[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 137 (Monday, July 18, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 42154]
[FR Doc No: 2011-18085]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 500-1]

BioMETRX, Inc., Biopure Corp. (n/k/a PBBPC, Inc.), Distributed
Energy Systems Corp., Fortified Holdings Corp., Knobias, Inc., and One
IP Voice, Inc. (n/k/a Indian Hill Holdings Corporation); Order of
Suspension of Trading

 July 14, 2011.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
BioMETRX, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since the
period ended September 30, 2008.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Biopure Corp. (n/k/a PBBPC, Inc.) because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended April 30, 2009.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Distributed Energy Systems Corp. because it has not filed any periodic
reports since the period ended March 31, 2008.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Fortified Holdings Corp. because it has not filed any periodic reports
since the period ended September 30, 2008.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
Knobias, Inc. because it has not filed any periodic reports since the
period ended September 30, 2008.
    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of
One IP Voice, Inc. (n/k/a Indian Hill Holdings Corporation) because it
has not filed any periodic reports since the period ended September 30,
2006.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the
protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the
securities of the above-listed companies. Therefore, it is ordered,
pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that
trading in the securities of the above-listed companies is suspended
for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT on July 14, 2011, through 11:59 p.m.
EDT on July 27, 2011.

    By the Commission.
Cathy H. Ahn,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-18085 Filed 7-14-11; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: September 29, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 189)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 56452-56454]
[DOCID:fr29se08-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0675; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-192-AD;
Amendment 39-15682; AD 2008-20-03]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Model F.28 Mark 0070 and Mark
0100 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is superseding an existing airworthiness directive
(AD), which applies to certain Fokker Model F.28 Mark 0070 and 0100
airplanes. That AD currently requires a one-time inspection of the main
landing gear (MLG) main fitting for cracks, and repair if necessary.
The existing AD also currently requires installing a placard and
revising the airplane flight manual to include procedures to prohibit
the application of brakes during backward movement of the airplane.
This new AD requires repetitive eddy current inspections of the MLG
main fitting and rework before further flight as applicable. This AD
results from reports that a final solution eliminating the cause of the
crack initiation mechanism is not yet available and that repetitive
inspections are necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct
cracks in the MLG main fitting, which could result in reduced
structural integrity of the MLG main fitting.

DATES: This AD becomes effective November 3, 2008.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of November 3,
2008.
    On April 26, 2006 (71 FR 14363, March 22, 2006), the Director of
the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of
Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin F100-32-106, including Appendices A
through C and excluding Appendix D, dated February 18, 2005.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O. Box 231, 2150 AE
Nieuw-Vennep, the Netherlands.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is the Document Management
Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30,
West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-1137; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14
CFR part 39 to include an AD that supersedes AD 2006-06-07, amendment
39-14516 (71 FR 14363, March 22, 2006). The existing AD applies to
certain Fokker Model F.28 Mark 0070 and 0100 airplanes. That NPRM was
published in the Federal Register on July 2, 2008 (73 FR 37903). That
NPRM proposed to continue to require a one-time inspection of the main
landing gear (MLG) main fitting for cracks, and repair if necessary.
That NPRM also proposed to continue to require installing a placard and
revising the airplane flight manual (AFM) to include procedures to
prohibit the application of brakes during backward movement of the
airplane. That NPRM also proposed to require repetitive eddy current
inspections of the MLG main fitting and rework before further flight as
applicable.

Comments

    We provided the public the opportunity to participate in the
development of this AD. No comments have been received on the NPRM or
on the determination of the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We have carefully reviewed the available data and determined that
air safety and the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed.

Costs of Compliance

    The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators
to comply with this AD.

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
              Action                  Work hours     Average labor                  Parts                    Cost per       registered      Fleet cost
                                                     rate per hour                                           airplane        airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection (required by AD 2006-06-              2             $80  None................................            $160              11          $1,760
 07).
AFM Revision and Placard                         1              80  None................................              80              11             880
 Installation (required by AD 2006-
 06-07).
Inspection (new required action)..               6              80  $540 ($270 per fitting).............           1,020              12          12,240
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866;
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    (3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES
section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
removing amendment 39-14516 (71 FR 14363, March 22, 2006) and by adding
the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

2008-20-03 Fokker Services B.V.: Amendment 39-15682. Docket No. FAA-
2008-0675; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-192-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This AD becomes effective November 3, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2006-06-07.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Fokker Model F.28 Mark 0070 and Mark 0100
airplanes, certificated in any category, equipped with Messier-Dowty
main landing gears (MLGs).

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports that a final solution
eliminating the cause of the crack initiation mechanism is not yet
available and that repetitive inspections are necessary. We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct cracks in the MLG main
fitting, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the
MLG main fitting.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2006-06-07

Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) Revision and Placard Installation

    (f) Within 14 days after April 26, 2006 (the effective date of
AD 2006-06-07), amend the Limitations section of the Fokker F.28 AFM
to prohibit application of brakes during backward movement of the
airplane. This

may be done by inserting a copy of this AD in the AFM.

    Note 1: When a statement to prohibit application of brakes
during backward movement of the airplane has been included in the
general revisions of the AFM, the general revisions may be inserted
into the AFM, and the copy of this AD may be removed from the AFM.

    (g) Within 14 days after April 26, 2006, affix a placard on the
pedestal, next to the parking brake handle, having the following
wording: ``APPLICATION OF BRAKES DURING BACKWARD MOVEMENT IS
PROHIBITED.''

Inspection and Corrective Action

    (h) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (h)(1) or
(h)(2) of this AD: Do an eddy current inspection of the MLG main
fittings and repair before further flight as applicable, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Messier-Dowty
Service Bulletin F100-32-106, including Appendices A through C and
excluding Appendix D, dated February 18, 2005, except as provided by
paragraphs (i) and (j) of this AD.
    (1) For airplanes on which an inspection has not been done in
accordance with Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin F100-32-104, Revision
2, dated October 30, 2003: Within 3 months after April 26, 2006.
    (2) For airplanes on which an inspection has been done in
accordance with Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin F100-32-104, Revision
2, dated October 30, 2003: Within 2,000 flight cycles since the last
inspection done in accordance with the service bulletin or within 3
months after April 26, 2006, whichever occurs later.

Exceptions to the Service Bulletin

    (i) Where Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin F100-32-106, including
Appendices A through C and excluding Appendix D, dated February 18,
2005, specifies contacting the manufacturer for repair: Before
further flight, repair using a method approved by either the
Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane
Directorate, FAA; or the Civil Aviation Authority--The Netherlands
(CAA-NL) (or its delegated agent).
    (j) Although Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin F100-32-106,
including Appendices A through C and excluding Appendix D, dated
February 18, 2005, specifies to submit certain information to the
manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.

Parts Installation

    (k) As of April 26, 2006, and until the effective date of this
AD, no person may install, on any airplane, a Messier-Dowty MLG,
unless it has been inspected/repaired according to paragraph (h) of
this AD.

New Requirements of This AD

Inspection and Repair

    (l) At the applicable times specified in paragraphs (l)(1),
(l)(2), and (l)(3) of this AD: Do an eddy current inspection of the
MLG main fitting for cracks, and rework the MLG main fitting if
applicable, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin F100-32-111, including Appendices A
through C and excluding Appendix D, dated December 20, 2005; except
as provided by paragraph (m) of this AD. The rework must be done
before further flight.
    (1) For all MLG main fittings, except those units identified in
paragraph (l)(2) of this AD: Inspect within the next 2,000 flight
cycles since the last inspection required by paragraph (h) of this
AD, or within 4 months after the effective date of this AD,
whichever occurs later.
    (2) For new MLG main fittings and MLG main fittings on which
both bores have been repaired (reworked) in accordance with
paragraph (h) of this AD: Inspect within 4,000 flight cycles since
new (installation) or repaired (rework) in accordance with paragraph
(h) of this AD, as applicable.
    (3) For all MLGs: Repeat the eddy current inspection thereafter
at intervals not to exceed 2,000 flight cycles.

Exception to Service Bulletin F100-32-111

    (m) Although Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin F100-32-111,
including Appendices A through C and excluding Appendix D, dated
December 20, 2005, specifies to submit certain information to the
manufacturer, this AD does not include that requirement.

Parts Installation

    (n) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install,
on any airplane, a Messier-Dowty MLG, unless it has been inspected
and reworked in accordance with paragraph (l) of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (o) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Tom
Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98057-3356; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.

Related Information

    (p) Dutch airworthiness directive NL-2006-003, dated February 7,
2006, also addresses the subject of this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (q) You must use Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin F100-32-106,
including Appendices A through C and excluding Appendix D, dated
February 18, 2005; and Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin F100-32-111,
including Appendices A through C and excluding Appendix D, dated
December 20, 2005; as applicable; to perform the actions that are
required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin F100-
32-111, including Appendices A through C and excluding Appendix D,
dated December 20, 2005, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1
CFR part 51.
    (2) On April 26, 2006 (71 FR 14363, March 22, 2006), the
Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of Messier-Dowty Service Bulletin F100-32-106, including
Appendices A through C and excluding Appendix D, dated February 18,
2005.
    (3) Contact Fokker Services B.V., Technical Services Dept., P.O.
Box 231, 2150 AE Nieuw-Vennep, the Netherlands, for a copy of this
service information.
    (4) You may review copies at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information
on the availability of this material at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-
locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 11, 2008.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E8-22210 Filed 9-26-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 94 (Wednesday, May 15, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28497-28501]
[FR Doc No: 2013-11450]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0968; FRL-9812-2]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Ohio; Canton-Massillon 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan Revision to
Approved Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA is approving the request by
Ohio to revise the Canton-Massillon, Ohio 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance
air quality State Implementation Plan (SIP) to replace the previously
approved motor vehicle emissions budgets (budgets) with budgets
developed using EPA's Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES)
emissions model. Ohio submitted the SIP revision request to EPA on
November 26, 2012.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective July 15, 2013, unless
EPA receives adverse comments by June 14,

2013. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing
the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2012-0968, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Control Strategies
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2012-0968. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays.
We recommend that you telephone Anthony Maietta, Environmental
Protection Specialist, at<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting the Region 5
office.

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

I. What is EPA approving?
II. What is the background for this action?
    a. SIP Budgets and Transportation Conformity
    b. Prior Approval of Budgets
    c. The MOVES Emissions Model
    d. Submission of New Budgets Based on MOVES2010a
III. What are the criteria for approval?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of the State's submittal?
    a. The Revised Inventories
    b. Approvability of the MOVES2010a-Based Budgets
    c. Applicability of MOBILE6.2-Based Budgets
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is EPA approving?

    EPA is approving new MOVES2010a-based budgets for the Canton-
Massillon, Ohio, 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance area that will replace
the MOBILE-based budgets in the SIP. The Canton-Massillon, Ohio area
was redesignated to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard
effective June 15, 2007, (72 FR 27648). MOBILE6.2-based budgets were
approved in that action. Upon the effective date of approval of the
MOVES-based budgets, they must then be used in future transportation
conformity analyses for the area as required by section 176(c) of the
CAA. See the official release of the MOVES2010 emissions model (75 FR
9411-9414) for background, and section II.(c) below for details.

II. What is the Background for this action?

a. SIP Budgets and Transportation Conformity

    Under the CAA, states are required to submit control strategy SIP
revisions and maintenance plans for nonattainment and maintenance areas
for a given National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). These SIP
revisions and maintenance plans include budgets of on-road mobile
source emissions for criteria pollutants and/or their precursors.
Transportation plans and projects ``conform'' to (i.e., are consistent
with) the SIP when they will not cause or contribute to air quality
violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS or an interim
milestone.

b. Prior Approval of Budgets

    EPA previously approved budgets for the Canton-Massillon, Ohio, 8-
hour ozone maintenance area for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and
nitrogen oxides (NOX). The area's ozone maintenance plan
established 2009 and 2018 budgets that demonstrated a reduction in
emissions from the monitored attainment year.

c. The MOVES Emissions Model

    The MOVES model is EPA's state of the art tool for estimating
highway emissions. EPA announced the release of MOVES2010 in March 2010
(75 FR 9411). Use of the MOVES model is required for regional emissions
analyses for transportation conformity determinations outside of
California that begin after March 2, 2013.
    MOVES2010a was used to estimate emissions in the Canton-Massillon
area for the same milestone years as the original budgets in the SIP.
The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) is revising the budgets
using the latest planning assumptions, including population and
employment updates. In addition, newer vehicle registration data has
been used to update the age distribution of the vehicle fleet. Updating
the budgets with MOVES2010a allows the area to continue to show
conformity to the SIP in plans, transportation improvement programs,
and projects. The interagency

consultation group has had extensive consultation on the requirements
and need for new budgets.

d. Submission of New Budgets Based on MOVES2010a

    On November 26, 2012, Ohio submitted final budgets based on
MOVES2010a that cover the Canton-Massillon area. Ohio received no
comments during the public review and comment period.
    The new MOVES2010a based budgets are for the years 2009 and 2018
for both VOCs and NOX and are detailed later in this notice.
Ohio has provided the area's total emissions from all sectors,
including mobile emissions based on MOVES2010a, for the attainment year
of 2004, the 2009 interim budget year, and the 2018 maintenance year.
The combined emissions reduction from all sectors between the years
2004 and 2018 is also shown. Total emissions include point, area, non-
road mobile and on-road mobile sources. The total emissions and
combined emissions reduction are shown in tables 1 and 2. It should be
noted that in tables 1 and 2, for on-road emissions of both VOC and
NOX for the years 2009 and 2018, a 15% safety margin has
been applied to reach the values shown.

             Table 1--Total VOC Emissions With MOVES2010a Mobile Emissions in Canton-Massillon, Ohio
                                                 [Tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Combined
                                                       2004                            2018          emissions
                     Sector                         Attainment     2009 Interim     Maintenance      reduction
                                                                                (2004-2018)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................            2.97            3.14            3.77  ..............
Area............................................           21.03           20.49           21.93  ..............
On-road Mobile..................................           22.56           19.17            9.02  ..............
Non-road Mobile.................................            5.44            4.06            3.36  ..............
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................           52.00           46.86           38.08           13.92
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

             Table 2--Total NOX Emissions With MOVES2010a Mobile Emissions in Canton-Massillon, Ohio
                                                 [Tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Combined
                                                       2004                            2018          emissions
                     Sector                         Attainment     2009 Interim     Maintenance      reduction
                                                                                (2004-2018)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................            4.85            4.16            4.72  ..............
Area............................................            1.23            1.40            1.46  ..............
On-road Mobile..................................           33.14           28.36           11.37  ..............
Non-road Mobile.................................            9.25            7.20            4.72  ..............
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................           48.47           41.12           22.27           26.20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Stark County Area Transportation Study added a safety margin
that is only a portion of the attainment margin available for
NOX and VOCs to the budgets for 2009 and 2018. As shown in
tables 1 and 2, the submittal demonstrates how the area's emissions
decline from the attainment year of 2004 to maintain the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard.
    No additional control measures were needed to maintain the 1997
ozone standard in the Canton-Massillon area. An appropriate safety
margin for NOX and VOCs was selected by the interagency
consultation group, which consists of the Federal Highway
Administration, OEPA, the Ohio Department of Transportation, and EPA.
The submitted budgets for the Canton-Massillon, Ohio area are shown in
table 3 below.

III. What are the criteria for approval?

    EPA requires that revisions to existing SIPs and budgets continue
to meet applicable requirements (e.g., reasonable further progress,
attainment, or maintenance). The SIP must also meet any applicable SIP
requirements under CAA section 110. In addition, adequacy criteria
found at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) must be satisfied before EPA can find
submitted budgets adequate and approve them for conformity purposes.
    Areas can revise their budgets and inventories using MOVES without
revising their entire SIP if (1) the SIP continues to meet applicable
requirements when the previous motor vehicle emissions inventories are
replaced with MOVES base year and milestone, attainment, or maintenance
year inventories, and (2) the state can document that growth and
control strategy assumptions for non-motor vehicle sources continue to
be valid and any minor updates do not change the overall conclusions of
the SIP. Ohio's November 26, 2012, submittal meets this requirement as
described in the next section.
    For more information, see EPA's latest ``Policy Guidance on the Use
of MOVES2010 for SIP Development, Transportation Conformity, and Other
Purposes'' (April 2012), available online at: www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/policy.htm#models.

IV. What is EPA's analysis of the State's submittal?

a. The Revised Inventories

    The November 26, 2012, SIP revision request for the Canton-
Massillon, Ohio 1997 ozone maintenance plan seeks to revise only the
on-road mobile source inventories. OEPA has certified that the control
strategies remain the same as in the original SIP, and that no other
control strategies are necessary. OEPA also finds that growth and
control strategy assumptions for non-mobile sources (i.e., area, non-
road, and point) have not changed significantly from the original
submittal. This is supported by

the monitoring data for the Canton-Massillon area, which continues to
monitor attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
    EPA has reviewed the emission estimates for point, area and non-
road sources and concluded that no major changes to the projections
need to be made. Ohio finds that growth and control strategy
assumptions for non-mobile sources (i.e., area, non-road, and point)
have not changed significantly from the original submittal for the
years 2004, 2009, and 2018. As a result, the growth and control
strategy assumptions for the non-mobile sources for the years 2004,
2009, and 2018 continue to be valid and do not affect the overall
conclusions of the plan.
    Ohio's submittal confirms that the total emissions in the revised
SIP (which includes MOVES2010a emissions from mobile sources) as shown
in tables 1 and 2 above demonstrate that emissions in the Canton-
Massillon, Ohio area continue to decline and remain below the
attainment levels.
    Ohio has submitted MOVES 2010a-based budgets for the Canton-
Massillon, Ohio area that are clearly identified in the submittal. The
budgets are displayed in table 3.

Table 3--Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MOVES) for the Canton-Massillon
          1997 Ozone Area (Stark County, Ohio) in tons per day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Year                         2009            2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC.....................................           19.17            9.02
NOX.....................................           28.36           11.37
------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Approvability of the MOVES2010a-Based Budgets

    EPA is approving the MOVES2010a-based budgets submitted by Ohio for
use in determining transportation conformity in the Canton-Massillon,
Ohio 1997 ozone maintenance area. EPA evaluated the MOVES-basaed
budgets using the adequacy criteria found in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), and
our in-depth evaluation of the State's submittal and SIP requirements.
    Before submitting the revised budgets, OEPA followed all necessary
conformity procedures. The budgets are clearly identified and precisely
quantified in the submittal. The budgets, when considered with other
emissions sources, are consistent with continued maintenance of the
1997 ozone standard. The budgets are clearly related to the emissions
inventory and control measures in the SIP. The changes from the
previous budgets are clearly explained with the change in the model
from MOBILE6.2 to MOVES2010a and the revised and updated planning
assumptions. The inputs to the model are detailed in the appendix to
the submittal. EPA has reviewed the inputs to the MOVES2010a modeling
and participated in the consultation process. The Federal Highway
Administration and the Ohio Department of Transportation have taken a
lead role in working with the Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission
to provide accurate, timely information and inputs to the MOVES2010a
model run. The state has documented that growth and control strategy
assumptions for non-motor vehicle sources (i.e. area, non-road, and
point) continue to be valid and any minor updates do not change the
overall conclusions of the SIP.
    Ohio's submission confirms that the SIP continues to demonstrate
maintenance of the 1997 ozone standard because the total emissions in
the revised SIP (including MOVES2010a emissions for mobile sources)
continue to decrease from the attainment year to the final year of the
maintenance plan, as shown in tables 1 and 2 above. The budgets include
an appropriate margin of safety while still maintaining total emissions
below the attainment level. The submitted budgets include an
appropriate margin of safety while still maintaining total emissions
below the attainment level.
    Based on our review of the SIP and the new budgets provided, EPA
has determined that the SIP will continue to meet the requirements if
the motor vehicle emissions inventories are replaced with MOVES2010a-
based inventories.

c. Applicability of MOBILE6.2-Based Budgets

    Upon the effective date of the approval of the revised budgets, the
state's existing MOBILE6.2-based budgets will no longer be applicable
for transportation conformity purposes.

V. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving the 2009 and 2018 submitted budgets for the
Canton-Massillon, Ohio 1997 ozone maintenance plan. We are publishing
this action without prior proposal because we view this as a
noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse comments. However,
in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register publication, we
are publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to
approve the state plan if relevant adverse written comments are filed.
This rule will be effective July 15, 2013 without further notice unless
we receive relevant adverse written comments by June 14, 2013. If we
receive such comments, we will withdraw this action before the
effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will withdraw
the final action. All public comments received will then be addressed
in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed action. EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA
receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this
rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the
rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not
the subject of an adverse comment. If we do not receive any comments,
this action will be effective July 15, 2013.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);

     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by July 15, 2013. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: April 30, 2013.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

0
2. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (ff)(14) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.1885  Control Strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (ff) * * *
    (14) Approval--On December 7, 2012, Ohio submitted a request to
revise the approved MOBILE6.2 motor vehicle emission budgets (budgets)
in the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the Canton-Massillon,
Ohio area. The budgets are being revised with budgets developed with
the MOVES2010a model. The 2009 motor vehicle emissions budgets for the
Canton-Massillon, Ohio area are 19.17 tpd VOC and 28.36 tpd
NOX. The 2018 motor vehicle emissions budgets for the
Canton-Massillon, Ohio area are 9.02 tpd VOC and 11.37 tpd
NOX.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-11450 Filed 5-14-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 89 (Wednesday, May 8, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26818-26819]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10901]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-69502; File No. SR-NYSE-2013-30]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change
Amending Rule 13 to Expand the Availability of Self-Trade Prevention
Modifiers

May 2, 2013.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that, on April 22, 2013, New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or
the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I
and II below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 13 to expand the availability
of self-trade prevention (``STP'') modifiers. The text of the proposed
rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at
the principal office of the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public
Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 13 to expand the availability
of STP modifiers functionality to additional order types.\4\ STP
modifiers are designed to prevent two orders from the same market
participant identifier (``MPID'') assigned to a member organization
from executing against each other. Use of the STP modifiers is optional
and is not automatically implemented by the Exchange. Rather, a member
organization can choose to add a STP modifier on eligible orders. The
STP modifier on the incoming order determines the interaction between
two orders marked with STP modifiers and whether the incoming or the
resting order would cancel. Both the buy and the sell order must
include an STP modifier in order to prevent a trade from occurring and
to effect a cancel instruction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange recently amended Rule 13 to add STP Modifiers.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 69102 (Mar. 11, 2013), 78 FR
16561 (Mar. 15, 2013) (SR-NYSE-2013-17).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to make STP modifiers available to additional
order types. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to make STP modifiers
available for market orders and stop orders entered by off-Floor
participants in a manner that is similar to limit orders. As proposed,
the STP modifiers would be available for market orders and stop orders
sent to the matching engine by off-Floor participants. Because of
technology issues, the Exchange would continue to reject all GTC and
MTS-IOC orders with an STP modifier.
    In addition, the Exchange proposes to make the STP modifier
available for certain Floor broker interest. In adopting STP modifiers,
the Exchange noted that the technology supporting the proposed STP
modifiers was not compatible with the Floor broker systems, but the
Exchange was actively working to develop the technology to extend STP
modifiers to be available for Floor brokers.\5\ The Exchange did not
believe it should delay the deployment of the STP modifiers for other
market participants while it performed the technical modifications
required for the use of STP modifiers for Floor brokers. Although the
technology supporting STP modifiers is still not compatible with
certain Floor broker systems, the Exchange is able to make the STP
modifiers available to algorithms used by Floor brokers to route
interest to the Exchange's matching engine. Accordingly, the Exchange
proposes to make STP modifiers available for e-Quotes, pegging e-
Quotes, and g-Quotes entered into the matching engine by an algorithm
on behalf of a Floor broker. STP modifiers would not be available for
d-Quotes at this time, regardless of the system used to enter d-Quotes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because of the technology changes associated with this rule
proposal, the Exchange will announce the implementation date of the STP
modifiers in a Trader Update to be published no later than 60 days
after the publication of the notice in the Federal Register. The
implementation date will be no later than 60 days following publication
of the Trader Update announcing publication of the notice in the
Federal Register.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6(b) \6\ of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (the ``Act''), in general, and furthers the objectives of
Section 6(b)(5) \7\ in particular in that it is designed to prevent
fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and
equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination
with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system. The Exchange believes that
expanding the availability STP functionality to additional order types
would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and
open market and a national market system because it would allow firms
to better manage order flow and prevent unintended executions with
themselves or the

potential for ``wash sales'' that may occur as a result of the velocity
of trading in today's high-speed marketplace. Commonly, member
organizations have multiple connections into the Exchange due to
capacity and speed-related demands. Orders routed by member
organizations via different connections may, in certain circumstances,
inadvertently trade against each other. Enabling STP modifiers for
market orders and stop orders would provide member organizations with
the opportunity to prevent these unintended trades from occurring.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By providing STP modifier functionality to certain e-Quotes,
pegging e-Quotes, and g-Quotes entered algorithmically, the proposal
provides Floor brokers with the opportunity to prevent these unintended
trades from occurring as well. The Exchange believes that offering STP
modifiers to Floor broker interest entered via algorithms removes
impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open market
because there is a greater potential for unintended consequences for
interest entered via algorithms, because of the above-noted velocity of
trading, as compared to orders entered manually. The Exchange will
continue to work to develop technology to extend STP modifiers for
other Floor broker systems as well. The Exchange notes that all Floor
brokers have access to algorithms, and therefore this functionality
will be available to all Floor brokers. The Exchange further notes that
the STP modifiers would not alleviate, or otherwise exempt, broker-
dealers from their best execution obligations.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange believes that
the proposal will provide member organizations and Floor brokers with
the opportunity to prevent unintended self-trades from occurring. The
Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which
market participants can readily direct order flow to competing venues
who offer similar functionality. Many competing venues offer similar
functionality to market participants. To this end, the Exchange is
proposing a market enhancement to provide greater protections from
inadvertent executions, and encourage market participants to trade on
the Exchange. The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is pro-
competitive because it would enable the Exchange to provide Floor
brokers with functionality that is similar to that of other exchanges
and available for interest entered electronically from off of the
Floor.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days after the date of the filing, or such
shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective
pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \8\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \9\
thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \10\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSE-2013-30 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2013-30. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSE-2013-30 and should be
submitted on or before May 29, 2013.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-10901 Filed 5-7-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 64 (Thursday, April 3, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18755-18757]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07462]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. FAA-2014-0210]

Airport Improvement Program (AIP) Grant Assurances

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of modification of Airport Improvement Program (AIP)
grant assurances.

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

SUMMARY: Changes have been made to the AIP grant assurances to conform
the list of General Federal Requirements to the correct numbering of
some of the documents that recently changed, to add recent legislation,
to revise Assurance 10 to conform to current statute, to clarify that
Assurance 25, Airport Revenues, applies when an airport sponsor takes a
grant for airport planning, and to note that Assurance 37 applies to
airport concession disadvantaged business enterprises. Assurance 20 of
the Non-Airport Sponsor Assurances for Non-Airport Sponsors Undertaking
Noise Compatibility Program Projects is also revised to delete
paragraphs which discussed land purchased for airport development.
    In addition, on April 24, 2013, the Secretary of Transportation
signed the DOT Standard Title VI Assurances and Non-Discrimination
Provisions, Order 1050.2A (Title VI Assurances). The Title VI
Assurances were incorporated into the FAA Office of Civil Rights Order
1400.11, the ``Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted Programs at the
Federal Aviation Administration Order,'' which was published on August
27, 2013. The changes to the AIP grant assurances in this Notice
incorporate the Title VI Assurances.

DATES: The FAA is modifying several grant assurances in order to (1)
conform the list of General Federal Requirements to the correct
numbering of some of the documents that were recently changed by the
Office of Management and Budget; (2) update and conform with statute;
and (3) incorporate the DOT Title VI Assurances. The FAA will implement
these modified grant assurances upon publication of this notice to
expedite processing fiscal year 2014 grants under the Airport
Improvement Program. The FAA will accept public comments concerning
these modified grant assurances for 30 days. Comments must be submitted
on or before May 5, 2014. If necessary, in response to comments
received, the FAA would adopt any appropriate revisions to these grant
assurance modifications through publication of a future notice in the
Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments [identified by Docket Number FAA-2014-
XXXX] using any of the following methods:
     Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and follow the instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
     Mail: Docket Operations, U.S. Department of
Transportation, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Routing
Symbol M-30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: To Docket Operations, Room W12-140 on the
ground floor of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank J. San Martin, Manager, Airports
Financial Assistance Division, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, telephone (202) 267-
3831; facsimile:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Authority for Grant Assurance Modifications

    This notice is published under the authority described in Subtitle
VII, Part B, Chapter 471, Sections 47107 and 47122 of Title 49 United
States Code.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A sponsor (applicant) seeking financial
assistance in the form of an AIP grant for airport planning, airport
development, noise compatibility planning or noise mitigation under 49
U.S.C., as amended, must agree to comply with certain assurances. These
grant assurances are incorporated in, and become part of a sponsor's
grant agreement for federal assistance. As need dictates, the FAA
modifies these assurances to reflect new Federal requirements. Notice
of such modifications is published in the Federal Register, and an
opportunity for public comment is provided.
    The assurances that apply to a sponsor depend on the type of
sponsor. The three types of sponsor assurances are Airport Sponsor
Assurances, Non-Airport Sponsors Undertaking Noise Compatibility
Program Projects, and Planning Agency Sponsors.
    The current assurances were published on February 3, 1988, at 53 FR
3104 and amended on September 6, 1988, at 53 FR 34361; on August 29,
1989, at 54 FR 35748; on June 10, 1994 at 59 FR 30076; on January 4,
1995, at 60 FR 521; on June 2, 1997, at 62 FR 29761; on August 18,
1999, at 64 FR 45008; on March 29, 2005 at 70 FR 15980; on March 18,
2011, at 76 FR 15028; and on April 13, 2012 at 77 FR 22376.
    A complete list of the current grant assurances can be viewed at:
http://www.faa.gov/airports/aip/grant_assurances/.

Discussion of AIP Grant Assurance Modifications

    The FAA is making four changes to the AIP grant assurances. These
changes will be in effect for grants issued in fiscal year 2014 and
beyond.
    The changes to the AIP grant assurances are as follows:

1. Technical Non-Substantive Changes To Correct Some Minor
Typographical Errors

    Because these have no change on the substance of the assurances,
these changes have not been specifically called out.

2. Addition of Assurance 25 to the List of Assurances That Apply to
Airport Planning Undertaken by a Sponsor

    As stated in FAA's Policy and Procedures Concerning the Use of
Airport Revenue, 64 FR 7696 (February 16, 1999), 49 U.S.C. 47133
applies the airport revenue-use requirements of Sec.  47107(b) to any
airport that has received ``Federal assistance.'' The FAA considers the
term ``Federal assistance'' to include airport planning grants that
relate to a specific airport. Many airport sponsors take grants for
airport planning projects. For a planning project, not all of the
airport sponsor grant assurances apply, some project-specific
assurances apply while the planning project is going on, and others
continue to apply after the planning project is over. The previous
version of the airport sponsor assurances did not list the revenue use
provision (Assurance 25) as one of the assurances that apply for a
planning project. Assurance 25 has been added to the list of assurances
that continue past the completion of the planning projects. This change
eliminates confusion by clarifying that if a sponsor is undertaking a
planning project, it is subject to the published requirements for
revenue use.
    Section B Duration and Applicability, (3) Airport Planning
Undertaken by a Sponsor, now reads,

    ``Unless otherwise specified in this grant agreement, only
Assurances 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 13, 18, 25, 30, 32, 33, and 34 in Section
C apply to planning projects. The terms, conditions, and assurances
of this grant agreement shall remain in full force and effect during
the life of the project; there shall be no limit on the

duration of the assurances regarding Exclusive Rights and Airport
Revenue so long as the airport is used as an airport.''

3. Administrative Changes to Assurance No. 1, General Federal
Requirements

    In 2008, the drug-free workplace requirements were included in 49
CFR part 32, Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace
(Financial Assistance). Also, in 2008, the Department of Transportation
moved its nonprocurement suspension and debarment regulations from 49
CFR part 29 to a new 2 CFR part 1200, and adopted the government-wide
guidance on nonprocurement suspension and debarment in 2 CFR part 180
(73 FR 24139, May 2, 2008).
    In 2013, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) compiled a
number of Circulars in 2 CFR part 200, including Circular A-87, ``Cost
Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments,'' and
Circular A-133, ``Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit
Organizations.''
    a. In Assurance No. 1, General Federal Requirements, Federal
Regulations section, make the following changes:
    1. Delete the entry for: 49 CFR part 29, Government wide debarment
and suspension (nonprocurement) and government wide requirements for
drug-free workplace (grants);
    2. Add a new entry for: 2 CFR part 1200--Nonprocurement Suspension
and Debarment;
    3. Add a new entry for: 2 CFR part 180--OMB Guidelines to Agencies
on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement);
    4. Add a new entry for: 49 CFR part 32--Governmentwide Requirements
for Drug-Free Workplace (Financial Assistance);
    5. Add a new entry for: 2 CFR part 200--Uniform Administrative
Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal
Awards.
    b. In Assurance No. 1, General Federal Requirements, delete the
Office of Management and Budget Circulars and its two entries.
    c. In Assurance No. 1, General Federal Requirements--Federal
Legislation, add the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency
Act of 2006, as amended (Pub. L. 109-282, as amended by section 6202 of
Pub. L. 110-252).
    d. Reorder the entries of Assurance 1 General Federal
Requirements--Federal Regulations and Office of Management Budget
Circulars into numerical order.

4. Revision of Assurance 10. Air and Water Quality Standards

    The 2003 FAA reauthorization bill, the Vision 100--Century of
Aviation Reauthorization Act, removed the specific statutory language
requiring the chief executive officer of a state to certify that the
airport development project will be designed, constructed, and operated
in compliance with applicable air and water quality standards. The Act
added in a requirement for a sponsor to provide a copy of a proposed
amendment to the airport layout plan to a Metropolitan Planning
Organization upon request. The Assurance has been revised to reflect
these statutory changes.

5. Incorporation of DOT Standard Title VI Assurances and Non-
Discrimination Provisions (Title VI Assurances)

    The FAA modified the AIP grant assurances to incorporate the DOT
Standard Title VI Assurances and Non-Discrimination Provisions, Order
1050.2A (Title VI Assurances) that were signed by the Secretary of
Transportation on April 24, 2013. These Title VI Assurances, which have
since been incorporated into FAA Order 1400.11, amend and augment FAA's
AIP grant assurances related to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964.
    To incorporate the Title VI Assurances, changes were made in the
AIP Grant Assurances to Assurance 1 and the Assurance 30, the Civil
Rights Assurance.
    a. In Assurance No. 1, General Federal Requirements, Federal
Legislation, the following changes are made to incorporate the Title VI
Assurances:
    1. Add a new entry for: Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq., 78 stat. 252) (prohibits discrimination on
the basis of race, color, national origin); and
    2. Add a new entry for: Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as
amended, (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.), prohibits discrimination on the
basis of disability).
    b. In Assurance No. 1, General Federal Requirements, Federal
Regulations, the following changes are made to incorporate the Title VI
Assurances:
    1. Add a new entry for: 28 CFR 50.3--U.S. Department of Justice
Guidelines for Enforcement of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
    2. Add a new entry for: 28 CFR part 35--Discrimination on the Basis
of disability in State and Local Government Services.
    3. Add a new entry for: 49 CFR part 28--Enforcement of
Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in Programs or Activities
conducted by the Department of Transportation.
    4. Add a new entry for: 49 CFR part 37--Transportation Services for
Individuals with Disabilities (ADA).
    The AIP Grant Assurances previously required a sponsor to comply
with rules preventing persons from being excluded on the grounds of
race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability from
participating in any activity conducted with or benefitting from the
funds received from AIP grants. This requirement continues unchanged,
but the protections are being extended to the programs, facilities and
activities of the sponsor, so long as any portion of the program is
grant funded or otherwise is federally-assisted. The Title VI
Assurances require that sponsors insert specific civil rights language
into all contracting documents including bids, Requests for Proposals,
and proposals. Specific contract provisions are also required for the
acquisition or transfer of real property, whether or not these projects
include federal assistance. The revised Civil Rights Assurance
specifies when specific contract clauses are required.
    Identical changes are made to Assurance 17, Civil Rights, in the
Non-Airport Sponsors Undertaking Noise Compatibility Program Projects
Assurances and Assurance 9, Civil Rights, in the Planning Agency
Sponsor Assurances. The Civil Rights Assurance language is replaced
with the following:

    30. Civil Rights.
    It will promptly take any measures necessary to ensure that no
person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, creed,
color, national origin, sex, age, or disability be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise
subjected to discrimination in any activity conducted with, or
benefiting from, funds received from this grant.
    a. Using the definitions of activity, facility and program as
found in as defined in Sec. Sec.  21.23 (b) and 21.23 (e) of 49 CFR
part 21, it will facilitate all programs, operate all facilities, or
conduct all programs in compliance with all non-discrimination
requirements imposed by, or pursuant to these assurances.
    b. Applicability
    (1) Programs and Activities. If the sponsor has received a grant
(or other federal assistance) for any of the sponsor's program or
activities, these requirements extend to all of the sponsor's
programs and activities.
    (2) Facilities. Where it receives a grant or other federal
financial assistance to construct, expand, renovate, remodel, alter
or acquire a facility, or part of a facility, the assurance extends
to the entire facility and facilities operated in connection
therewith.
    (3) Real Property. Where the sponsor receives a grant or other
Federal financial assistance in the form of, or for the acquisition
of real property or an interest in real property, the assurance will
extend to rights to space on, over, or under such property.
    c. Duration.

    The sponsor agrees that it is obligated to this assurance for
the period during which Federal financial assistance is extended to
the program, except where the Federal financial assistance is to
provide, or is in the form of, personal property, or real property,
or interest therein, or structures or improvements thereon, in which
case the assurance obligates the sponsor, or any transferee for the
longer of the following periods:
    (1) So long as the airport is used as an airport, or for another
purpose involving the provision of similar services or benefits; or
    (2) So long as the sponsor retains ownership or possession of
the property.
    d. Required Solicitation Language. It will include the following
notification in all solicitations for bids, Requests For Proposals
for work, or material under this grant agreement and in all
proposals for agreements including airport concessions, regardless
of funding source:
    ``The (Name of Sponsor), in accordance with the provisions of
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 252, 42 U.S.C.
2000d to 2000d-4) and the Regulations, hereby notifies all bidders
that it will affirmatively ensure that any contract entered into
pursuant to this advertisement, disadvantaged business enterprises
and airport concession disadvantaged business enterprises will be
afforded full and fair opportunity to submit bids in response to
this invitation and will not be discriminated against on the grounds
of race, color, or national origin in consideration for an award.''
    e. Required Contract Provisions.
    (1) It will insert the non-discrimination contract clauses
requiring compliance with the acts and regulations relative to non-
discrimination in Federally-assisted programs of the DOT, and
incorporate the acts and regulations into the contracts by reference
in every contract or agreement subject to the non-discrimination in
Federally-assisted programs of the DOT acts and regulations.
    (2) It will include a list of the pertinent non-discrimination
authorities in every contract that is subject to the non-
discrimination acts, statutes, and regulations.
    (3) It will insert non-discrimination contract clauses as a
covenant running with the land, in any deed from the United States
effecting or recording a transfer of real property, structures, use,
or improvements thereon or interest therein to a sponsor.
    (4) It will insert non-discrimination contract clauses
prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, creed, sex, age,
disability, color, or national origin as a covenant running with the
land, in any future deeds, leases, license, permits, or similar
instruments entered into by the sponsor with other parties:
    (a) For the subsequent transfer of real property acquired or
improved under the applicable activity, project, or program; and
    (b) For the construction or use of, or access to, space on,
over, or under real property acquired or improved under the
applicable activity, project, or program.
    It will provide for such methods of administration for the
program as are found by the Secretary to give reasonable guarantee
that it, other recipients, sub-recipients, sub-grantees,
contractors, subcontractors, consultants, transferees, successors in
interest, and other participants of Federal financial assistance
under such program, will comply with all requirements imposed or
pursuant to the acts, the regulations, and this assurance.
    f. It agrees that the United States has a right to seek judicial
enforcement with regard to any matter arising under the acts, the
regulations, and this assurance.

6. Modification of Assurance 37

    Assurance 37, the Disadvantaged Business Enterprises assurance has
been modified to specifically note that the assurance applies to
airport concession disadvantaged business enterprises.

7. Modification of Assurance 20 for Non-Airport Sponsors Undertaking
Noise Compatibility Program Projects

    Paragraphs b and c of Assurance 20, Disposal of Land, have been
deleted because these two paragraphs deal expressly about land that is
acquired for airport development. Non-Airport Sponsors undertaking
noise compatibility projects cannot undertake airport development
projects and these two paragraphs were deleted. Paragraph d has been
renumbered paragraph b.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on: March 28, 2014.
Elliott Black,
Acting Director, Office of Airport Planning and Programming.
[FR Doc. 2014-07462 Filed 4-2-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: October 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 198)]
[Notices]
[Page 60503-60505]
[DOCID:fr13oc06-64]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

October 5, 2006.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC06-168-000.
    Applicants: Triton Power Michigan LLC; Thermo Cogeneration
Partnership, L.P.
    Description: Triton Power Michigan LLC and Thermo Cogeneration
Partnership submit their application for authorization under Section
203 of the FPA.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061003-0146.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, October 18, 2006.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt
wholesale generator filings:

    Docket Numbers: EG06-84-000.
    Applicants: Peetz Logan Interconnect, LLC.
    Description: Peetz Logan Interconnect, LLC submits a notice of
self-certification of exempt wholesale generator status.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061003-0304.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, October 18, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: EG07-1-000.
    Applicants: Ewington Energy Systems LLC.
    Description: Ewington Energy Systems LLC submits a Notice of Self-
Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status located in Jackson
County, MN.
    Filed Date: 10/03/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061003-5033.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 24, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: EG07-2-000.
    Applicants: Cisco Wind Energy LLC.
    Description: Cisco Wind Energy LLC submits a Notice of Self
Certification of Exempt Wholesale Generator Status.
    Filed Date: 10/03/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061003-5037.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 24, 2006.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER94-1188-041; ER98-4540-010; ER99-1623-010; ER98-
179-012; ER06-1046-003.
    Applicants: LG&E Energy Marketing Inc.; Louisville Gas & Electric
Company; Kentucky Utilities company; Western Kentucky Energy
Corporation.
    Description: LG&E Energy Marketing Inc et al submits a notice of
change in status with regard to the characteristics upon which FERC
previously relied in granting the E.ON Parties market-based rate
authority.
    Filed Date: 10/02/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061005-0035.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 23, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER98-1150-008.
    Applicants: Tucson Electric Power Company.
    Description: Tucson Electric Power Co notifies FERC that it has
began purchasing up to 100 MW of power from Tri-State Generation and
Transmission Association, Inc, effective 9/1/06 under ER98-1150.
    Filed Date: 09/27/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061004-0053.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, October 18, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER99-1005-006.
    Applicants: Kansas City Power & Light Company.
    Description: Kansas City Power & Light Co submits a notice of a
non-material change in status, related market-based rate authority
granted pursuant to the reporting requirements of Order 652.
    Filed Date: 10/03/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061003-0097.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 24, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER02-2560-006.
    Applicants: Louisville Gas & Electric Company; Kentucky Utilities
Company.
    Description: Louisville Gas & Electric Company & Kentucky Utilities
Company in compliance electric refund report.
    Filed Date: 10/02/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061002-5037.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 23, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER04-1232-005.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool Inc submits revised pages to its
OATT intended to implement the rate change for Southwestern Public
Service Co.
    Filed Date: 10/02/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061003-0248.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 23, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER05-1235-003; ER06-847-002.
    Applicants: MidAmerican Energy Company.
    Description: MidAmerican Energy Co submits a compliance filing,
pursuant to Commission's 9/1/06 Order.
    Filed Date: 10/02/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061003-0249.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 23, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-20-006.
    Applicants: Louisville Gas & Electric Company; E.ON US, LLC.
    Description: E.ON US, LLC et al submits a joint OATT pursuant to
the August 23, 2006 letter order.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061003-0255.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, October 19, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1001-001.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator Inc
submits proposed revisions to Schedule 10--FERC (Annual Charge
Recovery), OAT&EM Tariff.
    Filed Date: 10/02/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061003-0247.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 23, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1024-001.
    Applicants: San Diego Gas & Electric Company.
    Description: San Diego Gas & Electric Co submits an amendment to
its 5/19/06 filing to revise Service Agreements 4 & 6.
    Filed Date: 10/02/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061005-0031.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 23, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1088-001.
    Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Services, Inc on behalf of Entergy Operating
Companies submits corrections to its 6/1/06 filing of the 2006 rate
redetermination.
    Filed Date: 10/02/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061004-0138.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 23, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1346-001.
    Applicants: White Creek Wind I, LLC.
    Description: White Creek Wind I, LLC submits an amendment to its 8/
4/06 application and the amended tariff.
    Filed Date: 10/02/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061003-0245.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 23, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1544-000.

    Applicants: AEP Texas North Company.
    Description: AEP Texas North Co submits seven ERCOT Generation
Interconnection Agreements with AEP Texas North Generation Co.
    Filed Date: 09/28/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061003-0178.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, October 19, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1547-000.
    Applicants: Duke Power Company LLC.
    Description: Duke Power Company, LLC dba Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC
submits the 7/19/06 Confirmation with North Carolina Municipal Power
Agency Number 1.
    Filed Date: 09/29/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061003-0124.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, October 20, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1549-000.
    Applicants: Duquesne Light Company.
    Description: Duquesne Light Co submits First Revised Sheet 314 et
al to FERC Electric Tariff, Sixth Revised Volume 1 to be effective 12/
1/06.
    Filed Date: 09/29/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061003-0240.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, October 20, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-1-000.
    Applicants: FirstEnergy Solutions Corp.
    Description: FirstEnergy Solutions Corporation submits a request
for authorization to sale electricity to Pennsylvania Power Company.
    Filed Date: 10/02/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061004-0127.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 23, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-2-000.
    Applicants: PSI Energy, Inc.
    Description: PSI Energy Inc dba Duke Energy Indiana, Inc on behalf
of itself and Indiana Municipal Power Agency submits the Ninth
Amendment to the Power Coordination Agreement.
    Filed Date: 10/02/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061004-0067.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 23, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-3-000.
    Applicants: Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation.
    Description: Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp submits its Rate
Schedule 206, Original Sheet Nos. 1-6, effective 8/1/06.
    Filed Date: 10/02/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061004-0164.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 23, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-4-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc submits an executed
Interconnection Agreement w/ Southwestern Electric Power Company et al
designated as Service Agreement No. 1285.
    Filed Date: 10/02/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061004-0068.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 23, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-5-000.
    Applicants: WPS Resources Operating Companies; Upper Peninsula
Power Company.
    Description: WPS Resources Operating Companies on behalf of
Wisconsin Public Service Corp et al submits two notices of cancellation
and two revised service agreement cover sheets.
    Filed Date: 10/02/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061004-0069.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 23, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-7-000.
    Applicants: Black Rock Group, LLC.
    Description: Black Rock Group, LLC submits a notice of cancellation
of its FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 10/02/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061005-0032.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, October 23, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-8-000.
    Applicants: GGBB Energy, Inc.
    Description: GGBB Energy, Inc submits a Petition for Acceptance of
Initial Tariff, Waivers and Blanket Authority designated as FERC
Electric Tariff, Original Volume 1.
    Filed Date: 10/03/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061005-0033.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 24, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-9-000.
    Applicants: Rowan County Power, LLC.
    Description: Rowan County Power, LLC submits a Notice of
Cancellation of its market-based rate tariff, FERC Electric Tariff,
Third Revised Volume No. 1.
    Filed Date: 10/03/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061005-0034.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 24, 2006.
    Docket Numbers: ER07-10-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison Co submits its
Communication Facilities Agreement with the City of Riverside,
California.
    Filed Date: 10/03/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061005-0030.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 24, 2006.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-11-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison submits First Revised Sheet
256 et al, First Revised Volume 5, to be effective 12/2/06.
    Filed Date: 10/03/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061005-0056.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 24, 2006.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following foreign
utility company status filings:

    Docket Numbers: FC07-1-000.
    Applicants: Uskmouth Power Limited.
    Description: Uskmouth Power Ltd submits a Foreign Utility Notice of
Self Certification pursuant to section 366.1 of PUCHA.
    Filed Date: 10/03/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061003-5016.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, October 24, 2006.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov.
 To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet

access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's

eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list.
They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference
Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site
that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document
is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance with any FERC
Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call (866)
208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-16967 Filed 10-12-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P