Terminology different performance requirements than comments received were concerned others. The NPRM proposed to revise or add Category 3–1 and category 3–3 mainly with test procedures rather than definitions in FMVSS No. 122 motorcycles are two-wheeled with brake system design requirements. (paragraph S4) where necessary to motorcycles. Category 3–1 motorcycles Specifically, Harley-Davidson, Honda, define terms used in the proposed are two-wheeled motorcycles with an and the Motorcycle Industry Council regulatory text, and we are largely engine cylinder capacity not exceeding (MIC) all commented on each of the retaining the definitions as proposed in 50 cm3 and a maximum design speed following three issues, which were the the NPRM. In order to streamline the not exceeding 50 kilometers per hour main issues in their submittals: proposed regulatory text to more closely (km/h). Category 3–3 motorcycles are • The NHTSA proposal in the NPRM reflect the GTR text, some of the new two-wheeled motorcycles with an proposed terms were common specified stopping distance as the sole engine cylinder capacity exceeding 50 terminology and definitions based on 3 compliance criterion for several cm or a maximum design speed the UN document titled ‘‘Special performance tests in FMVSS No. 122 exceeding 50 km/h. Category 3–2 Resolution No. 1 Concerning the motorcycles are three-wheeled while leaving out the option to use Common Definitions of Vehicle Mean Fully Developed Deceleration motorcycles of any wheel arrangement Categories, Masses and Dimensions with an engine cylinder capacity not (MFDD) where applicable. Commenters (S.R.1)’’ 30 (UN Doc. S.R.1) developed exceeding 50 cm3 and a maximum requested that NHTSA include MFDD as for the purposes of the GTRs. Thus, the design speed not exceeding 50 km/h. an alternative compliance option for NPRM proposed to add certain new Category 3–4 motorcycles are those measuring stopping performance. definitions to § 571.122 S4, Definitions, manufactured with three wheels • The NPRM specified that Peak that may be similar to existing 49 CFR asymmetrically arranged in relation to Braking Coefficient (PBC) be measured Part 571 definitions. For example, the longitudinal median plane with an by an ASTM skid-trailer method only. It current FMVSS No. 122 specifies that engine cylinder capacity exceeding 50 did not include other methods that were performance requirements must be met cm3 or a maximum design speed stated in the GTR for measurement of when the ‘‘motorcycle weight is exceeding 50 km/h. Finally, category 3– test surface friction coefficient. unloaded vehicle weight plus 200 5 motorcycles are motorcycles Commenters requested that the agency pounds.’’ 31 This is effectively manufactured with three wheels allow manufacturers the option to equivalent to the mass term ‘‘lightly symmetrically arranged in relation to choose which test method it uses to loaded’’ in the proposed rule, which is the longitudinal median plane with an measure PBC. the testing condition specified for the engine cylinder capacity exceeding 50 3 • proposed dry stop test (all service brake cm or a maximum design speed The NHTSA proposal changed controls actuated), the high-speed test, exceeding 50 km/h. ‘‘nominal PBC’’ as it appears in the GTR Motorcycle categories. Based on to just ‘‘PBC,’’ i.e., NHTSA removed the 29 See FMVSS No. 122 NPRM, 73 FR at 54023– comments from both Harley-Davidson word ‘‘nominal’’ in specifying the 54027. 30 friction coefficient of test track surfaces World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle 32 Lightly loaded means the sum of unladen used for motorcycle brake testing. Regulations (WP.29), Special Resolution No. 1 vehicle mass (mass of the vehicle with bodywork Concerning the Common Definitions of Vehicle and all factory fitted equipment, and fuel tanks Commenters requested that NHTSA Categories, Masses and Dimensions (S.R.1), U.N. filled to at least 90 percent) and driver mass ‘‘plus retain the GTR term ‘‘nominal,’’ based Doc. TRANS/WP.29/1045 (Sept. 15, 2005), available 15 kg for test equipment, or the laden condition, on best engineering practices. at http://www.unece.org/trans/doc/2005/wp29/ whichever is less.’’ FMVSS No. 122 S4, Definitions TRANS-WP29-1045e.pdf (last accessed April 26, (proposed). 2010). 33 See WP.29, Amendment to Special Resolution 27 The AAJ has submitted to several other 31 49 CFR 571.122, S6.1. ‘‘Unloaded vehicle No. 1 Concerning the Common Definitions of rulemaking dockets similar comments regarding the weight’’ is defined under 49 CFR 571.3(b) to mean Vehicle Categories, Masses, and Dimensions, U.N. agency’s preamble discussions of preemption. ‘‘the weight of a vehicle with maximum capacity of Doc. ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1045/Amend.1 (May 9, 28 See Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; all fluids necessary for operation of the vehicle, but 2007), available at http://www.unece.org/trans/ Electric-Powered Vehicles; Electrolyte Spillage and without cargo, occupants, or accessories that are main/wp29/wp29wgs/wp29gen/wp29fdoc/1000/ Electrical Shock Protection, 75 FR 33515, 33524–25 ordinarily removed from the vehicle when they are ECE-TRANS-WP29-1045a1e.pdf (last accessed April (Jun. 12, 2010). not in use.’’ 26, 2010).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51655
and the MIC regarding inconsistencies wheeled motorcycles, or ‘‘trikes,’’ as ‘‘vehicle’’ elsewhere in the proposed between category 3–4 and category 3–5 intended. standard as well. requirements, NHTSA has identified a Because the regulatory text of the Agency Response: Although the term series of mistakes in the proposed NPRM corresponded closely with that of ‘‘motorcycle’’ is used throughout the current FMVSS No. 122, we are not regulatory text relating to the the GTR, this mix-up was carried making this change as the commenter identification of these two categories. forward in the NPRM. Thus, there are a suggested. The term ‘‘vehicle’’ is the one For example, Harley-Davidson and the variety of inconsistencies in the used in the GTR’s regulatory definitions MIC commented that the stopping requirements for category 3–4 and as well as in the UN Doc. S.R.1, which distances for category 3–4 and 3–5 category 3–5 motorcycles throughout motorcycles listed in Table 2 is the source document for the vehicle the NPRM regulatory text. This includes categorization used in the GTR. For (Performance requirements, Dry stop Table 2 as noted by the commenters. test—single brake control actuated) these reasons, and in order to streamline Although the definitions of ‘‘Category the GTR and to maximize the benefits of appear to have been incorrectly reversed 3–4 motorcycle’’ and ‘‘Category 3–5 in the first two sections of the table: harmonization, we are in favor of motorcycle’’ given in paragraph S4 of keeping the term ‘‘vehicle’’ as used Single Brake System—Front Wheel(s) the proposed regulatory text are correct, Braking Only, and Single Brake throughout the proposed regulatory text. 34 most of the subsequent occurrences CBS. Bosch commented that electro- System—Rear Wheel(s) Braking Only. throughout the regulatory text are Proposed regulatory text Table 2 listed mechanical CBS (eCBS) should be incorrect. This mistake is easily distinguished from conventional CBS these tests as inapplicable to category 3– remedied by replacing ‘‘3–4’’ with ‘‘3– 4 motorcycles and listed a stopping because the failure mode for eCBS is 5,’’ and vice versa, in each place where 39 distance for category 3–5 motorcycles. different from CBS. Bosch suggested requirements apply to one or the other that the paragraph S4 definitions should These commenters noted that under the category. We have corrected the final proposed regulatory text, stopping exclude eCBS and that this could be rule regulatory text by applying these accomplished by rewording the distances would be inapplicable for corrections in each appropriate category 3–5 vehicles in these two definition for each motorcycle category instance. Concerning Table 2, to to say that CBS is ‘‘A service brake sections because those vehicles are maintain the desired ordering of required to have a combined or split system * * * mechanically linked and categories, we have moved each actuated by a single control.’’ service brake. However, as noted by the stopping distance specification listed for commenters, motorcycle-sidecar Bosch differentiates eCBS from category 3–5 to the corresponding conventional CBS because eCBS combinations of category 3–4 would category 3–4 row, and listed ‘‘not still be permitted to be equipped with systems have no mechanical or applicable’’ in each category 3–5 row. hydraulic link between the front and separate brakes. Finally, we have made a related These commenters further stated that rear brake circuits. With eCBS, the clarification in subsection S6.5.2.2(d)(3) it similarly thought the reference to activation of a front or rear service brake of the regulatory text, to add a category 3–5 in Table 4 (Performance by a rear or front brake control, specification of category 3–5. requirements, Power-assisted braking respectively, is accomplished by purely system failure test) should be category ‘‘Lightly loaded’’ definition. The MIC electronic means. Bosch stated that the 3–4 because category 3–5 vehicles will commented that in the parenthetical distinction between eCBS and carry split service systems or combined included in this definition, it was conventional CBS is important because break systems (CBS) and are covered in unclear as to which paragraphs the text the failure mode for eCBS is different the subsequent section of Table 4.35 was intending to refer.37 The proposed than for CBS, i.e., failed eCBS performs Agency Response: The regulatory text definition of ‘‘lightly loaded’’ referred to just like conventional, separate front of the NPRM was based on a version of ‘‘paragraphs 4.9.4 to 4.9.7’’ in a and rear brakes. Bosch explained that the GTR in which the definitions for parenthetical, and no such paragraphs ‘‘[a]n eCBS is subject to system failure, category 3–4 motorcycles and category existed in the proposed regulatory text. deactivation, and degradation, which results in a system that is functionally 3–5 motorcycles were listed incorrectly. Agency Response: The proposed range equivalent to a non-CBS with the Specifically, the category 3–4 and 3–5 quoted above was referring to the corresponding performance limits.’’ 40 notations were actually interchanged requirements as they were listed in the Bosch commented that their proposed with each other. This error was GTR. The proposed rule should have re-definition to make eCBS subject only addressed in the GTR by a correction listed the paragraphs as they were to the performance requirements for document which stated that the text ‘‘3– associated with the proposed regulatory single brake systems (outlined above) is 4’’ as it appears throughout the GTR text. The GTR paragraphs referenced are appropriate because of unique shall be replaced with ‘‘3–5,’’ and the a series of the ABS test procedures. The characteristics of eCBS that are not text ‘‘3–5’’ shall be replaced with the corresponding paragraphs in NHTSA’s 36 accounted for in the proposed rule. text ‘‘3–4.’’ This correction results in proposed regulatory text were S6.9.4 Bosch pointed out that an eCBS, unlike the GTR associating category 3–4 through S6.9.7. We have made this a CBS, may be equipped with a requirements with sidecar-equipped change in the final regulatory text. motorcycles and category 3–5 deactivation switch, a low-speed mode, ‘‘Unladen vehicle mass’’ definition. requirements with symmetric three- speed-dependent brake force The MIC suggested that the proposed distribution, or a variety of rider- 34 Harley-Davidson Comments, Docket No. definition of ‘‘lightly loaded’’ should selectable modes that tune the system NHTSA–2008–0150–0012 at 4; MIC Comments, use the term ‘‘motorcycle,’’ as opposed for riding conditions. Bosch stated that, Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0150–0017.1 at 3. to the term ‘‘vehicle’’ in the definition.38 ‘‘[t]hese additional eCBS characteristics 35 Id. They suggest that perhaps ‘‘motorcycle’’ differentiate an eCBS from a CBS and 36 See Global Technical Regulation No. 3, should be used in place of the term prescribe that the performance Corrigendum 1, Motorcycle Brake Systems, U.N. Doc. ECE/TRANS/180/Add.3/Corr.2 (Jan. 29, 2008), available at http://www.unece.org/trans/main/ 37 MIC Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– 39 Bosch Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– wp29/wp29wgs/wp29gen/wp29registry/gtr3.html 0150–0017.1 at 3. 0150–0016.1. (last accessed April 26, 2010). 38 Id. 40 Id. at 2.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51656 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
requirements for a CBS are not always B. Measurement of Performance Using give individual regulating bodies the applicable for an eCBS.’’ 41 Stopping Distance discretion to exclude MFDD. Honda Bosch suggested that, as an alternative The GTR specifies stopping stated that the ‘‘GTR does not specify to excluding eCBS from the regulatory performance requirements in terms of the option for each region to select only definitions, NHTSA could instead both stopping distance and MFDD. The one method of measurement.’’ Further, Honda noted that ‘‘the MFDD method define eCBS separately from CBS and NPRM proposed stopping distance as has been utilized by Honda as the provide separate performance the sole compliance criterion for several primary method for determining requirements to account for the different performance tests in proposed FMVSS No. 122 because, as noted in the stopping performance and has found it eCBS failure modes, similar to the way to be more reliable and repeatable than that ABS electrical failure is treated in proposal, stopping distance is a longstanding compliance criterion in the distance method.’’ S6.9.8 of the proposed FMVSS No. 122 FMVSS No. 122 as well as in NHTSA’s Similarly, the MIC pointed out that regulatory text.42 According to Bosch, standards for brake performance of both the GTR includes both MFDD and this would have to include an exception light vehicles and heavy vehicles.43 We stopping distance as alternative to the performance requirements further stated that the Executive performance criteria, which allows the defined in Table 2. Committee of the 1998 Agreement and manufacturer to choose to measure Agency Response: Bosch’s comment WP.29 are aware that the U.S. intended brake performance by either suggests that NHTSA should include to make these choices as allowed in the deceleration or stopping distance. It also specific test procedures to address the GTR. noted that deceleration-based possibility of a failed eCBS system. As Harley-Davidson, Honda, and the MIC performance tests are already part of Bosch acknowledges, this would entail each suggested that the agency should NHTSA’s proposal, in proposed defining eCBS separately from CBS, include the alternative criterion of paragraphs S6.6.3 et seq., and in paragraph S5.3.2, which refers to and/or adding separate test procedures MFDD, which is a calculated value ‘‘continuous deceleration recording.’’ for eCBS. If separate test procedures based on both speed and stopping distance measurements.44 MFDD and The MIC took issue with the rationale were added, eCBS would be treated stopping distance are both included in NHTSA gave for excluding MFDD: similarly to ABS, for which the NPRM the GTR as alternative performance has special procedures, including the The reason given [in the NPRM] for measures in several of the performance mandating brake performance measurement electrical failure test of S6.9.8. tests. exclusively by stopping distance is ‘‘to Bosch seems to suggest that system Harley-Davidson commented that, enhance the enforceability of the Standard as failure is more likely in the case of an based on its significant experience with opposed to providing optional performance eCBS than a conventional, mechanical MFDD, a vehicle that passes the measures,’’ and that ‘‘this is consistent with stopping distance measure will also how performance requirements are stated in CBS, which would seem logical because other Federal Motor Vehicle Safety of the purely electronic link between pass MFDD. Harley-Davidson also Standards.’’ We don’t agree that either is front and rear brake circuits. Certainly, commented that the GTR and the sufficient to justify departure from the GTR eCBS could be designed so as to be UNECE Regulation No. 78 allow either and not in the best interest of harmonization. readily deactivated, such as by measure to be used. Further, Harley- The MIC, Harley-Davidson, and equipping the motorcycle with an on/off Davidson stated that some of the Honda each requested that NHTSA switch for that purpose. In contrast, international inspection agencies prefer incorporate the MFDD as an alternative deactivation would not necessarily be MFDD, and that MFDD removes human performance measure in all appropriate easily accomplished with conventional factors from brake performance testing. tests in the final rule. CBS, but much would depend on the Harley-Davidson pointed out that an Agency Response: We are declining to details of the CBS system design. MFDD-like procedure is already adopt these commenters’ suggestions to incorporated into the proposed allow manufacturers a choice of Since eCBS systems currently are not regulatory text, specifically in proposed in use, it is difficult for us to evaluate performance measures in certain section S6.7.3.2(d)(1) pertaining to heat performance tests. As explained below, whether adding specific test procedures 45 fade tests. Harley-Davidson stated that providing manufacturers with an option to address eCBS system failure is as a result of inclusion of MFDD into the appropriate. Furthermore, in the FMVSS for compliance in FMVSS test heat fade test requirements, procedures is not common because it No. 122 proposal, there were no CBS- manufacturers and test facilities will be presents a substantial enforcement specific requirements that an eCBS required to apply MFDD for some difficulty for the agency. Moreover, would or should be incapable of measures. Finally, Harley-Davidson NHTSA participated in the development meeting, nor is eCBS addressed in the noted that the commentary of the GTR and during that process GTR separately from CBS. Since the accompanying the GTR recommends reached agreement with the other GTR does not include any proposal for using the MFDD measure ‘‘to maintain parties that we would continue to use failed CBS performance and since no consistency in the results.’’ stopping distance in all appropriate eCBS system is currently available Honda likewise requested that MFDD FMVSS No. 122 test procedures. The commercially, the agency believes that be included in NHTSA’s final rule. inclusion of a stopping distance establishing failed systems performance Honda commented that the GTR did not measurement procedure was an requirements for eCBS would be 43 important factor in U.S. approval of the premature. Therefore, we are electing FMVSS No. 122 NPRM, 73 FR at 54034. GTR. 44 See Honda Comments, Docket No. NHTSA– not to make any changes related to eCBS 2008–0018.1 at 2; MIC Comments, Docket No. When NHTSA stated in the NPRM at this time, but we will evaluate in the NHTSA–2008–0150–0017.1 at 2; Harley-Davidson that specifying stopping distance future whether such accommodations Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0150–0012 at enhances enforceability and referenced are necessary. 2. other FMVSSs to explain how 45 Although Harley-Davidson’s comments referred to this provision as part of the ‘‘wet fade tests,’’ we performance criteria are specified 41 Id. will refer to the referenced proposed tests as the elsewhere by the agency, we meant that 42 Id. at 3. ‘‘heat fade tests,’’ consistent with the NPRM. for various reasons (detailed below)
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51657
NHTSA believes stopping distance is a portion of the GTR preamble, the text and stated that proposed paragraphs better performance criteria than a was discussing the difference between S6.6.3 et seq. reference deceleration measurement of deceleration, and we do MFDD and MSD, and then stated that measurements for wet and heat fade not ordinarily provide manufacturer ‘‘[i]n order to maintain consistency in conditions even though it is not called options for compliance because it can the results, the MFDD was adopted MFDD. As explained above, the heat create an enforcement problem for the [instead of MSD] to measure braking fade test does not describe performance agency. For example, if we allow two deceleration performance.’’ 47 Thus, requirements in terms of deceleration, different measures of braking NHTSA does not believe this phrase but merely uses deceleration to specify performance in FMVSS No. 122 and, should be taken out of context and used how to determine how much force to when testing for compliance, NHTSA to characterize the GTR preamble apply to a brake when a test rider is measures stopping distance and finds a discussion of MFDD versus stopping actuating the brake for the purpose of failure to meet the minimum stopping distance. In the GTR, the performance heating it. The deceleration distance requirement test, NHTSA requirements for the different tests were measurement specified in section S6.6.3 would then be required to conduct as specified in the respective national (wet brake test) is for average additional testing to calculate MFDD. regulation on which the test was based. deceleration over the whole duration of Additionally, we believe that stopping However, based on U.S. insistence, the stop in accordance with paragraph distance is a preferable measurement of where the basis of a test was S5.3.2. This is not the same as MFDD as performance because MFDD assumes a performance measured by MFDD, the the MIC suggested. MFDD is the vehicle certain level of brake system GTR also specified a stopping distance deceleration calculated between 80 and responsiveness and does not consider equivalent performance measure, since 10 percent of the vehicle initial speed, performance over the entire braking the U.S. would not support a GTR that not the deceleration from initial speed event. We believe the stopping distance specified only measurement of to full stop. measure is less design-restrictive performance using MFDD. All GTR NHTSA notes that the 100 km/h dry because it allows a manufacturer to performance requirements refer to both stop test that was developed from the develop brake performance for the measurements of stopping distance and current FMVSS No. 122 specifies entire range of a braking event. MFDD in the table in paragraph 4.3.3 of performance in terms of stopping Similarly, since it accounts for the the GTR.48 distance only. It does not specify a distance traveled between the time a In response to Harley-Davidson’s deceleration-based criterion like MFDD. brake lever or pedal is applied and the observation that the heat fade test Similarly, the ABS stopping distance time the motorcycle actually begins to measures performance by referring to performance tests on low and high decelerate, stopping distance addresses MFDD, we do not agree. The commenter friction surfaces specify performance the potential problem of slow-acting referenced proposed paragraph measures in terms of stopping distance brake systems. S6.7.3.2(d)(1), which describes the force only. Hence, in these tests, there is no Further, none of the commenters that is to be applied to the brake lever alternative to measuring and recording presented any new information on this when actuated during the heating stops: stopping distance. issue. Nor did any commenter present ‘‘For the first stop: The constant control Finally, we note that the use of data to support assertions about force that achieves a vehicle stopping distance in the FMVSS does accuracy of MFDD, for example, that deceleration rate of 3.0–3.5 m/s 2 while not preclude the use of MFDD by MFDD is ‘‘more reliable and repeatable the vehicle is decelerating between 80 manufacturers or other parties. As long than the distance method.’’ 46 Since percent and 10 percent of the specified as there is a basis for correlating with stopping distance is used as one of the speed.’’ Since this specification is a way the FMVSS method, the test procedure measured values in the equation for to determine force, stopping distance is used to certify a motorcycle brake calculating MFDD, the accuracy of not appropriate here. Further, the system is left to the manufacturer’s MFDD depends to a great extent on specified braking force to heat the discretion. Specifically, FMVSSs do not stopping distance accuracy. MFDD is brakes is not a performance require manufacturers to test every not a measured value but is calculated requirement. In that paragraph, the test motor vehicle or piece of motor vehicle using measurements of speed and rider is just heating the brake. Paragraph equipment (e.g., tires) to the stopping distance. Because it is a factor S6.7.4, Hot brake stop—test conditions specifications in each safety standard. in the MFDD calculation, stopping and procedure, then specifies how to The FMVSSs set performance standards distance still would have to be test the hot brakes and paragraph S6.7.5, that motor vehicles and motor vehicle measured even if MFDD was the Performance requirements, specifies the equipment must meet when tested by specified compliance criterion in the comparative performance requirements the agency in accordance with the test NHTSA standard. Consequently, there is between the baseline stop procedures specified in the FMVSS little additional test burden in having to measurements and the hot brake stop associated with that performance collect stopping distance data. measurements, in terms of stopping requirement. Under the Motor Vehicle In response to the commenter that distance. Therefore, the use of a Safety Act, ‘‘a manufacturer or stated that the commentary deceleration specification to describe distributor of a motor vehicle or motor accompanying the GTR recommends the actuation force that a test rider is to vehicle equipment [must] certify * * * using the MFDD measure ‘‘to maintain use in the heat fade test is not that the vehicle or equipment complies 49 consistency in the results,’’ we point out inconsistent with the use of stopping with applicable [FMVSSs].’’ Under that this GTR preamble language was distance for all performance this enforcement mechanism, known as referring to the difference between the measurements. ‘‘self certification,’’ the burden for UNECE Regulation No. 78 specification The MIC similarly commented that ensuring that all new vehicles and of MFDD, and the JSS 12–61 proposed paragraph S5.3.2 describes equipment comply with Federal specification of vehicle mean saturated ‘‘continuous deceleration recording,’’ regulations is borne by the deceleration (MSD). In the relevant manufacturer. NHTSA does not perform 47 See Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0150–0002.1 at any pre-sale testing, approval, or 46 Honda Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– 11–12. 0018.1 at 2. 48 Id. at 40. 49 49 U.S.C. 30115(a).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51658 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
certification of vehicles or equipment, speed tolerance for this potential braking systems, FMVSS No. 121 and whether of foreign or domestic variation, but consistent with the GTR, FMVSS No. 135, specify the road test manufacture, before introduction into the proposed rule specified Japan’s surface using a PBC of 0.9 when the U.S. retail market. To ensure existing general tolerance of ± 5 km/h in measured using the American Society compliance with agency regulations, S6.1.4. for Testing and Materials (ASTM) NHTSA randomly tests certified As explained in the NPRM, a method E1136–93 (Reapproved 2003) standard vehicles or equipment (in accordance for correcting the measured stopping reference test tire, in accordance with with the test procedures laid out in the distance (in the event of the actual test ASTM Method E1337–90 (Reapproved regulations) to determine whether the speed deviating from the specified test 2002), at a speed of 40 mph without vehicles or equipment fail to comply speed, but within the ± 5 km/h water delivery. with applicable standards. For such tolerance) was proposed to compensate As explained in the NPRM, the GTR enforcement checks, NHTSA purchases for the difference between the specified defines the test surface using a PBC vehicles and equipment, which are then test speed and the actual speed where value instead of a skid number value tested according to the procedures the brakes were applied (see since peak braking coefficient is a more specified in the standards. If the vehicle S5.3.1(b)).52 The MIC commented that representative measure of the type of or equipment passes the test, no further the paragraph S6.1.4 reference to the braking tests performed in the action is taken. If the vehicle or proposed corrected stopping distance requirements with a rolling tire. equipment fails, NHTSA has the method in the proposed regulatory text However, the decision was made to not authority to request additional appeared to be incorrect.53 specify the method used to measure the information from the manufacturer on Agency Response: We agree with the coefficient of friction but leave it to the the basis for certification and to assess MIC. Paragraph S6.1.4 of the proposed national regulations to specify which of civil penalties for any confirmed regulatory text referred to the stopping the above test methods should be used violation.50 distance correction formula as being in to measure PBC. In the U.S., the ASTM Neither the National Traffic and paragraph S5.3.2(b). The actual stopping Method for measuring PBC to define Motor Vehicle Safety Act 51 (nor other distance correction formula was listed surface friction has been included in statutes NHTSA administers) nor in paragraph S5.3.1(b), as noted by the Federal motor vehicle safety standards NHTSA standards and regulations MIC. NHTSA has corrected this since the early-1990’s and was also used require that a manufacturer base its inaccurate reference in the final by the U.S. automotive industry prior to certifications on any particular tests, regulatory text. that date. Accordingly, the agency any number of specified tests or, for that proposed that the PBC of the test surface matter, any tests at all. A manufacturer D. Peak Braking Coefficient will be measured using the ASTM is required to exercise due care in The peak braking coefficient (PBC) is E1136–93 (Reapproved 2003) standard certifying its motor vehicles. It is the a measure of the coefficient of friction reference test tire, in accordance with responsibility of the manufacturer to of the test surface and is an important ASTM Method E1337–90 (Reapproved determine initially what test results, parameter in evaluating the brake 2002). The GTR maintains an option for computer simulations, engineering performance of a vehicle. PBC is Contracting Parties to specify in their analyses, or other information it needs effectively equivalent to the peak respective national regulations the value to enable it to certify that its vehicles friction coefficient (PFC) as defined in of PBC for the high-friction dry test comply with applicable Federal safety FMVSS No. 121, Air brake systems, and surface used for the motorcycle brake standards. Thus, manufacturers and test FMVSS No. 135, Light vehicle brake system tests. laboratories can measure performance systems. The GTR specifies test surface PBC Measurement Methodology. using stopping distance, or another conditions, one of which is that the Three commenters requested that method, for their own certification high-friction ‘‘test surface has a nominal NHTSA allow use of the test vehicle purposes as long as they can reasonably [PBC] of 0.9, unless otherwise itself to define PBC as described in the correlate test results using their chosen specified.’’ As explained in the NPRM, GTR. Harley-Davidson requested that method with those using the FMVSS for reasons of objectivity, we specified the agency reconsider our intent ‘‘to procedure and show that their in the proposed rule a PBC equal to 0.9 allow only ASTM [E1337–90] to certification tests provide a sound basis for the high-friction dry test surface determine road surface peak braking for compliance with the safety standard. used for the motorcycle brake system coefficient.’’ 54 Harley-Davidson stated tests. that, although NHTSA has a history of C. Motorcycle Test Speed and Corrected FMVSS No. 122 currently specifies using the ASTM method, the use of the Stopping Distance that the road tests be conducted on an test vehicle itself to determine wheel The GTR set deceleration or stopping 8-foot-wide level roadway having a skid lock threshold, as allowed by UNECE distance performance requirements for a number of 81. The skid number is also Reg. No. 78, is a widely used procedure specified initial test speed. While a measure of the coefficient of friction that is well understood within the professional test riders can approach of the test surface and is derived by motorcycle industry. Harley-Davidson this initial test speed, it is unlikely that measuring the friction using a locked commented that the ASTM method the test will be started at the exact speed wheel, whereas the PBC is derived by involves the use of additional test specified, affecting the stopping measuring the peak surface friction equipment, and adds further complexity distance measurement. The current before wheel lockup occurs. PBC is a and costs to the testing process, while FMVSS No. 122 does not specify a more relevant surface friction NHTSA has acknowledged that the two measurement for non-locked wheel methods yield comparable results. 50 See, e.g., 49 U.S.C. 30165, 30166 (safety tests, such as those included in FMVSS The MIC commented that the standards); 49 U.S.C. 32308, 32309 (consumer No. 122 and in the GTR. Other Federal intention of the GTR was for both the information); 49 U.S.C. 32507 (bumper standards); ASTM method and the alternative 49 U.S.C. 32706, 32709 (odometer fraud). motor vehicle safety standards for 51 National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act UNECE Reg. No. 78 method to be of 1966, Public Law 89–563, 80 Stat. 718 (1966) 52 FMVSS No. 122 NPRM, 73 FR at 54024. (now codified, as amended, at 49 U.S.C. 30101 et 53 MIC Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– 54 Harley-Davidson Comments, Docket No. seq.). 0150–0017.1 at 3. NHTSA–2008–0150–0012 at 2.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51659
available as test options.55 The MIC to measure the PBC.’’ 58 The use of the responsibility of the manufacturer to stated that the choice of method should phrase ‘‘which of the above test determine initially what test results, be up to the manufacturer or other methods’’ in this preamble statement computer simulations, engineering testing entity. The MIC also pointed out makes clear that the Contracting Parties analyses, or other information it needs that in some circumstances, where intended that national regulations to enable it to certify that its vehicles length and width of the test course are adopting the GTR could adopt either of comply with applicable Federal safety limited, the ASTM E1337–90 method the listed test methods. standards. Thus, manufacturers and test cannot be performed. Thus, consistent with the GTR, this laboratories can use the UNECE Reg. No. final rule specifies that measurement of Honda expressed a more specific 78 method, or another method, for their the PBC is conducted in accordance difficulty regarding the PBC own certification purposes as long as with the ASTM E1337–90 test method, they can reasonably correlate test results measurement. Honda stated that it has or the first option in paragraph 4.1.1.3 utilized a test facility that cannot using their chosen method with those of the GTR, as proposed.59 NHTSA’s using the FMVSS procedure and show accommodate the ASTM E1337–90 selection of the ASTM method procedure due to its relatively small that their certification tests provide a represents what we consider to be a sound basis for compliance with the size.56 Honda stated that it would have well-defined baseline that is appropriate safety standard. The GTR preamble to move its manpower, vehicles, and for use in a safety standard. As explains that despite the differences in testing equipment from its current on- explained above, other FMVSSs specify methodology, ‘‘the ABS validation site location to a much more distant one the ASTM E1337–90 test method to research program demonstrated that, in order to accommodate the ASTM measure peak braking coefficient. Thus, when properly conducted, both E1337–90 test procedure, and that NHTSA is immediately prepared to start methods yield comparable results for having to do so would be very testing in accordance with this test evaluating the test surface.’’ 61 Thus, it burdensome and expensive and could method, as opposed to the UNECE Reg. would appear that this approach will force product development delays. No. 78 test method. While there may, as not impose a great financial burden on Additionally, Honda stated that moving a couple commenters noted, be no manufacturers. This approach has a testing to other Honda facilities would quantifiable safety benefit to choosing longstanding history in brake system also cause schedule conflicts with one test method over the other, there is compliance tests. testing of other on-road products, and certainly an enforcement concern for the As a practical matter, we note that in may ultimately force Honda to build agency, both because NHTSA does not the UNECE Reg. No. 78 method, the additional testing facilities at great have as much experience conducting surface friction coefficient is determined expense. PBC measurements for compliance tests by measuring the maximum braking rate Agency Response: The GTR leaves to using the UNECE Reg. No. 78 test with ABS disabled, for the front wheel individual national legislation the method, and because proving and rear wheel brakes applied methodology that is selected for noncompliance is substantially more simultaneously, and with constant brake measurement of test surface friction. complicated when the agency provides forces applied throughout the tests. This The text of the GTR makes this clear in manufacturers with multiple options for is not practicable for some ABS- paragraph 4.1.1.3, Measurement of PBC, compliance, as explained in section III.B equipped motorcycles where ABS which states that ‘‘PBC is measured as above. cannot be disabled. This is a particular specified in national or regional As discussed above in section III.B, concern since FMVSS No. 122, under legislation using either: (a) [the ASTM Federal motor vehicle safety standards the current amendment, for the first E1337–90 test method]; or (b) [the (FMVSSs) do not require manufacturers time will include procedures UNECE Reg. No. 78 method].’’ 57 to test every motor vehicle or piece of specifically for ABS. For these reasons, Similarly, the formal statement of motor vehicle equipment to the this final rule amends FMVSS No. 122 technical rationale and justification that specifications in each safety standard. so that it will specify that when NHTSA precedes the GTR regulatory text states The FMVSSs set performance standards tests for the performance criteria listed that the ‘‘Contracting Parties [] agreed to that motor vehicles and motor vehicle in the standard, PBC will be measured list both methods in the regulatory text equipment must meet when tested by using the ASTM procedure. of the GTR, but decided to leave it to the the agency in accordance with the test Nominal PBC versus PBC. Harley- national regulations to specify which of procedures specified in the FMVSS Davidson urged NHTSA to reconsider the above test methods should be used associated with that performance the language the agency chose for requirement. Neither the National specifying the PBC measure of the high- 60 55 MIC Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act friction test surface, stating that the 0150–0017.1 at 1. (nor other statutes NHTSA administers) proposed language appears to require an 56 Honda Comment, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– nor NHTSA standards and regulations exact PBC measure of 0.9, rather than 0150–0018.1 at 2. Honda gave no further details, but require that a manufacturer base its accepting a ‘‘nominal PBC’’ of 0.9.62 we assume the inability of its test facility to certifications on any particular tests, accommodate the ASTM E1337–90 method has to Harley-Davidson commented that it did do with the additional track length needed to get any number of specified tests or, for that not understand NHTSA’s intent in a skid trailer up to the test speed of 64 km/h and matter, any tests at all. A manufacturer removing the term ‘‘nominal’’ and maintain that speed while braking the trailer’s test is required to exercise due care in NHTSA’s reference to ‘‘objectivity,’’ wheel, compared to the relatively shorter distance certifying its motor vehicles. It is the required to do the same from 60 km/h with a test other than as a desire for the agency to motorcycle while braking it to a stop. maintain consistency with other 58 57 See Global Technical Regulation No. 3, Global Technical Regulation No. 3, Motorcycle NHTSA safety standards. Harley- Amendment 1, Motorcycle Brake Systems, U.N. Brake Systems, U.N. Doc. ECE/TRANS/180/Add.3 Doc. ECE/TRANS/180/Add.3/Amend.1 (July 31, at 11 (Dec. 21, 2006). Davidson went on to state: 2008); Global Technical Regulation No. 3, 59 See proposed paragraph S6.1.1.3. FMVSS No. Motorcycle Brake Systems, U.N. Doc. ECE/TRANS/ 122 NPRM, 73 FR at 54039. 61 Global Technical Regulation No. 3, Motorcycle 180/Add.3 (Dec. 21, 2006), available at http:// 60 National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act Brake Systems, U.N. Doc. ECE/TRANS/180/Add.3 www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/wp29wgs/ of 1966, Public Law 89–563, 80 Stat. 718 (1966) at 11 (Dec. 21, 2006). wp29gen/wp29registry/gtr3.html (last accessed (now codified, as amended, at 49 U.S.C. 30101 et 62 Harley-Davidson Comments, Docket No. April 27, 2010). seq.). NHTSA–2008–0150–0012 at 2–3.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51660 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Measures of PBC are meant to be a PBC of the test surface is unacceptable that ESC systems meet minimum statement of a current condition on a from a compliance standpoint because it requirements. In the rulemaking that particular section of road. They are reported represents an unstated range of values. established FMVSS No. 126, NHTSA as an average of measures and, in the case of Specifying ‘‘nominal PBC’’ fails to limit ASTM E1337–90, as an average of averages. originally proposed a tolerance around Such a report is in the nature of ‘‘nominal’’ the friction coefficient in an objective or the surface PBC specification, but as we understand the term. We are uncertain useful way. Under the National Traffic ultimately specified simply a PBC of 0.9 whether NHTSA is effectively proposing to and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, FMVSSs for the test surface in the final rule.72 require vehicle manufacturers to expend prescribed by NHTSA must be ‘‘stated The agency explained that, although the extra resources to develop the entire test in objective terms.’’ 66 proposed tolerance was an attempt to surface to attain an actual PBC of 0.9 rather The agency’s intent is not to require increase objectivity, such a tolerance than accepting a report of the nominal that high-friction brake tests be created the possibility of compliance condition of the same test surface. conducted only on surfaces with a PBC tests for FMVSS No. 126 being Harley-Davidson also quoted a of exactly 0.9. Rather, the intent is to set performed on lower friction coefficient discussion that was included in the a target PBC that acts as a reference surfaces than those for other braking technical rationale accompanying the point. In this way, those who are standards, which is not the intention. GTR, at section 5.2.7.1, which lays out involved with brake system NHTSA explained that while it is in detail the reasons why the GTR development, such as motorcycle unlikely that any facility has a surface specifies a nominal PBC of 0.9 rather manufacturers, can use test surfaces with exactly that friction coefficient, than an exact value. with any PBC below 0.9 in order to compliance testing for other braking Honda also commented on this issue. ensure compliance at least at the 0.9 standards is performed on a surface Honda stated that ‘‘[i]t is difficult to level.67 On the other hand, NHTSA, and with a PBC/PFC slightly higher than the maintain the PBC equal to exactly 0.9, laboratories conducting compliance specification, i.e., slightly less-slippery and the parties which contributed to the tests, would use surfaces having a PBC than the surface required, which creates GTR discussed this issue many times, of 0.9 or somewhat greater to allow a a margin for clear enforcement. Here, as agreeing to allow for slight reasonable margin for friction variations in the ESC final rule, we will continue variances.’’ 63 Honda stated that and other test surface variables. As to use consistent compliance test referring to an exact PBC value would such, manufacturers are provided notice conventions across all FMVSSs, and result in an unnecessary testing burden regarding what is required under the specify an unqualified surface PBC. for which there will be no safety benefit. standard. Honda suggested that, should NHTSA Keeping in mind that FMVSS are E. Test Sequence deem it necessary to specify a tolerance established to set minimum The NPRM proposed a specific testing to improve objectivity, such a tolerance performance requirements, order to eliminate any potential effect of should be included in the FMVSS No. manufacturers presumably would want the test sequence on braking 122 Test Procedure.64 to design to a level that exceeds the performance and to harmonize with the The MIC comment raised similar minimum.68 We believe specifying a GTR. The proposed sequence was concerns, saying that testing costs will PBC of 0.9 without further qualification selected based on increasing severity of go up rather than be decreased, as is the best way to identify exactly what the test on the motorcycle and its brake described as a goal of the proposal, if the safety standard requires and to components, in order to preserve the the required PBC is set at exactly 0.9.65 eliminate the need for interpretation as condition of the brakes. The MIC stated: to what is expected for compliance. The current FMVSS No. 122 specifies We agree that objectivity is desirable if the This approach of specifying an a particular sequence in which tests inclusion of an absolute is useful. However, unqualified PBC is consistent with how should be conducted, ending with the in this application we do not believe it is surface peak friction coefficients are wet brake test. The fade test would have either useful or desirable. It’s difficult to set specified in FMVSS No. 121, Air Brake the greatest effect on the condition of 69 the PBC equal to 0.9 and this is recognized Systems, FMVSS No. 135, Light the motorcycle brakes, which could in the GTR that describes the attributes of the Vehicle Brake Systems,70 and in FMVSS high-friction brake surface as having ‘‘a affect brake performance in subsequent No. 126, Electronic Stability Control tests. For this reason, current FMVSS nominal peak braking coefficient (PBC) of Systems.71 FMVSS No. 126 mandates 0.9.’’ We are not suggesting a specific No. 122 specifies that a re-burnishing be tolerance, but believe nominal, based on best Electronic Stability Control (ESC) conducted after the fade test, to refresh engineering practices, is essential to systems on light vehicles, and the brake components. In order to satisfactorily perform the test or achieve establishes test procedures to ensure eliminate the need for re-burnishing, the repeatability and should not have been GTR specifies that the fade test be the deleted from the GTR language. 66 49 U.S.C. 30111(a). See Chrysler Corp. v. NHTSA, 472 F.2d 659, 675 (6th Cir. 1972) last of the motorcycle brake system Agency Response: Inclusion of the (discussing Congressional intent and explaining performance tests. ‘‘nominal’’ descriptor in specifying the that ‘‘objective criteria are absolutely necessary so The ABS test would be the next most that the question of whether there is compliance severe test, which will result in braking 63 Honda Comment, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– with the standard can be answered by objective at or near the limits of traction. Thus, 0150–0018.1 at 2. measurement and without recourse to any subjective determination’’). the GTR specifies that the ABS test 64 For each FMVSS, NHTSA’s Office of Vehicle 67 Safety Compliance (OVSC) publishes detailed Surfaces with lower coefficients of friction are would precede the fade test, for Laboratory Test Procedures for the purpose of more slippery than surfaces with higher friction motorcycles equipped with ABS. The providing guidelines for obtaining data in OVSC coefficients, and thus provide lower levels of remaining tests are not as severe on the braking force and poorer directional stability and compliance testing programs and a uniform data brake system and tires, therefore the recording format for NHTSA contractor laboratories. control during braking. See http://www.nhtsa.gov/Vehicle+Safety/ 68 See 49 U.S.C. 30102(a)(8) (defining ‘‘motor GTR sequenced them according to Test+Procedures (last accessed April 29, 2010). In vehicle safety standard’’ as a ‘‘minimum standard increasing test speed for the dry stop the near future, NHTSA will likely revise the for motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment FMVSS No. 122 Test Procedure in accordance with performance’’). 72 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, this final rule. 69 See 49 CFR 571.121, S5.3.1.1, S5.3.6.1, S6.1.7. Electronic Stability Control Systems, Controls and 65 MIC Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– 70 See 49 CFR 571.135, S6.2.1. Displays; Final Rule, 72 FR 17236, 17267–17268 0150–0017.1 at 1–2. 71 See 49 CFR 571.126, S6.2.2. (2007).
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51661
performance tests, followed by the wet Agency Response: We note that the TABLE 2—TEST SEQUENCE SPECIFIED brake performance test. Consistent with order in which the test procedures were IN FINAL REGULATORY TEXT—Con- the GTR, we proposed to specify the test listed in Table 1 corresponded to the tinued sequence using a table in the regulation. paragraph number sequence of the The proposed test sequence table was regulatory text of the proposed safety Test order Paragraph identical to Table 1 here. standard. Also, the procedures listed under No. 6 in Table 1 are required only 5.4. Power-assisted braking TABLE 1—PROPOSED TEST SEQUENCE for certain equipment which may not be system failure ...... S6 .11 fitted to the test motorcycle, e.g., a 6. Heat fade ...... S6 .7 Test order Paragraph parking brake or power-assisted brakes. Nevertheless, we agree it is clearer if the F. Brake Application Force 1. Dry stop—single brake con- procedures appear in Table 1 in the Measurement trol actuated ...... S6 .3 same order in which they are to be 2. Dry stop—all service brake Controls for the application of the performed. Therefore, we are changing controls actuated ...... S6 .4 brakes can include hand and foot the table in the regulatory text as 3. High speed ...... S6 .5 actuated control levers. The various requested, by putting the Heat Fade test 4. Wet brake ...... S6 .6 national standards and regulations have at the end of the list. Table 2 illustrates 5. Heat fade* ...... S6 .7 slightly different brake control input how the table appears in the final 6. If fitted: force limits, and in the case of a hand 6.1. Parking brake system .. S6 .8 regulatory text, which is referred to in actuated control lever, there is also a 6.2. ABS ...... S6 .9 paragraph S6.1.7, Test Sequence. 6.3. Partial failure, for split discrepancy as to the location of application of the input force. One service brake systems ..... S6 .10 TABLE 2—TEST SEQUENCE SPECIFIED 6.4. Power-assisted braking consistent element is the location and IN FINAL REGULATORY TEXT system failure ...... S6 .11 direction of application of the input force to the foot actuated lever (i.e., * Heat fade is always the last test to be car- Test order Paragraph ried out. pedal). Consistent with the GTR, the 1. Dry stop—single brake con- NPRM proposed input forces for each Harley-Davidson and the MIC both trol actuated ...... S6 .3 test in accordance with the national stated that the test sequence in Table 1 2. Dry stop—all service brake regulation on which the individual test would be clearer if the procedures listed controls actuated ...... S6 .4 is based, to minimize confusion. The as items No. 5 and No. 6 were 3. High speed ...... S6 .5 respective input forces are noted in 73 4. Wet brake ...... S6 .6 Table 3. A discussion on brake control reversed. They suggested that the heat 5. If fitted: fade test, listed as No. 5 in Table 1, 5.1. Parking brake system .. S6 .8 actuation force specifications for should be listed last since it is always 5.2. ABS ...... S6 .9 evaluating motorcycles equipped with the last test in the sequence, even if 5.3. Partial failure, for split ABS is provided below in paragraph procedures under No. 6 are required. service brake systems ..... S6 .10 IV.G.
TABLE 3—INPUT FORCES ON HAND AND FOOT ACTUATED BRAKE CONTROL LEVERS
Regulation Foot control, FP (N) Hand control, FL (N)
FMVSS No. 122 ...... 25 < FP < 400 10 < FL < 245 UNECE Regulation No. 78/JSS 12–61 ...... FP < 350 FL < 200
As discussed in the NPRM, with proposed since no commenter G. Brake Temperature Measurement respect to the location of the input force mentioned this proposed requirement. Brake test requirements typically on the hand-controlled lever, in Finally, for those motorcycles that use specify that initial brake temperature developing the GTR, there was hydraulic fluid for brake force (IBT) be measured at the start of each agreement that none of the three transmission, the GTR stipulates that braking performance run to enhance test national regulations is clear enough the master cylinder shall have a sealed, repeatability. The two measurement with respect to measuring the location covered, separate reservoir for each methods that are generally used in brake of the input force on the hand- brake system. This includes one or more standards and regulations worldwide controlled lever. In an effort to define a separate reservoirs located within the include (1) the use of plug-type common practice, the GTR includes a same container, such as commonly thermocouples, and (2) the use of revised description for the location of found on passenger cars. Such rubbing-type thermocouples. We the input force on the control lever and containers may only have one sealed, proposed to retain the plug-type its direction of application, based on covered filling cap. The proposed rule thermocouples brake temperature ISO 8710:1995, Motorcycles—Brakes incorporated these hydraulic service measurement method in FMVSS No. and braking devices—tests and brake system requirements in paragraph 122. measurement methods. Consistent with S5.1.9. Since no commenter mentioned The two methods of measuring the the GTR, the NPRM proposed the GTR’s this proposed regulatory text, we are IBT were included in the GTR and each harmonized specification of input force adopting these provisions as proposed. Contracting Party could specify which in proposed paragraph S6.2.3. NHTSA temperature measurement would be is adopting this specification as accepted in its national regulation.
73 MIC Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– 0150–0017.1 at 3; Harley-Davidson Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0150–0012 at 5.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51662 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
FMVSS No. 122, as well as all the other GTR specifies burnishing the brakes We are aware that for CBS-equipped brake standards in the Federal motor separately since this would result in a motorcycles, the burnish procedure may vehicle safety standards, currently more complete burnish for both front provide a slightly higher level of specifies the plug-type thermocouple for and rear brakes, as compared with the burnish since a portion of the front and measuring the initial brake temperature. current FMVSS No. 122 method of using rear foundation brakes may be activated NHTSA does not have experience using both brakes simultaneously. Hence, by both the hand lever and the foot the rubbing-type thermocouple either in consistent with the GTR, the proposed pedal. brake research or compliance testing. rule specified that each brake be NHTSA believes that the language of Given the limitations of the rubbing- burnished for 100 decelerations. the proposed procedure in S6.2.5.2(c) is type thermocouple described in the Harley-Davidson commented that it consistent with our intent, and NPRM, we continue to believe that the may not be possible or necessary in the therefore, we elect not to modify the plug-type thermocouple would be the case of combined or split-service brake proposal as requested in this comment. more effective option for measuring IBT systems to actuate each brake separately Since no commenter mentioned any in the updated FMVSS No. 122. We did for the burnishing procedure of the other aspect of the proposed burnishing not receive any comment on this aspect proposed rule.74 Harley-Davidson, thus, procedure, we are adopting the of the proposal. Therefore, as in current recommended appending language such burnishing procedure as proposed, for FMVSS No. 122 and as in the proposed as ‘‘unless a split service or combined the reasons explained here and in the rule, updated FMVSS No. 122 will brake system is present’’ to the NPRM.75 specify that initial brake temperature is S6.2.5.2(c) burnishing test procedure I. Notice of Wear measured by plug-type thermocouples. specification. With respect to the actual brake Agency Response: The test condition The NPRM proposed the GTR temperature values specified for testing specification in proposed paragraph requirement that ‘‘friction material purposes, consistent with the GTR, the S6.2.5.2(c) (Brake application) stated, thickness shall be visible without NPRM proposed that FMVSS No. 122 ‘‘Each service brake system control disassembly, or where the friction specify as a test condition an IBT actuated separately.’’ It did not say that material is not visible, wear shall be between 55 °C and 100 °C in order to the front and rear brakes have to be assessed by means of a device designed encompass all brake systems. Since no applied separately. The proposed for that purpose.’’ 76 Current FMVSS No. commenter addressed this proposed test language accurately conveys the intent 122 requires that the ‘‘brake system [ ] condition, today’s final rule continues of the requirement, which is that each be installed so that the lining thickness to specify this IBT range as a test control, if there is more than one control of drum brake shoes may be visually condition for each test procedure for the on the motorcycle, be actuated inspected, either directly or by use of a reasons explained in the NPRM. independently of any other brake mirror without removing the drums, and controls. so that disc brake friction lining H. Burnishing Procedure The language suggested by Harley- thickness may be visually inspected The current FMVSS No. 122 includes Davidson would not account for without removing the pads.’’ 77 a burnishing procedure. In order to combined brake systems having both Allowing wear of friction material harmonize with the GTR, we proposed hand lever and foot pedal controls. thickness to be assessed either visually a slight variation of the current Under the procedure in S6.2.5.2(c), such or by means of a device increases design procedure, to include some aspects of a system would be burnished by freedom while serving the same purpose procedures currently used by applying the front lever of the CBS- of indicating friction material wear, motorcycle manufacturers in equipped system (which could apply without the need for disassembly. We preparation for UNECE Regulation No. both front and rear brakes to varying did not receive comment on this aspect 78/JSS 12–61 type approval testing. degrees, depending on the CBS design) of the proposal and, therefore, are The burnishing procedure serves as a in a series of 100 stops, and then the adopting this requirement as proposed. conditioning of the foundation brake burnishing would be repeated using the components to permit the brake system rear lever or pedal of the CBS-equipped IV. Specific Performance Test to achieve its full capability. Burnishing system (which also could apply both Improvements to FMVSS No. 122 typically matches the friction front and rear brakes to varying degrees, Here, we discuss the proposed components to one-another and results depending on the CBS design) in a specific test procedures and in more stable and repeatable stops second series of 100 stops. performance criteria improvements to during testing. All Federal motor The intent of the contracting parties FMVSS No. 122, any comments vehicle safety standards for brake in developing separate burnish for front received on these proposed systems (FMVSS Nos. 105, 121, 122, and rear brakes was to ensure a more improvements, and the agency’s and 135) currently include a burnishing complete burnish compared with the response to those comments. Where no procedure. The burnishing procedure of current FMVSS No. 122 where a 200- comments were received on a proposed current FMVSS No. 122 specifies 200 stop burnish procedure is required with test procedure or performance criteria, stops with both brakes applied simultaneous application of both brake or a certain aspect of those simultaneously, decelerating from a controls. The current burnish procedure requirements, NHTSA has generally speed of 30 mph at 12 fps2 with an IBT results in more variability of the brake adopted those proposals in accordance between 55 °C and 65 °C (130 °F and burnish since the test rider determines with the rationale detailed in the NPRM. 150 °F). the mix of front to rear brake forces used Although this final rule states as such As explained in the NPRM, the to attain the specified deceleration level for each amendment, we generally will burnishing procedure in the GTR is during the burnish stops. The GTR not repeat the rationale and justification based on FMVSS No. 122, but also burnish procedure ensures a more for aspects of the proposal that did not includes some aspects of procedures complete burnish for both brakes since receive comment. We refer readers to currently used by motorcycle each brake control is used separately. manufacturers in preparation for 75 See FMVSS No. 122 NPRM, 73 FR at 54026. UNECE Regulation No. 78/JSS 12–61 74 Harley-Davidson Comments, Docket No. 76 See FMVSS No. 122 NPRM, 73 FR at 54038. type approval testing. For example, the NHTSA–2008–0150–0012 at 4. 77 49 CFR 571.122, S5.1.5, Other requirements.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51663
the NPRM for the basis for those control actuated dry stop test in the the high-speed test is to evaluate the full amendments.78 NPRM regulatory text appeared to be braking performance of the motorcycle missing a force value for motorcycle from a high speed and with both front A. Dry Stop Test—Single Brake Control category 3–4 (proposed paragraph and rear brakes applied simultaneously. Actuated S6.3.2(d)(2)(ii)).81 They pointed out that The test is performed from a speed of This final rule is adopting the this test procedure specification should 160 km/h or 0.8 of the vehicle’s proposed provision for a dry stop test read ‘‘≤ 500 N for motorcycle category maximum speed (Vmax), whichever is with single brake control that is based 3–4’’ instead of ‘‘≤ for motorcycle less. on UNECE Regulation No. 78 and JSS category 3–4.’’ No other commenter Based on the NHTSA/Transport 12–61 tests.79 Currently, FMVSS No. mentioned this proposed test procedure. Canada Review of Motorcycle Brake 122 does not have a requirement that Agency Response: We agree with the Standards,82 it was determined during tests each brake system separately commenters that the force value was development of the GTR that 100 mph except for tests with the brakes in a pre- missing from the paragraph (160 km/h) or 0.8 Vmax is adequate for burnished condition. All other tests S6.3.2(d)(2)(ii) test procedure a high speed effectiveness test since the with the brake system fully operational specification. Consistent with the GTR, benefits of testing from higher speeds do require front and rear brake application we have revised this paragraph to not warrant the potential hazard to simultaneously. In the main FMVSS No. specify a foot control brake actuation which the test rider is exposed. 122 dry stop test with both brake force of 500 N for category 3–4 Consistent with the GTR, the high-speed controls actuated simultaneously, the motorcycles. Since no commenter test procedure specified in this final test rider judges how to apportion the disagreed with the adoption of the rule limits the test speed to 160 km/h to actuation force to the front and rear proposed single brake control-actuated address test facility limitations and brakes. This may give less repeatable dry stop test, this final rule includes the safety concerns. As proposed, this final test results or allow the test rider to dry stop test with single brake control rule also specifies that the high speed compensate for a ‘‘weak’’ brake. As based on UNECE Regulation No. 78/JSS test be conducted with the motorcycle such, an additional test specifying that 12–61 requirements, for the reasons engine connected, i.e., with the clutch each brake be tested individually will explained in the NPRM. Unlike present engaged, and the transmission in the improve FMVSS No. 122. UNECE/JSS standards, the requirement highest gear, which has the effect of The purpose of a dry stop test will specify only stopping distance as enhancing motorcycle stability during requirement with the separate actuation the measurement criterion and will not braking from high speeds. of each brake control is to ensure a include MFDD as an optional criterion. The MIC noted a typographical error minimum level of motorcycle braking When NHTSA conducts compliance in the proposed regulatory text for the performance on a dry road surface for testing, we will use stopping distance as high-speed test in the specification for each independent brake system. Current the performance measure. the initial brake temperature FMVSS No. 122 performance measurement.83 The MIC correctly B. Dry Stop Test—All Service Brake requirements are quite different as they noted that, consistent with the GTR, the Controls Actuated specify motorcycles be tested in what is initial brake temperature should be effectively the lightly-loaded This final rule is also adopting the specified as ‘‘≥ 55 °C and ≤ 100 °C.’’ 80 condition, and with all brake controls proposed provision to test the service Agency Response: We agree with the actuated simultaneously. The exception brakes with both brake controls applied MIC that there was a typographical error is the pre-burnish test requirements, simultaneously, which is very similar to in the proposed initial brake which specify that each independently the current FMVSS No. 122 dry stop test temperature test condition in the high- actuated service brake system must be with both brake controls applied speed test procedure regulatory text, capable of stopping the motorcycle (in simultaneously. The purpose of this test and that it should read as quoted above. effectively the lightly-loaded condition) with all service brake controls actuated The proposed regulatory text used two within specified stopping distances. is to evaluate the full braking greater than or equal to symbols, instead The MIC and Harley-Davidson each performance of motorcycles from a of one greater than or equal to symbol, pointed out in their comments that the speed of 100 km/h with both front and and one less than or equal to symbol. proposed specification of brake rear brakes applied simultaneously. For the reasons explained above and in actuation force for the single brake These test parameters are relevant since the NPRM, we are adopting the high- they represent the typical operating speed test procedure and performance 78 See FMVSS No. 122 NPRM, 73 FR at 54023– 54027. conditions of a motorcycle with a single criteria as proposed, with the correction 79 See FMVSS No. 122 NPRM, 73 FR at 54027. rider traveling at highway speeds. In noted above. 80 addition, testing in the lightly loaded As mentioned above, current FMVSS No. 122 D. Wet Brake Test specifies that performance requirements must be condition with a full brake application met when the ‘‘motorcycle weight is unloaded helps to evaluate motorcycle stability This final rule is also adopting the vehicle weight plus 200 pounds.’’ 49 CFR 571.122, proposed wet brake test provision, S6.1. ‘‘Unloaded vehicle weight’’ is defined under during braking. Since we did not receive 49 CFR 571.3(b) to mean ‘‘the weight of a vehicle comments on this performance test, this which differs from the current FMVSS with maximum capacity of all fluids necessary for final rule is adopting this test procedure No. 122 wet brake test in that instead of operation of the vehicle, but without cargo, and performance criteria as proposed, submerging the brake system in water occupants, or accessories that are ordinarily and then testing the brakes, the water is removed from the vehicle when they are not in for the reasons explained in the NPRM. sprayed directly onto the brakes during use.’’ This current FMVSS No. 122 test mass C. High-Speed Test condition is effectively equivalent to the mass the test. This procedure is based on condition ‘‘lightly loaded’’ in the proposed rule. We are also adopting the proposed UNECE Regulation No. 78 and JSS 12– Lightly loaded means the sum of unladen vehicle high-speed test, for the reasons largely 61, which the reviews of motorcycle mass (mass of the vehicle with bodywork and all factory fitted equipment, and fuel tanks filled to at explained in the NPRM. The purpose of least 90 percent) and driver mass ‘‘plus 15 kg for 82 See Docket Nos. NHTSA–2008–0150–0005.1, test equipment, or the laden condition, whichever 81 MIC Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– NHTSA–2008–0150–0006.1. is less.’’ 73 FR 54020, 54037 (proposed FMVSS No. 0150–0017.1 at 3; Harley-Davidson Comments, 83 MIC Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– 122 S4, Definitions). Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0150–0012 at 5. 0150–0017.1 at 3.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51664 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
brake standards found to be more pedal and lever actuation forces as used regulatory text.84 Honda suggested that stringent than current FMVSS No. 122. in the baseline test. this additional language would be more Accordingly, we believe that motorcycle Minor adjustments were made to the appropriately included in the parking brake safety will be enhanced as a result UNECE Regulation No. 78 and JSS 12– brake test procedure, or section S6.8.2 of of this change in wet brake test 61 fade test. The text for the the regulatory text. The MIC made a procedure. The purpose of the wet brake performance criteria was revised to use similar comment.85 test is to ensure a minimum level of the average brake control force from the Agency Response: We agree that the braking performance when the baseline test, calculated from the added text would be more appropriately motorcycle is ridden in heavy rain measured values between 80 percent included in S6.8.2 rather than paragraph conditions. and 10 percent of the specified vehicle S6.8.3, as in the proposal. The The wet brake performance evaluation test speed. The brake heating procedure regulatory text of the final rule reflects specified in this final rule begins with was also made more objective. UNECE this change with the insertion of a new a baseline test where each brake is Regulation No. 78 presently requires subparagraph under S6.8.2 (test tested separately and is required to that the motorcycle decelerate to the conditions and procedures for parking decelerate a laden motorcycle at a lesser of 3 meters per second squared brake system test) which states: ‘‘The specified rate, using the conditions of (m/s 2) or the maximum achievable motorcycle must remain stationary to the dry stop test—single brake control the limits of traction of the braked deceleration rate with that brake actuated. For comparison, the same test wheels.’’ For the reasons explained control. For the purposes of the GTR, is then repeated, but with a constant above and in the NPRM, we are the latter performance requirement is spray of water to wet the brakes. The adopting the parking brake system test made more objective by specifying that, difference in performance is evaluated procedure and performance criteria as at a minimum, the motorcycle must immediately after the application of the proposed, with the minor rearrangement meet the deceleration rate for the dry respective brake, to ensure a minimum of language noted here. stop test—single brake control actuated, rise in deceleration performance with as noted in Table 2 of the regulatory G. Antilock Brake System (ABS) wet brakes. In addition, a drying brake text. As noted above in section IIIB, this Performance Test can sometimes result in an excessively is different from MFDD. high pad friction leading to motorcycle Today’s final rule does not require instability and wheel lock; therefore a Since we did not receive comments ABS but does contain ABS minimum check for this ‘‘over recovery’’ is also on this performance test, this final rule performance requirements for included. Since we did not receive is adopting the heat fade test procedure motorcycles that are voluntarily comments on this performance test, this and performance criteria as proposed, equipped with this type of brake system. final rule is adopting this test procedure for the reasons explained here and in The purpose of the specified ABS test and performance criteria as proposed, the NPRM. procedures is to assess the stability and stopping performance of a motorcycle for the reasons explained here and in F. Parking Brake System Test the NPRM. with the ABS functioning. This final rule is adopting the These new tests, adopted from the E. Heat Fade Test proposed parking brake test, which will GTR, include stopping distance We are also adopting the proposed improve upon the current FMVSS No. performance requirements on high and heat fade test provision, which is based 122 parking brake system test by low friction surfaces, wheel lock tests on the UNECE Regulation No. 78 and specifying a more stringent loading on high and low friction surfaces, and JSS 12–61 fade test. As explained in the condition. The purpose of the parking wheel lock tests for high to low friction NPRM, the results from both stringency brake system performance requirement and low to high friction surface studies indicated that this fade test is is to ensure that motorcycles required to transitions. In addition, the new more stringent than the current FMVSS be equipped with parking brakes can performance requirements include an No. 122 fade test. The heat fade test remain stationary without rolling away ABS failed systems performance test. ensures that a minimum level of braking when parked on an incline. Current FMVSS No. 122 does not performance is maintained after include any ABS-specific performance Consistent with the GTR, the test numerous consecutive brake requirements. adopted in this final rule specifies that applications. In terms of real world In the NPRM, NHTSA explained that the parking brake system be capable of conditions, this could be akin to we believe the ABS definition holding the motorcycle stationary for frequent braking while driving in a busy developed for the GTR is not as five minutes when tested in the laden suburban area or on a downhill comprehensive as NHTSA’s ABS condition (i.e., the maximum weight gradient. definition which appears in three other The adopted heat fade test requires limit specified by the manufacturer) on Federal motor vehicle safety standards: that the brakes be tested separately, with an 18 percent grade, in both the forward FMVSS No. 105, Hydraulic and Electric the motorcycle loaded to its maximum and reverse directions (to the limit of Brake Systems; FMVSS No. 121, Air mass capacity. The test begins with a traction of the braked wheels). In Brake Systems; and FMVSS No. 135, baseline test with an IBT between 55 °C addition, like current FMVSS No. 122, Light Vehicle Brake Systems. The two and 100 °C, which provides the the amended test procedure requires definitions are presented below: • benchmark for performance comparison that the parking brake system be GTR Definition: Antilock brake and evaluation of the heated brakes. designed to retain engagement solely by system or ABS means a system which This is followed by 10 consecutive fade mechanical means. senses wheel slip and automatically stops with the purpose of building heat Honda noted that, in adopting section modulates the pressure producing the within the brakes. The final 4.8.3 of the GTR regulatory language on braking forces at the wheel(s) to limit performance test occurs with one stop parking brakes, NHTSA’s proposal the degree of wheel slip. immediately following the 10 fade parenthetically added ‘‘to the limits of 84 stops. To evaluate brake fade traction of the braked wheels’’ to the Honda Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– performance requirements in paragraph 0150–0018.1 at 2–3. performance, the procedure compares 85 MIC Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– the stopping distance for the same brake S6.8.3 of the proposed FMVSS No. 122 0150–0017.1 at 2.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51665
• The current FMVSS Definition: surface tests.89 Harley-Davidson each of the test procedures the small Antilock brake system or ABS means a expressed concern that the proposed degree of wheel lock that is typical of portion of a service brake system that regulatory text stated in paragraph ABS operation, but to prohibit any automatically controls the degree of S6.1.1.3 that the ASTM procedure to greater degree of wheel lock. As rotational wheel slip during braking by: measure PBC be conducted ‘‘without explained in the NPRM, ‘‘the regulatory (1) Sensing the rate of angular rotation water delivery.’’ Harley-Davidson stated text includes that wheel lock is allowed of the wheels; that modifications needed to create a as long as the stability of the motorcycle dry low friction surface would be costly (2) Transmitting signals regarding the is not affected to the extent that it and requested that NHTSA permit use rate of wheel angular rotation to one or requires the operator to release the of a wet surface as an alternative means more controlling devices which control or causes the motorcycle to pass of achieving the low friction surface test 92 interpret those signals and generate outside the test lane.’’ What NHTSA conditions. meant there was that in each of the S6.9 responsive controlling output signals; Agency Response: It was not our and ABS test procedures (i.e., in S6.9.3, intention to prevent use of a wetted S6.9.4, S6.9.5, S6.9.6, and S6.9.7) where (3) Transmitting those controlling surface for the low friction portion of it specifies ‘‘there shall be no wheel signals to one or more modulators the ABS test sequence. Paragraph lock,’’ the limited degree of wheel lock which adjust brake actuating forces in S6.1.1.3 describes how the PBC of a dry allowed for in S6.9.1(d) is permitted. To response to those signals. surface is measured using the ASTM make this clearer, we have modified the The NPRM explained that we believe procedure but did not consider the need appropriate text of each of those both definitions can be interpreted to for measuring a wetted surface. We have procedures as follows (added text is mean the same thing. The NPRM sought deleted the phrase ‘‘without water italicized): ‘‘There shall be no wheel comment on the proposed GTR delivery’’ from the S6.1.1.3 test lock except as provided in section definition and on the ABS definition procedure to allow for the use of either S6.9.1(d) and the vehicle wheels shall used in the other braking standards. wet or dry low friction surfaces. We stay within the test lane.’’ Since we did not receive comment on note that the description of a low However, we disagree with Harley- the definition of ABS, we are adopting friction surface (S6.1.1.2) states that it Davidson’s suggestion that the the GTR definition, as proposed. must be a ‘‘clean and level surface,’’ definitional language associated with However, we continue to believe that which allows it to be wetted, as wheel lock in section S6.9.1(d) should this is consistent with other FMVSSs, as compared with the description of the be added to the general definition of both definitions above can be high friction surface (S6.1.1.1) which wheel lock in section S4 of FMVSS No. interpreted to mean the same thing. must be a ‘‘clean, dry and level surface’’. 122. The limited wheel lock allowed During the development of the GTR, 2. Wheel Lock specifically in ABS tests is not each of the ABS performance tests and Harley-Davidson pointed out in its allowable in other brake test procedures their corresponding requirements was comments that various performance in the safety standard, particularly reviewed to assess their appropriateness requirements in the proposed ABS tests where a motorcycle is not equipped for the proposed motorcycle brake with ABS. Therefore, we are not 86 section (S6.9) prohibit wheel lock, but system GTR. This analysis is paragraph S6.9.1(d) specifies that wheel amending the definition of the term discussed in the NPRM and will not be lock is allowed ‘‘as long as the stability ‘‘Wheel Lock’’ in section S4 of the repeated here except to the extent that of the vehicle is not affected to the regulatory text. it relates to comments received on the extent that it requires the operator to 3. Tests With ABS Electrical Failure proposed ABS test procedures and release the control or causes the vehicle performance criteria. Commenters were to pass outside the test lane.’’ 90 Harley- As noted above, the proposed ABS generally supportive of the adoption of Davidson commented that it is unclear performance tests included a test the proposed ABS test procedures. if the same language permitting limited procedure to measure performance in Therefore, with the exception of the wheel lock in S6.9.1(d) is implied in the the event of ABS electrical failure. minor changes discussed below, we are subsequent procedures where it is stated Harley-Davidson pointed out in its adopting the ABS test procedures and that wheel lock shall not occur. Harley- comments that proposed section S6.9.8, performance criteria for the reasons Davidson requested that, if section 87 Stops with an ABS electrical failure, explained here and in the NPRM. S6.9.1(d) is in fact intended to define requires the same test procedure as the term ‘‘wheel lock’’ generally for the section S6.3, Dry Stop Test—Single whole safety standard, then the ‘‘Wheel brake control actuated, in the test 1. Low Friction Surface for ABS Testing Lock’’ definition in section S4 of the sequence laid out in the FMVSS No. 122 The proposed ABS test procedures rule should be modified appropriately. proposal.93 Harley-Davidson stated that, included a wheel lock check and The MIC also noted that the description for a motorcycle with optional ABS, a stopping distance performance of the term ‘‘wheel lock’’ in S6.9.1(d) is test conducted under section S6.3 on a requirement on a low friction surface, confusing given its use in subsequent non-ABS-equipped version of the 91 and wheel lock checks on a high-to-low paragraphs of S6.9. motorcycle is equivalent to a test and low-to-high surface transitions.88 Agency Response: The limitation on conducted under section S6.9.8 on the Harley-Davidson commented that the ‘‘wheel lock’’ given in paragraph motorcycle’s ABS-equipped test tracks it utilizes to certify ABS S6.9.1(d) is meant to apply to all of the counterpart. Harley-Davidson requested systems rely upon water delivery to ABS test procedures of section S6.9. that NHTSA permit the result of the reduce the surface friction to the NHTSA’s intention was to permit in S6.3 test be used for the S6.9.8 test, i.e., to allow non-ABS portions of the test required level for the low friction 89 Harley-Davidson Comments, Docket No. sequence to be used to certify both non- NHTSA–2008–0150–0012 at 3. 86 See Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0150–0009.1. 90 Harley-Davidson Comments, Docket No. 87 See FMVSS No. 122 NPRM, 73 FR at 54030– NHTSA–2008–0150–0012 at 4. 92 See FMVSS No. 122 NPRM, 73 FR at 54031. 54032. 91 MIC Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– 93 Harley-Davidson Comments, Docket No. 88 See FMVSS No. 122 NPRM, 73 FR at 54042. 0150–0017.1 at 3. NHTSA–2008–0150–0012 at 3–4.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51666 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
ABS and ABS versions of the same Sliding Mode Observer ABS.95 SMO allow the rider to bring the motorcycle motorcycle. stated that this type of ABS is licensed to a stop. As explained in the NPRM, Agency Response: We are adopting for non-commercial aircraft and uses the the proposed service brake system the ABS electrical failure test procedure same hardware as current motorcycle partial failure test was not substantially as proposed. The tests in S6.9.8 and ABS. SMO commented that the system different from the current FMVSS No. S6.3 would be redundant only if ABS- can more accurately maintain wheel slip 122 test. Its statement of applicability equipped and non-ABS-equipped close to the optimal level by using was modified to use the newly proposed versions of a motorcycle were otherwise sensing and control algorithms different motorcycle categories. Also, identical and, only if they have identical from those of conventional ABS. The S5.1.10.1(a)(2) was written to require a braking performance under ABS- company stated that, in computer warning lamp to be activated, without disabled conditions. Although Harley- simulations of aircraft and rail actuation of the brake control, when the Davidson’s products may fit this applications, instead of the actual brake fluid level in the master cylinder ± description, it is not necessarily true for friction coefficient varying between reservoir falls below the greater of two all manufacturers. A manufacturer may 5% of the peak coefficient of friction, as levels. However, the conjunction ‘‘and’’ decide at its own discretion to certify a with currently available ABS, the SMO- rather than ‘‘or’’ was incorrectly used in motorcycle to section S6.9.8 based upon ± based system can keep within 0.5% of the proposed regulatory text between results of tests conducted under section the peak level friction coefficient. the two levels. This has been corrected. S6.3, but we do not believe these Agency Response: While we circumstances are necessarily typical. appreciate SMO’s comment, the The MIC pointed out in its comments Furthermore, there is the question of company provided few details about the that one of the proposed performance test sequencing. A manufacturer has to Sliding Mode Observer system and did requirements for this test, proposed certify that an ABS-equipped not include test data of any kind to paragraph S6.10.4(a), required the motorcycle can meet S6.9.8 after substantiate their claims of improved braking system to comply with the undergoing all preceding tests, ABS performance. Therefore, we have failure warning requirements ‘‘set out in including S6.3, when conducted in the no basis for evaluating whether such a paragraph 3.1.11’’ when the test was order specified in the standard. For system improves significantly on performed with one of the subsystems these reasons, we elect not to make any current motorcycle ABS systems. deactivated. The MIC noted that the changes to the rule in this regard. Furthermore, SMO did not make any reference to paragraph 3.1.11 was specific request relating to NHTSA’s 4. Other ABS-Related Comments incorrect, and suggested instead that the proposed rule, such as changes to the regulatory text should have referred to Statistical Study of ABS Effectiveness. regulatory text. SMO generally did not paragraph S5.1.10. The Insurance Institute for Highway comment on NHTSA’s effort to Agency Response: We agree that the Safety (IIHS) comment discussed its harmonize with the GTR other than to reference to ‘‘paragraph 3.1.11’’ in 2008 statistical study in which the IIHS say that it would like to discuss its proposed S6.10.4(a) was inadvertently estimated ABS effectiveness by patented braking technology with 94 copied from the GTR regulatory text. analyzing motorcycle fatal crash data. NHTSA. As such, we are not making The correct reference to the failure By comparing fatal crash frequency of any changes to the updated FMVSS No. warning requirements in the FMVSS ABS-equipped and non-ABS-equipped 122 regulatory text in response to this motorcycles, the IIHS concluded that comment. No. 122 regulatory text is S5.1.10.1, ABS reduces fatal crash involvement Regulatory Text Typographical Error. Split service brake system warning significantly. IIHS commented that a The MIC pointed out in its comments lamps, and we have amended the related study by the Highway Loss Data that there appeared to be some proposed regulatory text in this final rule Institute indicated that ABS also regulatory text missing at paragraph accordingly. reduces collision losses significantly. S6.9.5.1(a), Test Surfaces. I. Power-Assisted Braking System The IIHS further stated that ‘‘[t]he Agency Response: We agree with the Failure Test importance of equipping motorcycles MIC that there was an omission in that with ABS increases as motorcycling paragraph of proposed regulatory text. Since no commenter mentioned the continues to grow in popularity.’’ The We have revised paragraph S6.9.5.1(a) proposed power-assisted braking system IIHS stated that it supports the proposed to specify that the test surface condition failure test, this final rule adopts the test strengthening of FMVSS No. 122 and should be the ‘‘[h]igh friction or low as proposed, for the reasons explained urged NHTSA to consider further friction surface, as applicable.’’ in the NPRM. The new power-assisted changes to encourage or require ABS on H. Partial Failure Test—Split Service braking system failure test does not all motorcycles. Brake System require power-assisted braking systems Agency Response: NHTSA is well but does contain performance We are adopting the proposed partial acquainted with the IIHS statistical requirements for when such brake failure test applicable to motorcycles study. NHTSA has not yet determined systems fail, to ensure minimum brake equipped with split service brake what action we might take in the area system performance in motorcycles that of advanced motorcycle braking. The systems, with the exception of the are so equipped. The current FMVSS agency may explore the possibility of minor corrections explained below, for No. 122 does not have any performance mandating ABS on motorcycles as a the reasons explained here and in the requirements to test the failure of a requirement in FMVSS No. 122 as NPRM. The purpose of this test is to power-assisted braking system because suggested by IIHS in a future ensure that, in the event of a pressure the application of power-assisted rulemaking. component leakage failure in one of the SMO-based ABS. The comment of hydraulic subsystems, a minimum level braking systems on motorcycles is SMO Group, L.L.C. (SMO), described a of braking performance is still available relatively new. Certifying to the patented type of anti-lock system called in the remaining hydraulic subsystem to performance requirement is not required if the motorcycle is equipped with 94 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety 95 SMO Group, L.L.C. Comments, Docket No. another separate service brake system Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0150–0015.1. NHTSA–2008–0150–0013.1. that operates without power-assist.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51667
V. Other Comments and Technical This is identical to the current FMVSS Agency Response: We are unable to Amendments No. 122 failure indicator lamp label accede to ASTM’s request. requirement in paragraph S5.1.3.1(d). A. Labeling Requirements Incorporation of industry standards or Since the existing FMVSS No. 122 did other materials by reference into the The proposed regulatory text in the not have ABS performance Code of Federal Regulations can only be NPRM did not include a few labeling requirements, there were no existing accomplished with the approval of the requirements that were in FMVSS No. labeling requirements for ABS failure in Director of the Office of the Federal 122, since the GTR did not cover FMVSS No. 122. The GTR, and NPRM, Register, National Archives and Records labeling. Since we still believe these did specify that all motorcycles Administration.101 The Office of the labeling requirements are useful, and Federal Register requires regulatory text did not intend to remove those labeling equipped with ABS must also be fitted that incorporates industry standards or requirements in updating FMVSS No. with a yellow warning lamp to activate other materials by reference to identify 122, we are including them in the final whenever there is a malfunction that the standard or material to be rule. We believe this will not be affects the generation or transmission of burdensome for motorcycle signals in the motorcycle’s ABS system. incorporated by title, date, edition, manufacturers because they are already However, consistent with other FMVSS author, publisher, and identification 98 102 including these labels on the relevant addressing ABS system failure, and number of the publication. pieces of motorcycle equipment. consistent with the FMVSS that governs Further, from a compliance Currently, FMVSS No. 122 requires a and standardizes control, telltales, and standpoint, it is important to reference brake fluid warning label to be provided indicators, FMVSS No. 101, Controls a specific version of an industry on the brake fluid reservoir.96 FMVSS and Displays, motorcycle brake ABS standard, such as an ASTM procedure, No. 122 also requires that a label be system failure should be indicated with so that regulated entities are on notice provided for the brake failure indicator the words ‘‘Antilock’’ or ‘‘Anti-lock’’ or 99 regarding the version of the industry lamp.97 These required labels identify ‘‘ABS.’’ For ABS-equipped systems, recommended practice to which they we have modified section S5.1.10.2 by important safety features and safety- will be held accountable under a breaking the existing proposed text of related information, and they have Federal safety standard. NHTSA cannot that section into two paragraphs, longstanding applicability in FMVSS reference an industry standard in such identified as ‘‘(a)’’ and ‘‘(b),’’ and by No. 122. a way that the underlying procedures in adding the label requirement under new For the fluid reservoir label, we have a Federal safety standard are subject to inserted new language in the regulatory paragraph ‘‘(c)’’ which specifies: ‘‘The indicator shall be labeled in letters at being changed unilaterally, and without text under the general requirements notice, by an independent entity such as section S5.1.9, Hydraulic Service Brake least 3/32 of an inch high with the words ‘Antilock’ or ‘Anti-lock’ or ‘ABS’ ASTM. Otherwise, the requirements of System. The new subsection, S5.1.9(d), the FMVSS could be changed without closely reflects the requirements in in accordance with Table 1 of Standard No. 101 (49 CFR 571.101).’’ NHTSA’s or the public’s knowledge or section S5.1.2.2 of the existing FMVSS approval, and without the prerequisite No. 122 safety standard. This new B. Versions of ASTM Standards administrative process including public subsection identifies the wording, notice and comment. We will, however, ASTM International commented that location, and other characteristics of the reference the 2008 version of ASTM warning statement. Specifically, it NHTSA’s proposal makes reference to a E1136–93, as it is unchanged from the requires that the warning statement: (1) version of an ASTM standard that is not 2003 version. Have lettering at least 3/32 of an inch the latest version.100 The proposal refers high; (2) that it be located on or within to version E1337–90(2002) of ASTM’s C. Terminology 4 inches of the filler cap so as to be ‘‘Standard Test Method for Determining visible by direct viewing; and (3) that it Longitudinal Peak Braking Coefficient of The MIC commented that NHTSA be permanently affixed and of a Paved Surfaces Using Standard should substitute the word used to contrasting color, or else be either Reference Test Tire.’’ ASTM pointed out reference a type or category of engraved or embossed. that there is a more recent version, motorcycle, ‘‘type,’’ as it was used in As for labeling of the failure indicator ASTM E1337–90(2008). ASTM asked S5.1, Brake System Requirements, with lamp, this lamp is required for split- that references to ASTM standards be the word ‘‘category.’’103 service brake systems and ABS- done in a way that does not cite any Agency Response: Since the latter equipped brake systems, as specified in particular version, so that the latest term is the one used in the definitions section S5.1.10 of the updated FMVSS version will always be applicable. of the five different types of motorcycles No. 122 regulatory text. However, the Specifically, ASTM requested that in S4, Definitions, we agree with this label should be different for each of NHTSA reference the ‘‘Standard Test change and have revised the regulatory those types of brake systems. Method for Determining Longitudinal text accordingly. Consequently, the warning lamp label Peak Braking Coefficient of Paved specifications for split service brake Surfaces Using Standard Reference Test 101 Congress authorized incorporation by systems are listed separately from those Tire’’ only as ‘‘ASTM E1137.’’ ASTM’s reference, only with the approval of the Director of for ABS-equipped systems. comment also would apply to another the Federal Register, in the Freedom of Information For split service systems, we have standard, ASTM E1136, ‘‘Standard Act to reduce the volume of material published in inserted new paragraph S5.1.10.1(c) the Federal Register and Code of Federal Specification for A Radial Standard Regulations. 5 U.S.C. 552, as amended by Public which requires each indicator lamp to Reference Tire.’’ The NPRM proposed to Law 104–231, 100 Stat. 3048 (1996). have the legend ‘‘Brake Failure’’ on or refer to the ASTM E1136–93(2003) 102 National Archives and Records adjacent to it in letters not less than 3/ version of that standard. Administration, Office of the Federal Register, 32 of an inch high that shall be legible Federal Register Document Drafting Handbook, § 6.4 (October 1998 Revision), available at http:// to the driver in daylight when lighted. 98 See, e.g., 49 CFR 571.121, S5.1.6.2 (2009). www.archives.gov/federal-register/write/ 99 See, e.g., 49 CFR 571.101, Table 1 (2009). resources.html (last accessed May 14, 2010). 96 49 CFR 571.122, S5.1.2.2 (2009). 100 ASTM International Comments, Docket No. 103 MIC Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– 97 49 CFR 571.122, S5.1.3.1(d) (2009). NHTSA–2008–0150–0011.1. 0150–0017.1 at 3.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51668 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
VI. Compliance Date the date on which the text of the Code in the power-assisted braking system, if The NPRM explained that NHTSA of Federal Regulations is amended. To a motorcycle is so equipped. had tentatively determined that accommodate the extra year of lead time Moreover, as mentioned above, virtually all of the current motorcycle for category 3–5 motorcycles and the motorcycle manufacturers and, fleet would comply with the proposal, optional early compliance, we are ultimately, consumers both here and if made final. Therefore, we proposed to retaining the text of current version of abroad can expect to achieve cost make the upgraded requirements FMVSS No. 122 in a new Standard, savings through the formal mandatory at the beginning of the first FMVSS No. 122a. We are amending harmonization of differing sets of September that is two full years after paragraph S3 of the redesignated standards when the Contracting Parties publication of a final rule. The NPRM FMVSS No. 122a to limit its to the 1998 Agreement implement the proposed that optional early compliance applicability to motorcycles not Motorcycle Brake Systems GTR. would be permitted on and after 30 days certified to the new FMVSS No. 122. Harmonization enables motorcycle after the date of publication of a final We are also including in this final manufacturers to test their models to rule in the Federal Register. rule a technical correction to 49 CFR just one regulation/series of tests to sell Two commenters, Harley-Davidson 571.5. When NHTSA published a final globally. and the MIC, requested that additional rule in January 2012 consolidating all of We believe that, although the final lead time be allowed for phase-in of the the standards and practices that are rule adds some new requirements to amended FMVSS No. 122 requirements incorporated by reference in the FMVSS No. 122 and replaces some test as they apply to three-wheeled FMVSSs into § 571.5, the agency procedures and performance motorcycles of category 3–5 104 as inadvertently incorporated an incorrect requirements with ones based on more defined in both the GTR and the version of ASTM E274–70, ‘‘Skid stringent standards used in another NPRM.105 They stated that the proposal Resistance of Paved Surfaces Using a national regulation, none of the new contains new brake system requirements Full-Scale Tire,’’ into FMVSS Nos. 105 tests will result in measurable costs to 106 for this type of three-wheeler in that and 122. The version that was motorcycle purchasers. The rule split-service or combined brakes will be incorporated by reference in January includes performance requirements that required instead of merely allowed. 2012 was the original 1970 version of constitute the best practices from They requested an additional year of the standard, which is different from the various standards and regulations. Some lead time beyond the two-year version that had been previously of the tests, such as the wet brake test, minimum lead time of the proposal. incorporated by reference into FMVSS the ABS performance requirements, and Agency Response: We agree that some Nos. 105 and 122, which includes the tests in the loaded condition, are an category 3–5 motorcycles potentially editorial changes made in July 1974. upgrade to the existing FMVSS No. 122. will need re-engineering of their brake This final rule corrects this error, and But current FMVSS No. 122 does not systems and that additional lead time is incorporates the correct version of reflect the advancement of modern appropriate. Therefore, for category 3–5 ASTM E274–70 into FMVSS No. 105 braking technologies, and almost all motorcycles, the updated FMVSS No. and the newly redesignated FMVSS No. motorcycles sold in the U.S. can meet 122 promulgated in today’s final rule 122a. the performance requirements as proposed without any major design will be mandatory no later than the VII. Costs and Benefits beginning of the first September that is changes. The agency believes that three full years after publication of Although this final rule adds and motorcycles sold in the U.S. market can today’s final rule. This will provide a updates FMVSS No. 122 test comply with the requirements of ECE total of at least three years of lead time procedures, we anticipate that virtually Regulation No. 78 and JSS 12–61 for category 3–5 motorcycles. For all all motorcycles sold in the U.S. can without any modifications, and that other motorcycle categories, compliance meet the performance requirements in motorcycles sold in the European and with the updated FMVSS No. 122 must this final rule, and thus, the agency has Japanese markets can meet U.S. FMVSS occur no later than the beginning of the not been able to quantify safety benefits No. 122. As a result, any costs for design first September that is two full years from the proposal. However, NHTSA changes by motorcycle manufacturers to after publication of today’s final rule, as believes that the performance comply with the final rule performance proposed in the NPRM. requirements promulgated in today’s requirements are expected to be The precise compliance dates for each final rule will help ensure the safety of minimal and would be offset by the motorcycle category are set forth, as motorcycle brake systems and thus have elimination of some test procedures applicable, in § 571.122, S3. Optional a beneficial effect on safety. The final previously in FMVSS No. 122. We early compliance is permitted on and rule includes several tests that will expect that, for manufacturers who after 60 days after the date of update and enhance performance certify compliance by conducting publication of a final rule in the Federal requirements—tests both at the fully NHTSA’s test procedures, the changes Register. The optional early compliance loaded condition (‘‘laden’’) and lightly- in the compliance test procedures date was changed from the 30 days loaded vehicle weight, which ensure would result in a cost savings of less proposed in the NPRM to coincide with adequate braking performance at the than one-tenth of a cent per motorcycle. two extremes of the loading conditions; No commenter addressed the agency’s 104 Category 3–5 motorcycles are defined in S3 as a wet brake test that is more assessment of costs and benefits in the motorcycles ‘‘manufactured with three wheels representative of the manner in which NPRM. However, we have considered symmetrically arranged in relation to the brakes are wetted during real world Harley-Davidson’s comment that some longitudinal median plane with an engine cylinder riding in wet conditions; a variety of three-wheeled motorcycles would need capacity in the case of a thermic engine exceeding 50 cm3 or whatever the means of propulsion a ABS performance tests, for motorcycles to have their brake systems redesigned maximum design speed exceeding 50 km/h.’’ This so equipped, to ensure adequate to meet the new brake system category includes primarily ‘‘trikes’’ and excludes antilock performance during emergency requirements for category 3–5 motorcycles with sidecars, which are category 3–4 braking or on slippery road conditions; motorcycles. We agree that a limited motorcycles. 105 MIC Comments, Docket No. NHTSA–2008– and a new test in the event of a failure number of motorcycles will need to be 0150–0017.1 at 2; Harley-Davidson Comments, redesigned to comply with the upgraded Docket No. NHTSA–2008–0150–0012 at 1–2. 106 77 FR 751 (Jan. 6, 2012). FMVSS No. 122. We estimate that about
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51669
8,000 category 3–5 motorcycles will These amendments are appropriate No. 122 test procedure (72), even though need to be equipped with a split service for the vehicles subject to the this final rule adds additional tests for brake system, which includes a dual performance requirements. Today’s final motorcycles equipped with ABS. Not all master cylinder. A 2004 NHTSA report rule continues to exclude motorcycles motorcycles are equipped with ABS, estimate the cost of upgrading to a dual for which the requirements and test and those motorcycles will be subjected master cylinder at a cost of $10.88 per procedures are impractical or to fewer tests as we harmonize our motorcycle in 2002 dollars.107 Adjusting unnecessary (e.g., low-speed motorcycle braking standards with that cost for inflation results in a cost of motorcycles, categories 3–1 and 3–2, European and Japanese standards and $13.38 in 2011 dollars. We anticipate continue to be excluded from the heat delete unnecessary tests. For example, that, based on recent sales numbers of fade test). this final rule eliminates a reburnishing three-wheeled motorcycles, Finally, the agency has determined of the brakes in the existing FMVSS No. approximately 8,000 motorcycles would that the amendments provide objective 122 test procedure. We have determined need to be equipped with a dual master procedures for determining compliance. that, for manufacturers that certify cylinder. Thus, we believe that the total The test procedures have been evaluated compliance by conducting NHTSA’s test annual cost of the upgrade necessary to by the agency, and we have determined procedures, this final rule would result the limited number of three-wheeled that they help achieve repeatable and in a net cost savings of less than one- motorcycles as a result of today’s final reproducible results. Further, we are tenth of a cent per motorcycle. rule is approximately $107,040. adopting test procedures to provide NHTSA is not able to quantify direct improved objectivity to existing safety benefits from this rule in terms of VIII. Regulatory Analyses and Notices performance requirements. the number of injuries and fatalities A. Vehicle Safety Act prevented. However, this final rule adds B. Executive Order 12866, Executive braking tests for motorcycles with Under 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, Motor Order 13563, and DOT Regulatory antilock brakes. NHTSA believes that Vehicle Safety (49 U.S.C. 30101 et seq.), Policies and Procedures those tests will help ensure the safety of the Secretary of Transportation is NHTSA has considered the impacts of motorcycle brake systems. responsible for prescribing motor this rulemaking action under Executive C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) vehicle safety standards that are Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, practicable, meet the need for motor and the Department of Transportation’s NHTSA has examined today’s final vehicle safety, and are stated in (DOT’s) related policies and procedures. rule pursuant to Executive Order 13132 objective terms. 49 U.S.C. 30111(a). This rulemaking is not considered (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and When prescribing such standards, the significant and was not reviewed by the concluded that no additional Secretary must consider all relevant, Office of Management and Budget under consultation with States, local available motor vehicle safety E.O. 12866. Given the minimal impacts governments or their representatives is information. 49 U.S.C. 30111(b). The of the proposed rule, we have not mandated beyond the rulemaking Secretary must also consider whether a prepared a full regulatory evaluation in process. The agency has concluded that proposed standard is reasonable, accordance with the Department’s the rulemaking would not have practicable, and appropriate for the type Regulatory Policies and Procedures.108 sufficient federalism implications to of motor vehicle or motor vehicle The factual basis supporting this finding warrant consultation with State and equipment for which it is prescribed is as follows. local officials or the preparation of a and the extent to which the standard This final rule amends test procedures federalism summary impact statement. will further the statutory purpose of and performance requirements, but The final rule would not have reducing traffic accidents and associated would impose minimal additional costs ‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, deaths. Id. Responsibility for on manufacturers. We believe virtually on the relationship between the national promulgation of Federal motor vehicle all motorcycles presently manufactured government and the States, or on the safety standards was subsequently for the U.S. market can meet these new distribution of power and delegated to NHTSA. 49 U.S.C. 105 and performance requirements. Thus, this responsibilities among the various 322; delegation of authority at 49 CFR final rule is not expected to require levels of government.’’ 1.50. design changes to nearly all current NHTSA rules can preempt in two ways. First, the National Traffic and The agency carefully considered these motorcycles. As discussed in section VII above, a limited number of three- Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an statutory requirements in adopting these express preemption provision: When a amendments to FMVSS No. 122. The wheeled motorcycles would need design changes to include a dual master motor vehicle safety standard is in effect amendments to FMVSS No. 122 are under this chapter, a State or a political practicable. This document does not cylinder at a cost of $13.38 per motorcycle in 2011 dollars. Thus, the subdivision of a State may prescribe or adopt significant changes to the current continue in effect a standard applicable performance requirements of FMVSS total cost of this rule on the motorcycle industry is expected to be to the same aspect of performance of a No. 122. Currently, we believe that motor vehicle or motor vehicle essentially all motorcycle brakes will approximately $107,040 per year. We have considered whether the new equipment only if the standard is meet or exceed the performance criteria identical to the standard prescribed specified in the adopted test procedures. compliance tests NHTSA will conduct under this final rule will result in under this chapter. 49 U.S.C. Additionally, the amendments will 30103(b)(1). It is this statutory command harmonize the U.S. requirements with additional costs to certify motorcycles as compliant with these performance by Congress that preempts any non- the Motorcycle Brake Systems Global identical State legislative and Technical Regulation. requirements. The number of tests in the new test procedure (66) is less than the administrative law addressing the same number of tests in the existing FMVSS aspect of performance. 107 Cost and Weight Added by the Federal Motor The express preemption provision Vehicle Safety Standards for Model Years 1968– 2001 in Passenger Cars and Light Trucks (NHTSA 108 Department of Transportation, Adoption of described above is subject to a savings Report No. DOT HS 809 834), December 2004, p. Regulatory Policies and Procedures, 44 FR 11034 clause under which ‘‘[c]ompliance with 21–23. (Feb. 26, 1979). a motor vehicle safety standard
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51670 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
prescribed under this chapter does not ‘‘economically significant’’ as defined proposed or final rule, it must prepare exempt a person from liability at under Executive Order 12866, and (2) and make available for public comment common law.’’ 49 U.S.C. 30103(e) concerns an environmental, health or a regulatory flexibility analysis that Pursuant to this provision, State safety risk that NHTSA has reason to describes the effect of the rule on small common law tort causes of action believe may have a disproportionate entities (i.e., small businesses, small against motor vehicle manufacturers effect on children.109 If the regulatory organizations, and small governmental that might otherwise be preempted by action meets both criteria, we must jurisdictions). However, no regulatory the express preemption provision are evaluate the environmental health or flexibility analysis is required if the generally preserved. However, the safety effects of the planned rule on head of an agency certifies the rule Supreme Court has recognized the children, and explain why the planned would not have a significant economic possibility, in some instances, of regulation is preferable to other impact on a substantial number of small implied preemption of such State potentially effective and reasonably entities. The SBREFA amended the common law tort causes of action by feasible alternatives considered by us. Regulatory Flexibility Act to require virtue of NHTSA’s rules, even if not This rulemaking is not subject to the Federal agencies to provide a statement expressly preempted. This second way Executive Order because it is not of the factual basis for certifying that a that NHTSA rules can preempt is economically significant as defined in rule would not have a significant dependent upon there being an actual Executive Order 12866. It also does not economic impact on a substantial conflict between an FMVSS and the involve decisions based on health risks number of small entities. higher standard that would effectively that disproportionately affect children. We have considered the effects of this be imposed on motor vehicle rulemaking action under the Regulatory manufacturers if someone obtained a E. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) and State common law tort judgment against Reform) certify that this final rule will not have the manufacturer, notwithstanding the With respect to the review of the a significant economic impact on a manufacturer’s compliance with the promulgation of a new regulation, substantial number of small entities. NHTSA standard. Because most NHTSA section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, The agency is not currently aware of any standards established by an FMVSS are ‘‘Civil Justice Reform,’’ requires that motorcycle manufacturer that is minimum standards, a State common Executive agencies make every considered a small business. The brake law tort cause of action that seeks to reasonable effort to ensure that the systems installed on motorcycles are impose a higher standard on motor regulation: (1) Specifies in clear typically developed by one of the major vehicle manufacturers will generally not language the preemptive effect; (2) brake component suppliers, which are be preempted. However, if and when specifies in clear language the effect on independent companies. There are cases such a conflict does exist—for example, existing Federal law or regulation, where the motorcycle manufacturer may when the standard at issue is both a including all provisions repealed, perform some of the brake system minimum and a maximum standard— circumscribed, displaced, impaired, or design and development in-house, and the State common law tort cause of modified; (3) provides a clear legal have the system components action is impliedly preempted. See standard for affected conduct rather manufactured by an outside supplier. Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., than a general standard, while NHTSA does not consider any of these 529 U.S. 861 (2000). promoting simplification and burden businesses to be small business entities Pursuant to Executive Order 13132 reduction; (4) specifies in clear language that would be significantly and 12988, NHTSA has considered the retroactive effect; (5) specifies economically impacted by this whether this rule could or should whether administrative proceedings are rulemaking. preempt State common law causes of to be required before parties may file G. National Environmental Policy Act action. The agency’s ability to announce suit in court; (6) explicitly or implicitly its conclusion regarding the preemptive defines key terms; and (7) addresses We have analyzed this proposed effect of one of its rules reduces the other important issues affecting clarity amendment for the purposes of the likelihood that preemption will be an and general draftsmanship of National Environmental Policy Act and issue in any subsequent tort litigation. regulations.110 This document is determined that it would not have any To this end, the agency has examined consistent with that requirement. significant impact on the quality of the the nature (e.g., the language and Pursuant to this Order, NHTSA notes human environment. structure of the regulatory text) and as follows. The preemptive effect of this objectives of today’s rule and finds that H. Paperwork Reduction Act proposed rule is discussed above. this rule, like many NHTSA rules, Under the Paperwork Reduction Act NHTSA notes further that there is no prescribes only a minimum safety of 1995, a person is not required to requirement that individuals submit a standard. As such, NHTSA does not respond to a collection of information petition for reconsideration or pursue intend that this rule preempt state tort by a Federal agency unless the other administrative proceeding before law that would effectively impose a collection displays a valid Office of they may file suit in court. higher standard on motor vehicle Management and Budget (OMB) control manufacturers than that established by F. Regulatory Flexibility Act number. The rule does not contain any today’s rule. Establishment of a higher Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility new information collection standard by means of State tort law Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by requirements. would not conflict with the minimum the Small Business Regulatory I. National Technology Transfer and standard announced here. Without any Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of Advancement Act conflict, there could not be any implied 1996) whenever an agency is required to Section 12(d) of the National preemption of a State common law tort publish a notice of rulemaking for any cause of action. Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA) directs us to use D. Executive Order 13045 109 Exec. Order No. 13045, 62 FR 19885 (Apr. 23, 1997). voluntary consensus standards in Executive Order 13045 applies to any 110 Exec. Order No. 12988, 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, regulatory activities unless doing so rulemaking that: (1) Is determined to be 1996). would be inconsistent with applicable
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51671
law or otherwise impractical.111 local, or tribal governments, in the revised July 1974, into §§ 571.105; Voluntary consensus standards are aggregate, or to the private sector. Thus, 571.122a. technical standards (e.g., materials this rulemaking is not subject to the * * * * * specifications, test methods, sampling requirements of sections 202 and 205 of (32) ASTM E1136–93 (Reapproved procedures, and business practices) that the UMRA. 2003), ‘‘Standard Specification for a are developed or adopted by voluntary K. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) Radial Standard Reference Test Tire,’’ consensus standards bodies, such as the approved March 15, 1993, into Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) The Department of Transportation §§ 571.105; 571.121; 571.122; 571.126; and the American Society for Testing assigns a regulation identifier number 571.135; 571.139; 571.500. and Materials (ASTM). The NTTAA (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in (33) ASTM E1337–90 (Reapproved directs us to provide Congress, through the Unified Agenda of Federal 2008), ‘‘Standard Test Method for OMB, explanations when we decide not Regulations. The Regulatory Information Determining Longitudinal Peak Braking to use available and applicable Service Center publishes the Unified Coefficient of Paved Surfaces Using a voluntary consensus standards. Agenda in April and October of each Standard Reference Test Tire,’’ ASTM E1136–93, Standard year. You may use the RIN contained in approved June 1, 2008, into §§ 571.105; Specification for a Radial Standard the heading at the beginning of this 571.121; 571.122; 571.126; 571.135; Reference Test Tire, and ASTM Method document to find this action in the 571.500. E1337–90, Standard Test Method for Unified Agenda. * * * * * Determining Longitudinal Peak Braking (i) International Organization for Coefficient of Paved Surfaces Using a L. Privacy Act Standardization (ISO), 1, ch. de la Voie- Standard Reference Test Tire, are Anyone is able to search the Creuse, CP 56, CH–1211 Geneva 20, incorporated by reference in the electronic form of all comments Switzerland. Telephone: +41 22 749 01 regulatory text. This is consistent with received into any of our dockets by the 11. Fax: +41 22 733 34 30. Web site: the NTTAA because these are industry name of the individual submitting the http://www.iso.org/. voluntary consensus standards. comment (or signing the comment, if (1) ISO 7117:1995(E), ‘‘Motorcycles— Measurement of maximum speed,’’ J. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may Second edition, March 1, 1995, into Section 202 of the Unfunded review DOT’s complete Privacy Act § 571.122. Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) Statement in the Federal Register (2) [Reserved] requires Federal agencies to prepare a published on April 11, 2000.114 You * * * * * written assessment of the costs, benefits may also visit http:// § 571.122 [Redesignated as § 571.122a] and other effects of proposed or final www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/ rules that include a Federal mandate home.html#privacyNotice (last accessed ■ 3. Redesignate § 571.122 as § 571.122a likely to result in the expenditure by May 17, 2010). and revise paragraph S3 to read as State, local or tribal governments, in the follows: aggregate, or by the private sector, of List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571 more than $100 million in any one year § 571.122a Standard No. 122a; Motorcycle Incorporation by reference, Motor brake systems. (adjusted for inflation with base year of vehicle safety, Reporting and 112 * * * * * 1995). Before promulgating a NHTSA recordkeeping requirements, Tires. rule for which a written statement is S3. Application. This standard needed, section 205 of the UMRA In consideration of the foregoing, applies to motorcycles. However, this generally requires us to identify and NHTSA amends 49 CFR part 571 as standard does not apply to motorcycles consider a reasonable number of follows: certified to comply with § 571.122. * * * * * regulatory alternatives and adopt the PART 571—FEDERAL MOTOR ■ 4. Add new § 571.122 to read as least costly, most cost-effective or least VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS burdensome alternative that achieves follows: 113 the objectives of the rule. The ■ 1. The authority citation for Part 571 § 571.122 Standard No. 122; Motorcycle provisions of section 205 do not apply continues to read as follows: brake systems. when they are inconsistent with S1. Scope. This standard specifies applicable law. Moreover, section 205 Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, requirements for motorcycle service allows us to adopt an alternative other 30117 and 30166; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50. brake systems and, where applicable, than the least costly, most cost-effective associated parking brake systems. or least burdensome alternative if we ■ 2. Amend § 571.5 by revising S2. Purpose. The purpose of the publish with the final rule an paragraphs (d)(29), (32), and (33), standard is to ensure safe motorcycle explanation why that alternative was redesignating paragraphs (i) through (l) braking performance under normal and not adopted. as paragraphs (j) through (m), and emergency riding conditions. Today’s final rule will not impose any adding new paragraph (i) to read as S3. Application. This standard unfunded mandates under the follows: applies to category 3–1 motorcycles, Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of category 3–2 motorcycles, category 3–3 § 571.5 Matter incorporated by reference. 1995. This rulemaking does not meet motorcycles, and category 3–4 the definition of a Federal mandate * * * * * motorcycles manufactured on and after because it would not result in costs of (d) * * * September 1, 2014. This standard $100 million or more to either State, (29) ASTM E274–70, ‘‘Standard applies to category 3–5 motorcycles Method of Test for Skid Resistance of manufactured on and after September 1, 111 National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 § 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272. Paved Surfaces Using a Full-Scale Tire,’’ 2015. At the manufacturer’s option, any 112 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 § 202, motorcycle manufactured on or after 2 U.S.C. 1532. 114 Privacy Act of 1974: Systems of Records, 65 October 23, 2012 may comply with this 113 2 U.S.C. 1535. FR 19476, 19478 (Apr. 11, 2000). standard.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51672 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
S4. Definitions. (a) For motorcycle categories 3–1 and Sidecar means a one-wheeled vehicle Antilock brake system or ABS means 3–3: a service brake system where at that is attached to the side of a a system which senses wheel slip and least two brakes on different wheels are motorcycle. automatically modulates the pressure actuated by the operation of a single Single brake system means a brake producing the braking forces at the control. system which acts on only one axle. wheel(s) to limit the degree of wheel (b) For motorcycle categories 3–2 and Split service brake system or SSBS slip. 3–5: a service brake system where the means a brake system that operates the Baseline test means a stop or a series brakes on all wheels are actuated by the brakes on all wheels, consisting of two of stops carried out in order to confirm operation of a single control. or more subsystems actuated by a single the performance of the brake prior to (c) For motorcycle category 3–4: a control designed so that a single failure subjecting it to a further test such as the service brake system where the brakes in any subsystem (such as a leakage type heating procedure or wet brake stop. on at least the front and rear wheels are failure of a hydraulic subsystem) does Brake means those parts of the brake actuated by the operation of a single not impair the operation of any other system where the forces opposing the control. (If the rear wheel and the subsystem. movement of the motorcycle are asymmetrical wheel are braked by the Stopping distance means the distance developed. same brake system, this is regarded as traveled by the motorcycle from the Brake system means the combination the rear brake.) point the rider begins to actuate the of parts consisting of the control, the Control means the part actuated brake control to the point at which the brake, and the components that provide motorcycle reaches full stop. For tests the functional link between the control directly by the rider in order to supply and regulate the energy required for where simultaneous actuation of two and the brake, but excluding the engine, controls is specified, the distance whose function it is to progressively braking the motorcycle. Driver mass means the nominal mass traveled is taken from the point the first reduce the speed of a moving control is actuated. motorcycle, bring it to a halt, and keep of a driver that equals 75 kg (68 kg occupant mass plus 7kg of luggage Test speed means the motorcycle it stationary when halted. speed measured the moment the rider Category 3–1 motorcycle means a two- mass). begins to actuate the brake control. For wheeled motorcycle with an engine Engine disconnected means when the tests where simultaneous actuation of cylinder capacity in the case of a engine is no longer internally connected two controls is specified, the motorcycle thermic engine not exceeding 50 cubic to the driving wheel(s), i.e., the clutch speed is taken from the moment the first centimeters (cm3) and whatever the is disengaged and/or the transmission is control is actuated. means of propulsion a maximum design in neutral. Unladen vehicle mass means the speed not exceeding 50 kilometers per Gross vehicle mass means the nominal mass of a complete vehicle as hour (km/h). maximum mass of the fully laden solo Category 3–2 motorcycle means a vehicle, based on its construction and determined by the following criteria: three-wheeled motorcycle of any wheel design performances, as declared by the (a) Mass of the vehicle with bodywork arrangement with an engine cylinder manufacturer. and all factory fitted equipment, electrical and auxiliary equipment for capacity in the case of a thermic engine Initial brake temperature means the normal operation of vehicle, including not exceeding 50 cm3 and whatever the temperature of the hottest brake before liquids, tools, fire extinguisher, standard means of propulsion a maximum design any brake application. speed not exceeding 50 km/h. spare parts, chocks and spare wheel, if Laden means the gross vehicle mass. fitted. Category 3–3 motorcycle means a two- Lightly loaded means mass in running wheeled motorcycle with an engine (b) The fuel tanks filled to at least 90 order plus 15 kg for test equipment, or percent of rated capacity and the other cylinder capacity in the case of a the laden condition, whichever is less. thermic engine exceeding 50 cm3 or liquid containing systems (except those In the case of ABS tests on a low friction for used water) to 100 percent of the whatever the means of propulsion a surface (paragraphs S6.9.4 to S6.9.7), the maximum design speed exceeding 50 capacity specified by the manufacturer. mass for test equipment is increased to Vmax means either the speed km/h. 30 kg to account for outriggers. Category 3–4 motorcycle means a attainable by accelerating at a maximum Mass in running order means the sum motorcycle manufactured with three rate from a standing start for a distance of unladen vehicle mass and driver wheels asymmetrically arranged in of 1.6 km on a level surface, with the mass. relation to the longitudinal median vehicle lightly loaded, or the speed plane with an engine cylinder capacity Peak braking coefficient or PBC measured in accordance with in the case of a thermic engine means the measure of tire-to-road International Organization for exceeding 50 cm3 or whatever the surface friction based on the maximum Standardization (ISO) 7117:1995(E) means of propulsion a maximum design deceleration of a rolling tire. (incorporated by reference; see § 571.5). speed exceeding 50 km/h. (This Power-assisted braking system means Wheel lock means the condition that category definition is intended to a brake system in which the energy occurs when there is 100 percent wheel include motorcycles with sidecars.) necessary to produce the braking force slip. Category 3–5 motorcycle means a is supplied by the physical effort of the S5. General requirements. motorcycle manufactured with three rider assisted by one or more energy S5.1 Brake system requirements. wheels symmetrically arranged in supplying devices, for example vacuum Each motorcycle shall meet each of the relation to the longitudinal median assisted (with vacuum booster). test requirements specified for a plane with an engine cylinder capacity Secondary brake system means the motorcycle of its category and for those in the case of a thermic engine second service brake system on a brake features on the motorcycle. exceeding 50 cm3 or whatever the motorcycle equipped with a combined S5.1.1 Service brake system control means of propulsion a maximum design brake system. operation. Each motorcycle shall have a speed exceeding 50 km/h. Service brake system means a brake configuration that enables a rider to Combined brake system or CBS system which is used for slowing the actuate the service brake system control means: motorcycle when in motion. while seated in the normal driving
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51673
position and with both hands on the S5.1.9 Hydraulic service brake (a) Each motorcycle equipped with an steering control. system. For motorcycles that use ABS system shall be fitted with a yellow S5.1.2 Secondary brake system hydraulic fluid for brake force warning lamp. The lamp shall be control operation. Each motorcycle shall transmission, the master cylinder shall: activated whenever there is a have a configuration that enables a rider (a) Have a sealed, covered, separate malfunction that affects the generation to actuate the secondary brake system reservoir for each brake system; and or transmission of signals in the control while seated in the normal (b) Have a minimum reservoir motorcycle’s ABS system. driving position and with at least one capacity equivalent to 1.5 times the total (b) To permit function checking, the hand on the steering control. fluid displacement required to satisfy warning lamp shall be illuminated by S5.1.3 Parking brake system. the new to fully worn lining condition the activation of the ignition switch and (a) If a parking brake system is fitted, with the worst case brake adjustment extinguished when the check has been it shall hold the motorcycle stationary conditions; and completed. The warning lamp shall on the slope prescribed in S6.8.2. The (c) Have a reservoir where the fluid remain on while a failure condition parking brake system shall: level is visible for checking without exists whenever the ignition switch is in (1) have a control which is separate removal of the cover. the ‘‘on’’ position. from the service brake system controls; (d) Have a brake fluid warning (c) The indicator shall be labeled in and statement that reads as follows, in letters at least 3/32 of an inch high with (2) be held in the locked position by letters at least 3/32 of an inch high: the words ‘‘Antilock’’ or ‘‘Anti-lock’’ or solely mechanical means. Warning: Clean filler cap before ‘‘ABS’’ in accordance with Table 1 of (b) Each motorcycle equipped with a removing. Use only llll fluid from Standard No. 101 (49 CFR 571.101). parking brake shall have a configuration a sealed container (inserting the S5.2 Durability. that enables a rider to be able to actuate recommended type of brake fluid as S5.2.1 Compensation for wear. Wear the parking brake system while seated specified in accordance with 49 CFR of the brakes shall be compensated for in the normal driving position. 571.116, e.g., ‘‘DOT 3’’). The lettering by means of a system of automatic or S5.1.4 Two-wheeled motorcycles of shall be: manual adjustment. categories 3–1 and 3–3. Each category (1) Permanently affixed, engraved, or S5.2.2 Notice of wear. The friction 3–1 and 3–3 two-wheeled motorcycle embossed; material thickness shall either be visible shall be equipped with either two (2) Located so as to be visible by without disassembly, or where the separate service brake systems, or a split direct view, either on or within 4 inches friction material is not visible, wear service brake system, with at least one of the brake-fluid reservoir filler plug or shall be assessed by means of a device brake operating on the front wheel and cap; and designed for that purpose. at least one brake operating on the rear (3) Of a color that contrasts with its S5.2.3 Testing. During all the tests in wheel. background, if it is not engraved or this standard and on their completion, S5.1.5 Three-wheeled motorcycles of embossed. there shall be no friction material category 3–4. Each category 3–4 S5.1.10 Warning lamps. All warning detachment and no leakage of brake motorcycle shall comply with the brake lamps shall be mounted in the rider’s fluid. system requirements in S5.1.4. A brake view. S5.3 Measurement of dynamic on the asymmetric wheel (with respect S5.1.10.1 Split service brake system performance. There are two ways in to the longitudinal axis) is not required. S5.1.6 Three-wheeled motorcycles of warning lamps. which brake system performance is (a) Each motorcycle that is equipped category 3–2. Each category 3–2 measured. The particular method to be with a split service brake system shall motorcycle shall be equipped with a used is specified in the respective tests be fitted with a red warning lamp, parking brake system plus one of the in S6. following service brake systems: which shall be activated: S5.3.1 Stopping distance. (1) When there is a hydraulic failure (a) Based on the basic equations of (a) Two separate service brake ≤ systems, except CBS, which, when on the application of a force of 90 N motion: applied together, operate the brakes on on the control; or S = 0.1·V + (X) ·V2, (2) Without actuation of the brake all wheels; or Where: (b) A split service brake system; or control, when the brake fluid level in the master cylinder reservoir falls below S = stopping distance in meters (c) A CBS that operates the brake on V = initial vehicle speed in km/h all wheels and a secondary brake system the greater of: (i) That which is specified by the X = a variable based on the requirement for which may be the parking brake system. each test S5.1.7 Three-wheeled motorcycles of manufacturer; or categories 3–5. Each category 3–5 (ii) That which is less than or equal (b) To calculate the corrected stopping motorcycle shall be equipped with: to half of the fluid reservoir capacity. distance using the actual vehicle test (a) A parking brake system; and (b) To permit function checking, the speed, the following formula is used: (b) A foot actuated service brake warning lamp shall be illuminated by Ss = 0.1·Vs + (Sa¥0.1·Va) · Vs2/Va2, system which operates the brakes on all the activation of the ignition switch and Where: shall be extinguished when the check wheels by way of either: Ss = corrected stopping distance in meters (1) A split service brake system; or has been completed. The warning lamp Vs = specified vehicle test speed in km/h (2) A CBS and a secondary brake shall remain on while a failure Sa = actual stopping distance in meters system, which may be the parking brake condition exists whenever the ignition Va = actual vehicle test speed in km/h system. switch is in the ‘‘on’’ position. S5.1.8 Two separate service brake (c) Each indicator lamp shall have the Note to S5.3.1(b): This equation is only systems. For motorcycles where two legend ‘‘Brake Failure’’ on or adjacent to valid when the actual test speed (Va) is ± separate service brake systems are it in letters not less than 3/32 of an inch within 5 km/h of the specified test speed installed, the systems may share a high that shall be legible to the driver (Vs). common brake, if a failure in one system in daylight when lighted. S5.3.2 Continuous deceleration does not affect the performance of the S5.1.10.2 Antilock brake system recording. The other method used to other. warning lamps. measure performance is the continuous
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51674 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
recording of the vehicle instantaneous S6.1.6 Vehicle position and wheel (e) Number of decelerations. There deceleration from the moment a force is lock. The vehicle is positioned in the shall be 100 decelerations per brake applied to the brake control until the center of the test lane for the beginning system. end of the stop. of each stop. Stops are made without the (f) For the first stop, accelerate the S6. Test conditions, procedures and vehicle wheels passing outside the vehicle to the initial speed and then performance requirements. applicable test lane and without wheel actuate the brake control under the S6.1 General. lock. conditions specified until the final S6.1.1 Test surfaces. S6.1.7 Test sequence. Test sequence speed is reached. Then reaccelerate to S6.1.1.1 High friction surface. A is as specified in Table 1. the initial speed and maintain that high friction surface is used for all S6.2 Preparation. speed until the brake temperature falls dynamic brake tests excluding the ABS S6.2.1 Engine idle speed. The engine to the specified initial value. When tests where a low-friction surface is idle speed is set to the manufacturer’s these conditions are met, reapply the specified. The high-friction surface test specification. brake as specified. Repeat this area is a clean, dry and level surface, S6.2.2 Tire pressures. The tires are procedure for the number of specified with a gradient of ≤ 1 percent. The high- inflated to the manufacturer’s decelerations. After burnishing, adjust friction surface has a peak braking specification for the vehicle loading the brakes in accordance with the coefficient (PBC) of 0.9. condition for the test. manufacturer’s recommendations. S6.2.3 Control application points S6.1.1.2 Low-friction surface. A low- S6.3 Dry stop test—single brake and direction. For a hand control lever, friction surface is used for ABS tests control actuated. the input force (F) is applied on the where a low-friction surface is specified. S6.3.1 Vehicle condition. control lever’s forward surface The low-friction surface test area is a (a) The test is applicable to all perpendicular to the axis of the lever clean and level surface, which may be motorcycle categories. fulcrum and its outermost point on the wet or dry, with a gradient of ≤ 1 (b) Laden. For vehicles fitted with plane along which the control lever percent. The low-friction surface has a CBS and split service brake system, the rotates (see Figure 1). The input force is PBC of ≤ 0.45. vehicle is tested in the lightly loaded applied to a point located 50 condition in addition to the laden S6.1.1.3 Measurement of PBC. The millimeters (mm) from the outermost PBC is measured using the American condition. point of the control lever, measured (c) Engine disconnected. Society for Testing and Materials along the axis between the central axis (ASTM) E1136–93 (Reapproved 2003) S6.3.2 Test conditions and of the fulcrum of the lever and its procedure. standard reference test tire, in outermost point. For a foot control accordance with ASTM Method E1337– (a) Initial brake temperature. Initial pedal, the input force is applied to the brake temperature is ≥ 55 °C and ≤ 100 90 (Reapproved 2008), at a speed of 64 center of, and at right angles to, the ° km/h (both publications incorporated by C. control pedal. (b) Test speed. reference; see § 571.5). S6.2.4 Brake temperature (1) Motorcycle categories 3–1 and 3– S6.1.1.4 Parking brake system tests. measurement. The brake temperature is 2: 40 km/h or 0.9 Vmax, whichever is The specified test slope has a clean and measured on the approximate center of lower. dry surface that does not deform under the facing length and width of the most (2) Motorcycle categories 3–3, 3–4 and the weight of the motorcycle. heavily loaded shoe or disc pad, one per 3–5: 60 km/h or 0.9 Vmax, whichever is S6.1.1.5 Test lane width. For two- brake, using a plug-type thermocouple lower. wheeled motorcycles (motorcycle that is embedded in the friction (c) Brake application. Each service categories 3–1 and 3–3) the test lane material, as shown in Figure 2. brake system control actuated width is 2.5 meters. For three-wheeled S6.2.5 Burnishing procedure. The separately. motorcycles (motorcycle categories 3–2, vehicle brakes are burnished prior to (d) Brake actuation force. 3–4 and 3–5) the test lane width is 2.5 evaluating performance. (1) Hand control: ≤ 200 N. meters plus the vehicle width. S6.2.5.1 Vehicle condition. (2) Foot control: S6.1.2 Ambient temperature. The (a) Vehicle lightly loaded. (i) ≤ 350 N for motorcycle categories ° ambient temperature is between 4 C (b) Engine disconnected. 3–1, 3–2, 3–3 and 3–5. ° and 45 C. S6.2.5.2 Conditions and procedure. (ii) ≤ 500 N for motorcycle category 3– S6.1.3 Wind speed. The wind speed (a) Initial brake temperature. Initial 4. is not more than 5 meters per second brake temperature before each brake ≤ ° (e) Number of stops: until the vehicle (m/s). application is 100 C. meets the performance requirements, S6.1.4 Test speed tolerance. The test (b) Test speed. (1) Initial speed: 50 km/h or 0.8 with a maximum of 6 stops. speed tolerance is ± 5 km/h. In the event (f) For each stop, accelerate the Vmax, whichever is lower. of the actual test speed deviating from vehicle to the test speed and then the specified test speed (but within the (2) Final speed = 5 to 10 km/h. (c) Brake application. Each service actuate the brake control under the ± 5 km/h tolerance), the actual stopping brake system control actuated conditions specified in this paragraph. distance is corrected using the formula separately. S6.3.3 Performance requirements. in S5.3.1(b). (d) Vehicle deceleration. When the brakes are tested in S6.1.5 Automatic transmission. (1) Single front brake system only: accordance with the test procedure set Motorcycles with automatic (i) 3.0–3.5 meters per second squared out in paragraph S6.3.2., the stopping transmission shall meet all test (m/s2) for motorcycle categories 3–3 and distance shall be as specified in column requirements—whether they are for 3–4 2 of Table 2. ‘‘engine connected’’ or ‘‘engine (ii) 1.5–2.0 m/s2 for motorcycle S6.4 Dry stop test—all service brake disconnected.’’ If an automatic categories 3–1 and 3–2 controls actuated. transmission has a neutral position, the (2) Single rear brake system only: 1.5– S6.4.1 Vehicle condition. neutral position is selected for tests 2.0 m/s2 (a) The test is applicable to where ‘‘engine disconnected’’ is (3) CBS or split service brake system, motorcycle categories 3–3, 3–4 and 3–5. specified. and category 3–5: 3.5–4.0 m/s2 (b) Lightly loaded.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51675
(c) Engine disconnected. (e) Number of stops: until the vehicle (2) Drum brakes with ventilation and S6.4.2 Test conditions and procedure. meets the performance requirements, open inspection ports. The water spray (a) Initial brake temperature. Initial with a maximum of 6 stops. equipment is installed as follows: brake temperature is ≥ 55 °C and ≤ 100 (f) For each stop, accelerate the (i) Water is sprayed equally onto both °C. vehicle to the test speed and then sides of the drum brake assembly (on (b) Test speed. Test speed is 100 km/ actuate the brake control(s) under the the stationary back plate and on the h or 0.9 Vmax, whichever is lower. conditions specified in this paragraph. rotating drum) with a flow rate of 15 (c) Brake application. Simultaneous S6.5.3 Performance requirements. liters/hr. actuation of both service brake system When the brakes are tested in (ii) The spray nozzles are positioned controls, if so equipped, or of the single accordance with the test procedure set two thirds of the distance from the outer service brake system control in the case out in paragraph S6.5.2, the stopping circumference of the rotating drum to of a service brake system that operates distance (S) shall be ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0067 V2 the wheel hub center. on all wheels. (where V is the specified test speed in (iii) The nozzle position is > 15° from (d) Brake actuation force. km/h and S is the required stopping the edge of any opening in the drum (1) Hand control: ≤ 250 N. distance in meters). back plate. (2) Foot control: S6.6 Wet brake test. S6.6.3 Baseline test—test conditions ≤ (i) 400 N for motorcycle categories S6.6.1 General information. and procedure. 3–3 and 3–4. (a) The test in paragraph S6.3 (dry ≤ (a) The test is comprised of two parts (ii) 500 N for motorcycle category 3– that are carried out consecutively for stop test—single brake control actuated) 5. each brake system: is carried out for each brake system but (e) Number of stops: until the vehicle (1) A baseline test based on the dry with the brake control force that results meets the performance requirements, stop test—single brake control actuated in a vehicle deceleration of 2.5–3.0 m/ 2 with a maximum of 6 stops. (S6.3). s , and the following is determined: (f) For each stop, accelerate the (2) A single wet brake stop using the (1) The average brake control force vehicle to the test speed and then same test parameters as in (1), but with measured when the vehicle is traveling actuate the brake control under the the brake(s) being continuously sprayed between 80 percent and 10 percent of conditions specified in this paragraph. with water while the test is conducted the specified test speed. S6.4.3 Performance requirements. in order to measure the brakes’ (2) The average vehicle deceleration When the brakes are tested in performance in wet conditions. in the period 0.5 to 1.0 seconds after the accordance with the test procedure set (b) The test is not applicable to point of actuation of the brake control. (3) The maximum vehicle out in paragraph S6.4.2., the stopping parking brake systems unless it is the ≤ 2 deceleration during the complete stop distance (S) shall be S 0.0060 V secondary brake. (where V is the specified test speed in but excluding the final 0.5 seconds. (c) Drum brakes or fully enclosed disc km/h and S is the required stopping (b) Conduct 3 baseline stops and brakes are excluded from this test unless distance in meters). average the values obtained in (1), (2), ventilation or open inspection ports are S6.5 High speed test. and (3). present. S6.5.1 Vehicle condition. S6.6.4 Wet brake test—test (a) The test is applicable to (d) This test requires the vehicle to be conditions and procedure. motorcycle categories 3–3, 3–4 and 3–5. fitted with instrumentation that gives a (a) The vehicle is ridden at the test (b) Test is not required for vehicles continuous recording of brake control speed used in the baseline test set out with Vmax ≤ 125 km/h. force and vehicle deceleration. in S6.6.3 with the water spray (c) Lightly loaded. S6.6.2 Vehicle condition. equipment operating on the brake(s) to (d) Engine connected (clutch engaged) (a) The test is applicable to all be tested and with no application of the with the transmission in the highest motorcycle categories. brake system. gear. (b) Laden. For vehicles fitted with (b) After a distance of ≥ 500 m, apply S6.5.2 Test conditions and CBS and split service brake system, the the average brake control force procedure. vehicle is tested in the lightly loaded determined in the baseline test for the (a) Initial brake temperature. Initial condition in addition to the laden brake system being tested. brake temperature is ≥ 55 °C and ≤ 100 condition. (c) Measure the average vehicle °C. (c) Engine disconnected. deceleration in the period 0.5 to 1.0 (b) Test speed. (d) Each brake is fitted with water seconds after the point of actuation of (1) Test speed is 0.8 Vmax for spray equipment as shown in Figure 3. the brake control. motorcycles with Vmax > 125 km/h and (1) Disc brakes—sketch of water spray (d) Measure the maximum vehicle < 200 km/h. equipment. The disc brake water spray deceleration during the complete stop (2) Test speed is 160 km/h for equipment is installed as follows: but excluding the final 0.5 seconds. motorcycles with Vmax ≥ 200 km/h. (i) Water is sprayed onto each brake S6.6.5 Performance requirements. (c) Brake application. Simultaneous with a flow rate of 15 liters/hr. The When the brakes are tested in actuation of both service brake system water is equally distributed on each side accordance with the test procedure set controls, if so equipped, or of the single of the rotor. out in paragraph S6.6.4, the wet brake service brake system control in the case (ii) If the surface of the rotor has any deceleration performance shall be: of a service brake system that operates shielding, the spray is applied 45° prior (a) The value measured in paragraph on all wheels. to the shield. S6.6.4(c) shall be ≥ 60 percent of the (d) Brake actuation force. (iii) If it is not possible to locate the average deceleration values recorded in (1) Hand control: ≤ 200 N. spray in the position shown on the the baseline test in paragraph (2) Foot control: sketch, or if the spray coincides with a S6.6.3(a)(2), i.e., in the period 0.5 to 1.0 (i) ≤ 350 N for motorcycle categories brake ventilation hole or similar, the seconds after the point of actuation of 3–3 and 3–4. spray nozzle may be advanced by an the brake control; and (ii) ≤ 500 N for motorcycle category 3– additional 90° maximum from the edge (b) The value measured in S6.6.4(d) 5. of the pad, using the same radius. shall be ≤ 120 percent of the average
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51676 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
deceleration values recorded in the S6.7.3.2 Test conditions and S6.8.2 Test conditions and baseline test S6.6.3(a)(3), i.e., during the procedure—heating procedure. procedure. complete stop but excluding the final (a) Initial brake temperature. Initial (a) Initial brake temperature. Initial 0.5 seconds. brake temperature is (prior to first stop brake temperature is ≤ 100 °C. S6.7 Heat fade test. only) ≥ 55 °C and ≤ 100 °C. (b) Test surface gradient. Test surface S6.7.1 General information. (b) Test speed. gradient is equal to 18 percent. (a) The test comprises three parts that (1) Single brake system, front wheel (c) Brake actuation force. are carried out consecutively for each braking only: 100 km/h or 0.7 Vmax, (1) Hand control: ≤ 400 N. brake system: whichever is the lower. (2) Foot control: ≤ 500 N. (1) A baseline test using the dry stop (2) Single brake system, rear wheel (d) For the first part of the test, park test—single brake control actuated braking only: 80 km/h or 0.7 Vmax, the vehicle on the test surface gradient (S6.3). whichever is the lower. facing up the slope by applying the (2) A heating procedure which (3) CBS or split service brake system: parking brake system under the consists of a series of repeated stops in 100 km/h or 0.7 Vmax, whichever is the conditions specified in this paragraph. If order to heat the brake(s). lower. the vehicle remains stationary, start the (3) A hot brake stop using the dry stop (c) Brake application. Each service measurement of the test period. test—single brake control actuated brake system control actuated (e) The vehicle must remain (S6.3), to measure the brake’s separately. stationary to the limits of traction of the performance after the heating (d) Brake actuation force. braked wheels. procedure. (1) For the first stop: The constant (f) On completion of the test with (b) The test is applicable to control force that achieves a vehicle vehicle facing up the gradient, repeat motorcycle categories 3–3, 3–4 and 3–5. deceleration rate of 3.0—3.5 m/s2 the same test procedure with the vehicle (c) The test is not applicable to while the vehicle is decelerating between 80 facing down the gradient. parking brake systems and secondary S6.8.3 Performance requirements. service brake systems. percent and 10 percent of the specified speed. When tested in accordance with the test (d) All stops are carried out with the procedure set out in S6.8.2, the parking motorcycle laden. (2) For the remaining stops: (i) The same constant brake control brake system shall hold the vehicle (e) The heating procedure requires the stationary for 5 minutes when the motorcycle to be fitted with force as used for the first stop. (ii) Number of stops: 10. vehicle is both facing up and facing instrumentation that gives a continuous down the gradient. recording of brake control force and (iii) Interval between stops: 1000 m. (e) Carry out a stop to the conditions S6.9 ABS tests. vehicle deceleration. S6.9.1 General. S6.7.2 Baseline test. specified in this paragraph and then immediately use maximum acceleration (a) The tests are only applicable to the S6.7.2.1 Vehicle condition—baseline ABS fitted on motorcycle categories 3– test. Engine disconnected. to reach the specified speed and maintain that speed until the next stop 1 and 3–3. S6.7.2.2 Test conditions and (b) The tests are to confirm the is made. procedure—baseline test. performance of brake systems equipped (a) Initial brake temperature. Initial S6.7.4 Hot brake stop—test with ABS and their performance in the brake temperature is ≥ 55 °C and ≤ 100 conditions and procedure. Perform a event of ABS electrical failure. °C. single stop under the conditions used in (c) Fully cycling means that the anti- (b) Test speed. Test speed is 60 the baseline test (S6.7.2) for the brake lock system is repeatedly modulating km/h or 0.9 Vmax, whichever is the system that has been heated during the the brake force to prevent the directly lower. procedure in accordance with S6.7.3. controlled wheels from locking. (c) Brake application. Each service This stop is carried out within one (d) Wheel-lock is allowed as long as brake system control is actuated minute of the completion of the the stability of the vehicle is not affected separately. procedure set out in S6.7.3 with a brake to the extent that it requires the operator (d) Brake actuation force. control application force less than or ≤ to release the control or causes a vehicle (1) Hand control: 200 N. equal to the force used during the test wheel to pass outside the test lane. (2) Foot control: set out in S6.7.2. (i) ≤ 350 N for motorcycle categories (e) The test series comprises the S6.7.5 Performance requirements. individual tests in Table 3, which may 3–3 and 3–4. When the brakes are tested in (ii) ≤ 500 N for motorcycle category be carried out in any order. accordance with the test procedure set 3–5. S6.9.2 Vehicle condition. out in S6.7.4, the stopping distance S (e) Accelerate the vehicle to the test 2 (a) Lightly loaded. shall be ≤ 1.67 S ¥0.67 x 0.1V, speed, actuate the brake control under 1 (b) Engine disconnected. the conditions specified and record the Where: S6.9.3 Stops on a high friction control force required to achieve the S1 = corrected stopping distance in meters surface. vehicle braking performance specified achieved in the baseline test set out in S6.9.3.1 Test conditions and in the table to S6.3.3 (Table 2). S6.7.2. procedure. S6.7.3 Heating procedure. S2 = corrected stopping distance in meters (a) Initial brake temperature. Initial S6.7.3.1 Vehicle condition—heating achieved in the hot brake stop set out in brake temperature is ≥ 55 °C and ≤ 100 procedure. Engine transmission: S6.7.4. °C. (a) From the specified test speed to 50 V = specified test speed in km/h. (b) Test speed. Test speed is 60 km/ per cent specified test speed: connected, S6.8 Parking brake system test—for h or 0.9 Vmax, whichever is lower. with the highest appropriate gear motorcycles with parking brakes. (c) Brake application. Simultaneous selected such that the engine speed S6.8.1 Vehicle condition. actuation of both service brake system remains above the manufacturer’s (a) The test is applicable to controls, if so equipped, or of the single specified idle speed. motorcycle categories 3–2, 3–4 and 3–5. service brake control in the case of a (b) From 50 per cent specified test (b) Laden. service brake system that operates on all speed to standstill: disconnected. (c) Engine disconnected. wheels.
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51677
(d) Brake actuation force. The force ensure that the ABS will cycle fully (b) Initial brake temperature. Initial applied is that which is necessary to throughout each stop, down to 10 km/ brake temperature is ≥55 °C and ≤100 ensure that the ABS will cycle fully h. °C. throughout each stop, down to 10 km/ (f) Brake application rate. The brake (c) Test speed. The speed that will h. control actuation force is applied in 0.2– result in 50 km/h or 0.5 Vmax, (e) If one wheel is not equipped with 0.5 seconds. whichever is the lower, at the point ABS, the control for the service brake on (g) Number of stops: until the vehicle where the vehicle passes from the low that wheel is actuated with a force that meets the performance requirements, friction to the high friction surface. is lower than the force that will cause with a maximum of 3 stops. (d) Brake application. the wheel to lock. (h) For each stop, accelerate the (1) Each service brake system control (f) Number of stops: until the vehicle vehicle to the test speed and then applied separately. meets the performance requirements, actuate the brake control under the (2) Where ABS is fitted to both brake with a maximum of 6 stops. conditions specified in this paragraph. systems, simultaneous application of both brake controls in addition to (1). (g) For each stop, accelerate the S6.9.5.2 Performance requirements. (e) Brake actuation force. The force vehicle to the test speed and then When the brakes are tested in actuate the brake control under the applied is that which is necessary to accordance with the test procedures set ensure that the ABS will cycle fully conditions specified in this paragraph. out in S6.9.5.1, there shall be no wheel S6.9.3.2 Performance requirements. throughout each stop, down to 10 km/ lock beyond that allowed for in h. When the brakes are tested in paragraph S6.9.1(d), and the vehicle accordance with the test procedures (f) Number of stops: until the vehicle wheels shall stay within the test lane. meets the performance requirements, referred to in S6.9.3.1: S6.9.6 Wheel lock check—high to (a) The stopping distance (S) shall be with a maximum of 3 stops. low friction surface transition. ≤ 0.0063 V2 (where V is the specified (g) For each stop, accelerate the S6.9.6.1 Test conditions and test speed in km/h and S is the required vehicle to the test speed and then procedure. stopping distance in meters); and actuate the brake control before the (b) there shall be no wheel lock (a) Test surfaces. A high friction vehicle reaches the transition from one beyond that allowed for in paragraph surface immediately followed by a low friction surface to the other. S6.9.1(d), and the vehicle wheels shall friction surface. (h) Record the vehicle’s continuous (b) Initial brake temperature. Initial deceleration. stay within the test lane. ≥ ° ≤ S6.9.4 Stops on a low friction brake temperature is 55 C and 100 S6.9.7.2 Performance requirements. ° surface. C. When the brakes are tested in S6.9.4.1 Test conditions and (c) Test speed. The speed that will accordance with the test procedures set procedure. As set out in S6.9.3.1, but result in 50 km/h or 0.5 Vmax, out in S6.9.7.1: using the low friction surface instead of whichever is the lower, at the point (a) There shall be no wheel lock the high friction one. where the vehicle passes from the high beyond that allowed for in paragraph S6.9.4.2 Performance requirements. friction to the low friction surface. S6.9.1(d), and the vehicle wheels shall When the brakes are tested in (d) Brake application. stay within the test lane, and accordance with the test procedures set (1) Each service brake system control (b) within 1 second of the rear wheel out in S6.9.4.1: actuated separately. passing the transition point between the (a) the stopping distance (S) shall be (2) Where ABS is fitted to both brake low and high friction surfaces, the ≤ 0.0056 V2/P (where V is the specified systems, simultaneous actuation of both vehicle deceleration shall increase. test speed in km/h, P is the peak braking brake controls in addition to (1). S6.9.8 Stops with an ABS electrical coefficient and S is the required (e) Brake actuation force. The force failure. stopping distance in meters); and applied is that which is necessary to S6.9.8.1 Test conditions and (b) there shall be no wheel lock ensure that the ABS will cycle fully procedure. With the ABS electrical beyond that allowed for in paragraph throughout each stop, down to 10 km/ system disabled, carry out the test set S6.9.1(d), and the vehicle wheels shall h. out in S6.3 (dry stop test—single brake stay within the test lane. (f) Number of stops: until the vehicle control actuated) applying the S6.9.5 Wheel lock checks on high meets the performance requirements, conditions relevant to the brake system and low friction surfaces. with a maximum of 3 stops. and vehicle being tested. S6.9.8.2 Performance requirements. S6.9.5.1 Test conditions and (g) For each stop, accelerate the When the brakes are tested in procedure. vehicle to the test speed and then accordance with the test procedure set (a) Test surfaces. High friction or low actuate the brake control before the friction surface, as applicable. out in S6.9.8.1: vehicle reaches the transition from one (a) The system shall comply with the (b) Initial brake temperature. Initial friction surface to the other. brake temperature is ≥ 55 °C and ≤ 100 failure warning requirements of ° S6.9.6.2 Performance requirements. S5.1.10.2; and C. When the brakes are tested in (c) Test speed. (b) the minimum requirements for (1) On the high friction surface: 80 accordance with the test procedures set stopping distance shall be as specified km/h or 0.8 Vmax, whichever is lower. out in S6.9.6.1, there shall be no wheel in column 2 under the heading ‘‘Single (2) On the low friction surface: 60 km/ lock beyond that allowed for in brake system, rear wheel(s) braking h or 0.8 Vmax, whichever is lower. paragraph S6.9.1(d), and the vehicle only’’ in Table 2. (d) Brake application. wheels shall stay within the test lane. S6.10 Partial failure test—for split (1) Each service brake system control S6.9.7 Wheel lock check—low to service brake systems. actuated separately. high friction surface transition. S6.10.1 General information. (2) Where ABS is fitted to both brake S6.9.7.1 Test conditions and (a) The test is only applicable to systems, simultaneous actuation of both procedure. vehicles that are equipped with split brake controls in addition to (1). (a) Test surfaces. A low friction service brake systems. (e) Brake actuation force. The force surface immediately followed by a high (b) The test is to confirm the applied is that which is necessary to friction surface with a PBC ≥ 0.8. performance of the remaining subsystem
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 51678 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
in the event of a hydraulic system out in S6.11.2, the stopping distance TABLE 2—PERFORMANCE REQUIRE- leakage failure. shall be as specified in column 2 of MENTS, DRY STOP TEST—SINGLE S6.10.2 Vehicle condition. Table 4. Note that if the power BRAKE CONTROL ACTUATED—Con- (a) The test is applicable to assistance may be activated by more tinued motorcycle categories 3–3, 3–4 and 3–5. than one control, the above performance (b) Lightly loaded. shall be achieved when each control is Column 1 Column 2 (c) Engine disconnected. actuated separately. S6.10.3 Test conditions and Stopping Distance(s) Tables and Figures to § 571.122 procedure. Motorcycle (where V is the specified (a) Initial brake temperature. Initial category test speed in km/h and S is TABLE 1—TEST SEQUENCE the required stopping dis- brake temperature is ≥ 55 °C and ≤ 100 tance in meters) ° C. Test order Paragraph (b) Test speed. Test speed is 50 km/ 3–5 ...... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0077 V 2. h and 100 km/h or 0.8 Vmax, whichever 1. Dry stop—single brake con- is lower. trol actuated ...... S6 .3 Vehicles with CBS—secondary service (c) Brake actuation force. 2. Dry stop—all service brake brake system ≤ controls actuated ...... S6 .4 (1) Hand control: 250 N. ALL ...... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0154 V 2. (2) Foot control: ≤ 400 N. 3. High speed ...... S6 .5 4. Wet brake ...... S6 .6 (d) Number of stops: until the vehicle 5. If fitted: meets the performance requirements, 6.1. Parking brake system .. S6 .8 TABLE 3—ABS TESTS with a maximum of 6 stops for each test 6.2. ABS ...... S6 .9 speed. 6.3. Partial failure, for split ABS Tests Paragraph (e) Alter the service brake system to service brake systems ..... S6 .10 induce a complete loss of braking in any 6.4. Power-assisted braking a. Stops on a high friction sur- one subsystem. Then, for each stop, system failure ...... S6 .11 face—as specified in accelerate the vehicle to the test speed 6. Heat fade ...... S6 .7 S6.1.1.1 ...... S6.9.3 b. Stops on a low friction sur- and then actuate the brake control under face—as specified in the conditions specified in this TABLE 2—PERFORMANCE REQUIRE- S6.1.1.2 ...... S6.9.4 paragraph. MENTS, DRY STOP TEST—SINGLE c. Wheel lock checks on high (f) Repeat the test for each subsystem. BRAKE CONTROL ACTUATED and low friction surfaces ...... S6.9.5 S6.10.4 Performance requirements. d. Wheel lock check—high to When the brakes are tested in Column 1 Column 2 low friction surface transition S6.9.6 accordance with the test procedure set e. Wheel lock check—low to out in S6.10.3: Stopping Distance(s) high friction surface transition S6.9.7 (a) the system shall comply with the Motorcycle (where V is the specified f. Stops with an ABS electrical test speed in km/h and S is failure ...... S6.9.8 failure warning requirements set out in category the required stopping dis- paragraph S5.1.10.1; and tance in meters) (b) the stopping distance (S) shall be TABLE 4—PERFORMANCE REQUIRE- ≤ 2 Single brake system, front wheel(s) braking 0.1 V + 0.0117 V (where V is the MENTS, POWER-ASSISTED BRAKING specified test speed in km/h and S is the only SYSTEM FAILURE TEST required stopping distance in meters). 3–1 ...... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0111 V 2. S6.11 Power-assisted braking system 3–2 ...... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0143 V 2. Column 1 Column 2 failure test. 3–3 ...... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0087 V 2. S6.11.1 General information. 3–4 ...... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0105 V 2. Stopping Distance(s) (a) The test is not conducted when the 3–5 ...... Not applicable. (where V is the specified vehicle is equipped with another Vehicle category test speed in km/h and S Single brake system, rear wheel(s) braking is the required stopping separate service brake system. distance in meters) (b) The test is to confirm the only performance of the service brake system 3–1 ...... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0143 V 2. Single brake system in the event of failure of the power 3–2 ...... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0143 V 2. ≤ 2 assistance. 3–3 ...... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0133 V 2. 3–1 ...... S 0.1 V + 0.0143 V . S6.11.2 Test conditions and 3–4 ...... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0105 V 2. 3–2 ...... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0143 V 2. procedure. Carry out the test set out in 3–5 ...... Not applicable. 3–3 ...... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0133 V 2. ≤ 2 S6.3.3 (dry stop test—single brake 3–4 ...... S 0.1 V + 0.0105 V . control actuated) for each service brake Vehicles with CBS or split service brake systems: For laden and lightly loaded Vehicles with CBS or split service brake system with the power assistance conditions systems disabled. S6.11.3 Performance requirements. 3–1 and 3–2 .... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0087 V 2. All ...... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0154 V 2. When the brakes are tested in 3–3 ...... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0076 V 2. accordance with the test procedure set 3–4 ...... S ≤ 0.1 V + 0.0071 V 2. BILLING CODE P
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 51679
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with ER24AU12.000 ER24AU12.001 51680 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Issued on: August 14, 2012. David L. Strickland, Administrator. [FR Doc. 2012–20480 Filed 8–23–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE C
VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:23 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\24AUR3.SGM 24AUR3 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with ER24AU12.002 i
Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 77, No. 165 Friday, August 24, 2012
CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING AUGUST
Federal Register/Code of Federal Regulations At the end of each month the Office of the Federal Register General Information, indexes and other finding 202–741–6000 publishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), which aids lists parts and sections affected by documents published since Laws 741–6000 the revision date of each title. Ch. X...... 47328 Presidential Documents 3 CFR Executive orders and proclamations 741–6000 12 CFR The United States Government Manual 741–6000 Proclamations: 8844...... 45477 234...... 45907 Other Services 8845...... 45895 235...... 46258 Electronic and on-line services (voice) 741–6020 8846...... 47763 1005...... 50244 Privacy Act Compilation 741–6064 8847...... 47765 1072...... 46606 Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 741–6043 Executive Orders: Proposed Rules: TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 741–6086 13621...... 45471 1002...... 50390 13622...... 45897 1005...... 50404 ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 13623...... 49345 1024...... 49090, 51116 World Wide Web Administrative Orders: 1026...... 49090, 51116 Presidential Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications 13 CFR is located at: www.fdsys.gov. Determinations: Ch. 1...... 46806, 46855 Federal Register information and research tools, including Public No. 2012–13 of August 121...... 49991 Inspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access are located at: 10, 2012 ...... 50557 www.ofr.gov. Notices: 14 CFR Notice of July 17, 2012 E-mail (Correction) ...... 45469 21...... 45921 FEDREGTOC-L (Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV) is Notice of August 15, 27...... 48058, 50576 an open e-mail service that provides subscribers with a digital 2012 ...... 49699 29...... 50576 form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The digital form 39 ...... 46929, 46932, 46935, of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes HTML and 5 CFR 46937, 46940, 46943, 46946, PDF links to the full text of each document. 7501...... 46601 47267, 47273, 47275, 47277, To join or leave, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select 48419, 48420, 48423, 48425, Proposed Rules: Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list 48427, 49702, 49705, 49708, Ch. XXII ...... 47328 (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 49710, 50371, 50577, 50582, PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail 6 CFR 51459, 51462 service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. 71 ...... 46282, 46283, 46284, 5...... 40000, 47767 To subscribe, go to http://listserv.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html 48060, 49712, 49719, 49720, and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow 7 CFR 50907, 51464 the instructions. 95...... 50909 FEDREGTOC-L and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot 59...... 50561 97 ...... 45922, 45925, 50012, respond to specific inquiries. 205...... 45903 50014 253...... 50903 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 400...... 50584 272...... 48045 Federal Register system to: [email protected] Proposed Rules: 273...... 48045 The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 39 ...... 45513, 45518, 45979, 782...... 51459 regulations. 45981, 46340, 46343, 47329, Reminders. Effective January 1, 2009, the Reminders, including Proposed Rules: 47330, 47563, 47568, 47570, Rules Going Into Effect and Comments Due Next Week, no longer 278...... 48461 48110, 48469, 48473, 49386, appear in the Reader Aids section of the Federal Register. This 279...... 48461 49389, 49394, 49396, 50054, information can be found online at http://www.regulations.gov. 319...... 46339 50407, 50411, 50414, 50644, 50954 CFR Checklist. Effective January 1, 2009, the CFR Checklist no 8 CFR longer appears in the Federal Register. This information can be 43...... 49740 found online at http://bookstore.gpo.gov/. Proposed Rules: 71 ...... 45983, 45984, 45985, 235...... 47558 45987, 48476, 49399, 49400, FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, AUGUST 50417, 50419, 50646, 50647, 10 CFR 50648, 50656 45469–45894...... 1 50561–50902...... 22 2...... 46562 91...... 49740, 50420 45895–46256...... 2 50903–51458...... 23 11...... 46257 97...... 50420 46257–46600...... 3 51459–51680...... 24 12...... 46562 121...... 50420 46601–46928...... 6 25...... 46257 125...... 50420 46929–47266...... 7 51...... 46562 129...... 50420 47267–47510...... 8 54...... 46562 135...... 50420 47511–47766...... 9 61...... 46562 145...... 49740 47767–48044...... 10 430...... 49701 400...... 50956 48045–48418...... 13 431...... 49701 401...... 50956 48419–48854...... 14 Proposed Rules: 15 CFR 48855–49344...... 15 61...... 48107 49345–49700...... 16 Ch. II ...... 47328 774 ...... 45927, 46948, 48429 49701–49990...... 17 429...... 49064, 49739 801...... 49721 49991–50370...... 20 430 ...... 48108, 49064, 49739 Proposed Rules: 50371–50560...... 21 Ch. III ...... 47328 90...... 47783
VerDate Mar 15 2010 17:00 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\24AUCU.LOC 24AUCU mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGCU ii Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Reader Aids
922...... 46985 2704...... 48429 45956, 45958, 45962, 45965, 1623...... 46995 1400...... 46346 2705...... 48429 46952, 46960, 46961, 47530, 2706...... 48429 47533, 47535, 47536, 48061, 46 CFR 16 CFR 4022...... 48855 48062, 50021, 50033, 50378, 2...... 47544 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 50595, 50602, 50608, 50611, Proposed Rules: 23...... 50056 1...... 47787 50936 401...... 45539, 47582 312...... 46643 1926...... 49741 60...... 48433, 49490 801...... 50057 63...... 45967, 49490 47 CFR 30 CFR 81 ...... 46295, 48062, 50033 0...... 48090 17 CFR 82...... 47768 250...... 50856 1...... 46307, 50628 98...... 48072, 51477 1...... 48208 Proposed Rules: 15...... 48097 131...... 46298 43...... 48060 935...... 46346 25...... 50049, 50628 150...... 46289 230...... 48208 51...... 48448 164...... 46289 240...... 48208, 50016 32 CFR 54...... 48453 241...... 48208 174...... 47287 Proposed Rules: 178...... 46289 73 ...... 46631, 50053, 50630 Proposed Rules: 323...... 46653 79...... 46632, 48102 39...... 50425 179...... 46289 180 ...... 45495, 45498, 46304, 90...... 45503 50...... 47170 33 CFR 46306, 47291, 47296, 47539, Proposed Rules: 100 ...... 46285, 47279, 47519, 1...... 49749 18 CFR 48899, 48902, 48907, 49732, 47520, 47522, 50373 50613, 50617 2...... 45558 Proposed Rules: 110...... 50914 268...... 50622 73...... 50071 35...... 46986 117 ...... 46285, 46286, 47282, 271...... 47302, 47779 76...... 50071 47524, 47525, 50016, 50017, 90...... 45558 19 CFR 272...... 46964 50376, 51470 300 ...... 45968, 50038, 50044 12...... 45479 48 CFR 165 ...... 45488, 45490, 46285, 700...... 46289 Proposed Rules: 46287, 46613, 47282, 47284, 712...... 46289 3001...... 50631 12...... 48918 47525, 48431, 48856, 49349, 716...... 46289 3002...... 50631 163...... 48918 49351, 49730, 50017, 50018, 720...... 46289 3003...... 50631 178...... 48918 50019, 50373, 50593, 50916, 721...... 48858 3004...... 50631 Ch. II ...... 47572 50919, 50921, 50923, 50926, 723...... 46289 3005...... 50631 351...... 50963 50929, 51471, 51473, 51475 725...... 46289 3006...... 50631 Proposed Rules: 3012...... 50631 21 CFR 761...... 46289 110...... 45988 763...... 46289 3018...... 50631 16...... 50372 165 ...... 50062, 50065, 50444 766...... 46289 3022...... 50631 20...... 50589 117 ...... 47787, 47789, 47792 795...... 46289 3023...... 50631 118...... 50372 161...... 45911 796...... 46289 3033...... 50631 500...... 50591 165 ...... 45911, 46349, 47331, 799...... 46289 3035...... 50631 510...... 46612, 47511 47334, 49401 Proposed Rules: 3036...... 50631 520...... 47511 3042...... 50631 34 CFR 49...... 48923 522...... 46612 52 ...... 45523, 45527, 45530, 3045...... 50631 524...... 46612, 47511 Ch. III...... 45991, 47496 45532, 45992, 46008, 46352, 3052...... 50631 807...... 45927 Proposed Rules: 46361, 46664, 46672, 46990, 3053...... 50631 Proposed Rules: Ch. III ...... 46658 47573, 47581, 49308, 49404, Proposed Rules: Ch. I ...... 48491 50446, 50651, 50660, 50964, 4...... 51496 36 CFR 7...... 51496 24 CFR 50966, 50969, 50973 Proposed Rules: 60...... 46371 12...... 51496 25...... 51465 218...... 47337 63...... 46371 19...... 47797 30...... 51465 1192...... 50068 152...... 47351 35...... 47797 201...... 51465 158...... 47351 42...... 51496 37 CFR 202...... 51465 161...... 47351 52...... 51496 203...... 51465 1 ...... 46615, 48612, 48776, 168...... 47351 3016...... 50449 206...... 51465 48828, 49354 180...... 45535, 50661 3052...... 50449 3...... 48612, 48776 271...... 47797 Ch. 10 ...... 50454 25 CFR 5...... 46615, 48776 272...... 46994 502...... 47513 6...... 47528 300 ...... 46009, 50069, 50070 49 CFR 537...... 47514 10...... 46615, 48776 721...... 48924 1...... 49764 571...... 47516 11...... 46615 375...... 48460 573...... 47517 41...... 46615, 48776 41 CFR 385...... 49384 42 ...... 48612, 48680, 48734, Proposed Rules: 393...... 46633 26 CFR 48756 102–37...... 50447 395...... 46640 1...... 45480, 50373 90...... 48612 563...... 47552 44 CFR Proposed Rules: 571...... 48105, 51650 1 ...... 45520, 46987, 51496 38 CFR 64...... 46968 580...... 50381 40...... 47573 Proposed Rules: 65...... 50626 594...... 50637 46...... 47573 3...... 47795 67 ...... 46972, 46980, 49360, Proposed Rules: 51...... 46653, 48111 49367, 49373, 49379 171...... 49168 301...... 48922 39 CFR Proposed Rules: 172...... 49168 20...... 50932 67 ...... 46994, 50665, 50667, 173...... 49168 29 CFR 241...... 46950 50668 175...... 49168 1614...... 51469 176...... 49168 45 CFR 1910...... 46948 40 CFR 178...... 49168 1926...... 46948, 49722 1...... 46289 162...... 48008 190...... 48112 2700...... 48429 9...... 46289, 48858 Proposed Rules: 192...... 48112 2701...... 48429 49...... 48878, 51620 1606...... 46995 193...... 48112 2702...... 48429 52 ...... 45492, 45949, 45954, 1618...... 46995 195...... 48112
VerDate Mar 15 2010 17:33 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\24AUCU.LOC 24AUCU mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGCU Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Reader Aids iii
199...... 48112 50 CFR 648...... 48915 49894, 50214, 50768 20...... 49680, 49868 214...... 50324 17 ...... 45870, 46158, 48368 660 ...... 45508, 47318, 47322, 383...... 46010 50952 223...... 45571 218...... 50290 535...... 51499 679 ...... 46338, 46641, 48916, 224...... 45571 223...... 48108 544...... 50671 50389 424...... 51503 622...... 50388 580...... 50071 Proposed Rules: 622...... 50672 563...... 48492 635...... 47303 17 ...... 47003, 47011, 47352, 665...... 46014 567...... 46677 640...... 50642 47583, 47587, 48934, 49602, 679...... 47356
VerDate Mar 15 2010 17:00 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\24AUCU.LOC 24AUCU mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGCU iv Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 165 / Friday, August 24, 2012 / Reader Aids
(phone, 202–512–1808). The Services Employment and text will also be made Reemployment Rights Act. LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS available on the Internet from (Aug. 16, 2012; 126 Stat. Public Laws Electronic GPO’s Federal Digital System 1306) This is a continuing list of (FDsys) at http://www.gpo.gov/ Notification Service H.R. 4240/P.L. 112–172 public bills from the current fdsys. Some laws may not yet (PENS) session of Congress which be available. Ambassador James R. Lilley have become Federal laws. It and Congressman Stephen J. may be used in conjunction H.R. 1402/P.L. 112–170 Solarz North Korea Human with ‘‘P L U S’’ (Public Laws To authorize the Architect of Rights Reauthorization Act of PENS is a free electronic mail Update Service) on 202–741– the Capitol to establish battery 2012 (Aug. 16, 2012; 126 notification service of newly 6043. This list is also recharging stations for Stat. 1307) enacted public laws. To available online at http:// privately owned vehicles in subscribe, go to http:// www.archives.gov/federal- parking areas under the S. 3510/P.L. 112–173 listserv.gsa.gov/archives/ register/laws. jurisdiction of the House of To prevent harm to the publaws-l.html The text of laws is not Representatives at no net cost national security or published in the Federal to the Federal Government. endangering the military Note: This service is strictly Register but may be ordered (Aug. 16, 2012; 126 Stat. officers and civilian employees for E-mail notification of new in ‘‘slip law’’ (individual 1303) to whom internet publication of laws. The text of laws is not pamphlet) form from the H.R. 3670/P.L. 112–171 certain information applies, available through this service. Superintendent of Documents, To require the Transportation and for other purposes. (Aug. PENS cannot respond to U.S. Government Printing Security Administration to 16, 2012; 126 Stat. 1310) specific inquiries sent to this Office, Washington, DC 20402 comply with the Uniformed Last List August 16, 2012 address.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 17:00 Aug 23, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\24AUCU.LOC 24AUCU mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGCU