[Federal Register: February 7, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 25)]
[Notices]
[Page 5693-5695]
[DOCID:fr07fe07-71]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings  1

January 30, 2007.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:
    Docket Numbers: EC07-50-000.
    Applicants: Lake Road Generating Company, LP; BG North America.
    Description: Lake Road Generating Company, LP et al. submits a
joint application for authorization of the disposition of
jurisdictional facilities pursuant to Section 203.
    Filed Date: 1/22/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070125-0192.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 12, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: EC07-51-000.
    Applicants: DPL Energy, LLC.
    Description: DPL Energy, LLC submits an application for approval of
the

transfer by sale of 100% of the Greenville Generating Station and its
associated jurisdictional assets to Buckeye Power, Inc.
    Filed Date: 1/23/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070125-0181.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 13, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: EC07-52-000.
    Applicants: Mirant Americas, Inc.; Mirant Energy Trading, LLC;
Mirant Las Vegas, LLC; Mirant North America, LLC; Mirant Sugar Creek,
LLC; Mirant Zeeland, LLC; Shady Hills Power Company, L.L.C.; West
Georgia Generating Company, L.L.C.; LS Power Power Acquistition Co. I,
LLC; LS Power Marketing, LLC.
    Description: Mirant Americas Inc et al. submits an application
requesting authorization sales and acquisition transaction under
Section 203 of the FPA.
    Filed Date: 1/24/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070126-0280.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 14, 2007.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:
    Docket Numbers: ER91-569-036.
    Applicants: Entergy Services Inc.
    Description: Entergy Arkansas, Inc and Entergy Gulf States, Inc et
al. submit a non-material change in status report pursuant to the
requirements of Order 652.
    Filed Date: 1/26/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070129-0118.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 16, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER98-830-014; ER03-719-005; ER03-720-005; ER03-721-
005.
    Applicants: Millenium Power Partners, LLC; New Athens Generating
Company, LLC; New Covert Generating Company, LLC; New Harquahala
Generating Company, LLC.
    Description: MACH Gen, LLC et al. submits a supplement to its
notice of non-material change in status.
    Filed Date: 01/25/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070129-0115.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, February 15, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER03-736-005.
    Applicants: CAM Energy Products, L.P.
    Description: CAM Energy Products, LP submits its triennial updated
market power analysis pursuant to FERC's order issued on 6/12/03.
    Filed Date: 1/25/2007
    Accession Number: 20070129-0034.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, February 15, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER04-208-003.
    Applicants: Citigroup Energy Inc.
    Description: Citigroup Energy, Inc submits its Triennial Updated
Market Analysis pursuant to FERC's order issued 1/7/04.
    Filed Date: 12/21/2006.
    Accession Number: 20061227-0039.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 9, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER05-6-094; EL04-135-097; EL02-111-114; EL03-212-
110.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, LLC submits its refund report
pursuant to the Commission's 11/8/06 Order.
    Filed Date: 1/25/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070129-0116.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, February 15, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER05-463-001.
    Applicants: Mendota Hills, LLC.
    Description: Mendota Hills, LLC submits a notification of non-
material change in status.
    Filed Date: 1/29/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070129-5051.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 19, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1397-001.
    Applicants: Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm, LLC.
    Description: Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm, LLC submits a notification
of non-material change in status.
    Filed Date: 1/29/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070129-5050.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 19, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-1467-002; ER06-451-018.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc submits portions of its OATT
relating to its real-time energy imbalance service market, effective 1/
1/07.
    Filed Date: 1/25/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070126-0294.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, February 15, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-127-002.
    Applicants: California Independent System Operator Corporation
    Description: California Independent System Operator Corporation
submits its compliance filing pursuant to the Commission's 12/28/06
order.
    Filed Date: 1/29/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070129-5043.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 19, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-232-001.
    Applicants: Aragonne Wind LLC.
    Description: Aragonne Wind LLC notification of non-material change
in status.
    Filed Date: 1/29/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070129-5049.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 19, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-465-000.
    Applicants: Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company.
    Description: Oklahoma Gas and Electric Co submits a notice of
cancellation of its Rate Schedule 145, Reserve Sharing Agreement with
Oklahoma Municipal Power Authority.
    Filed Date: 1/25/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070126-0292.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, February 15, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-466-000.
    Applicants: Met Ma, LLC.
    Description: MET MA, LLC submits an application for market-based
rate authorization & request for waivers and blanket authorizations.
    Filed Date: 1/25/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070126-0293.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, February 15, 2007.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-467-000.
    Applicants: Sierra Pacific Power Company.
    Description: Sierra Pacific Power Co submits a notice of
cancellation of an amended operating agreement with Plumas-Sierra Rural
Electric Cooperative, Northern California Power Agency & Pacific Gas
and Electric Co.
    Filed Date: 1/26/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070126-0295.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 16, 2007.
    Docket Numbers: ER07-468-000.
    Applicants: Sierra Pacific Power Company.
    Description: Sierra Pacific Power Co submits an executed
Interconnection Agreement with Plumas-Sierra Rural Electric Cooperative
& notice of cancellation of Rate Schedule 29.
    Filed Date: 1/26/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070126-0296.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 16, 2007.
    Docket Numbers: ER07-471-000.
    Applicants: Puget Sound Energy, Inc.
    Description: Puget Sound Energy, Inc submits amendments to Sections
12A(1) and 12B(1) of the Power Contract-Rock Island Joint System dated
6/19/74 with Public Utility District 1 of Chelan County, WA.
    Filed Date: 1/26/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070129-0117.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 16, 2007.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
securities filings:
    Docket Numbers: ES07-17-000.
    Applicants: AEP Generating Company.

    Description: AEP Generating Co submits an Application, Under
Section 204 of the Federal Power Act, for Authorization to Issue
Securities.
    Filed Date: 1/26/2007.
    Accession Number: 20070126-5004.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 16, 2007.
    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<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-1906 Filed 2-6-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 82 (Friday, April 27, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25165-25166]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10200]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9002-7]

Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements filed 04/16/2012
through 04/20/2012 pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

    Notice: Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make
public its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's
comment letters on EISs are available at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/eisdata.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA is seeking agencies to participate in
its e-NEPA electronic EIS submission pilot. Participating agencies can
fulfill all requirements for EIS filing, eliminating the need to submit
paper copies to EPA headquarters, by filing documents online and
providing feedback on the process. To participate in the pilot,
register at: https://cdx.epa.gov.

EIS No. 20120113, Final EIS, BPA, OR, Albany-Eugene 115 kilovolt No. 1
Transmission Line Rebuild Project, Extending from Albany Substation to
the Alderwood Tap, Linn and Lane Counties OR, Review Period Ends: 05/
29/2012, Contact: Douglas F. Corkran,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120114, Final Supplement, USN, CA, Hunters Point (Former)
Naval Shipyard Disposal and Reuse, Supplement Information on the 2000
FEIS, Implementation, City of San Francisco, San Francisco County, CA,
Review Period Ends: 05/29/2012, Contact: Ronald Bochenek,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120115, Final EIS, USFS, AK, Tonka Timber Sale Project,
Proposed Timber Harvesting, Petersburg Ranger District, Tongass
National Forest, Petersburg, AK, Review Period Ends: 05/29/2012,
Contact: Jason Anderson,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120116, Final EIS, USFS, SD, Vestal Project, Commercial and
Non-commercial Vegetation Treatments and Prescribed Burning to Reduce
Mountain Pine Beetle Risk and Fire Hazard, Hell Canyon Ranger District,
Black Hills National Forest, Custer County, SD, Review Period Ends: 05/
29/2012, Contact: Lynn Kolund,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120117, Draft EIS, BLM, WY, Lost Creek In Situ Recovery
Project, To Analyze the Site-Specific Impacts Associated with the Plan
of Operations, Sweetwater County, WY, Comment Period Ends: 06/11/2012,
Contact: John Russell,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120118, Final EIS, FTA, CA, California High-Speed Train
(HST): Merced to Fresno Section High-Speed Train, Propose to Construct,
Operate, and Maintain an Electric-Powered High-Speed Train (HST),
Merced, Madera, and Fresno Counties, CA, Review Period Ends: 05/29/
2012, Contact: David Valenstein,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120119, Final EIS, NPS, IN, Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore,
White-Tailed Deer Management Plan, Implementation, Lake, Porter,
LaPorte Counties, IN, Review Period Ends: 05/29/2012, Contact: Randy
Knutson,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120120, Draft EIS, BLM, CO, Mohave County Wind Farm Project,
Application for a Right-of-Way Grant to Construct, Operate, Maintain
and Decommission a Wind Powered Electrical Generation Facility, White
Hills, Mohave County, CO, Comment Period Ends: 06/11/2012, Contact:
Jerry Crockford,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120121, Final EIS, FHWA, OR, Newberg Dundee Bypass Project,
Proposal to Build a Four Lane Expressway and Reduce Congestion on OR
99W, from OR 99W/OR/8 to the top of Rex Hill, USACE 404/Removal Fill
Permits, Funding, Yamhill and Washington Counties, OR, Review Period
Ends: 05/29/2012, Contact: Michelle Eraut,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120122, Draft Supplement, USACE, NM, Rio Grande Floodway
Flood Protection Plan, San Acacia to Bosque Del Apache Unit, To Provide
Higher Levels of Flood Risk Management to Floodplain Communities from
San Acacia Diversion Dam Downstream to Elephant Butte Lake, Socorro
County, NM, Comment Period Ends: 06/11/2012, Contact: Julie A. Alcon,
505-342-3281.
EIS No. 20120123, Final EIS, BLM, NV, Phoenix Copper Leach Project,
Construction and Operation of a New Copper Beneficiation Facility,
Lander County, NV, Review Period Ends: 05/29/2012, Contact: Dave Davis,
775-635-4000.
EIS No. 20120124, Final EIS, NPS, SD, South Unit--Badlands National
Park, General Management Plan, Implementation, SD, Review Period Ends:
05/29/2012, Contact: Eric J. Brunnemann,<PHONE_NUMBER> .
EIS No. 20120125, Final EIS, FTA, CA, Hercules Intermodal Transit
Center,

Construction To Improve Access to Public Transit, Funding USACE Section
404 Permit, Contra Costa County, CA, Review Period Ends: 05/29/2012,
Contact: Paul Page,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120126, Draft EIS, USFS, CO, Black Mesa Vegetation Management
Project, Implementation, Divide Ranger District, Rio Grande National
Forest, Hinsdale and Mineral Counties, CO, Comment Period Ends: 06/11/
2012, Contact: Thomas Malecek,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20120127, Final EIS, USFS, CA, Rubicon Trail Easement and
Resource Improvement Project, Construction and Operation, Right-of-Way
Grant, Eldorado National Forest, Pacific Ranger District, El Dorado
County, CA, Review Period Ends: 05/29/2012, Contact: Laura Hierholzer,
530-642-5187.

Amended Notices

EIS No. 20120047, Draft EIS, BIA, WA, West Plains Casino and Mixed-Use
Development Project, Approval of Gaming Development and Management,
Spokane Tribe of Indians, Spokane County, WA, Comment Period Ends: 05/
16/2012, Contact: Dr. B.J. Howerton,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Revision to FR
Notice Published 03/02/2012; Lead Agency Re-opening the Comment Period
to end 05/16/2012.
EIS No. 20120104, Draft EIS, NOAA, 00, Amendment 5 to the Atlantic
Herring Fishery Management Plan, Implementation, Comment Period Ends:
06/04/2012, Contact: Daniel S. Morris,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Revision to FR
Notice Published 04/20/2012: Change Agency Contact to Daniel S. Morris,
978-281-9250 and Correction to EIS Title.

    Dated: April 24, 2012.
Aimee Hessert,
DeputyDirector, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2012-10200 Filed 4-26-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 33 (Tuesday, February 19, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4885-4887]
[FR Doc No: 2019-02610]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-85113; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2019-004]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Adopt a New MIDP Routing
Option Under Rule 4758 and Make a Conforming Change to Rule 4703(e)

February 12, 2019.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on January 31, 2019, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in
Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to adopt a new MIDP routing option under Rule
4758 and make a conforming change to Rule 4703(e).
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
website at http://nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at the principal office of
the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects 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 is proposing to adopt MIDP, a new order routing \3\
option under Rule 4758(a)(1)(A). The Exchange provides a variety of
routing options under Rule 4758(a)(1). Routing options may be combined
with all available Order Types and Times-in-Force, with the exception
of Order Types and Times-in-Force whose terms are inconsistent with the
terms of a particular routing option. The MIDP routing option would
allow members to seek midpoint liquidity on Nasdaq and other markets on
the System routing table.\4\ Specifically, the MIDP routing option may
be assigned only to a Non-Displayed Order Type \5\ with a Midpoint
Pegging Order Attribute.\6\ An Order with MIDP will check the System
for available shares and then the remaining shares are routed to
destinations on the System routing table \7\ that support midpoint
eligible orders with a limit price that is at the lesser (greater) of:
(1) The current NBO (NBB); or (2) the Order's entered limit price (if
applicable).\8\ If shares remain unexecuted after routing, the Order
returns to Nasdaq and will check the System for available shares, with
remaining shares posted on the Nasdaq Book \9\ as a Non-Displayed Order
with a Midpoint Pegging Order Attribute.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Routing is an Order Attribute that allows a Participant to
designate an Order to employ one of several Routing Strategies (also
called ``routing options'') offered by Nasdaq, as described in Rule
4758; such an Order may be referred to as a ``Routable Order.'' Upon
receipt of an Order with the Routing Order Attribute, the System
will process the Order in accordance with the applicable Routing
Strategy. In the case of a limited number of Routing Strategies, the
Order will be sent directly to other market centers for potential
execution. For most other Routing Strategies, including MIDP, the
Order will attempt to access liquidity available on Nasdaq in the
manner specified for the underlying Order Type and will then be
routed in accordance with the applicable Routing Strategy. Shares of
the Order that cannot be executed are then returned to Nasdaq, where
they will (i) again attempt to access liquidity available on Nasdaq
and (ii) post to the Nasdaq Book or be cancelled, depending on the
Time-in- Force of the Order. See Rule 4703(f).
    \4\ The term ``System routing table'' refers to the proprietary
process for determining the specific trading venues to which the
System routes orders and the order in which it routes them. Nasdaq
reserves the right to maintain a different System routing table for
different routing options and to modify the System routing table at
any time without notice. See Rule 4758(a)(1)(A).
    \5\ See Rule 4702(b)(3).
    \6\ Midpoint Pegging means Pegging with reference to the
midpoint between the Inside Bid and the Inside Offer (the
``Midpoint''). See Rule 4703(d).
    \7\ The Order is routed sequentially to the various venues on
the System routing table in the full amount. An Order with MIDP and
a Minimum Quantity Order Attribute will similarly route to the
venues sequentially.
    \8\ If the entered limit price of a buy (sell) Order entered
with MIDP is less (greater) than the current Midpoint price, the
Order will not be routed but will instead be posted on the Nasdaq
Book as a Midpoint Peg Order (if not an IOC). Once on the Nasdaq
Book, if the NBBO moves and the Order's limit price is equal to or
greater (less) than the NBO (NBB), the Order would not subsequently
route.
    \9\ See Rule 4701(a).
    \10\ An Order with the MIDP routing option will only be accepted
with a Time-in-Force of Market Hours DAY or IOC and may not be
flagged to participate in any of the Nasdaq Crosses. Unexecuted
shares of an order with the MIDP routing option will be cancelled
after routing if the order has a Time-in-Force of IOC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A member may specify a Minimum Quantity Order Attribute upon
entry.\11\ Minimum Quantity is an Order Attribute that allows a
Participant to provide that an Order will not execute unless a
specified minimum quantity of shares can be obtained.\12\ If at any
point during the routing process, but prior to returning to post on the
Nasdaq Book (unless an IOC), the remaining size of the Order becomes
less than the specified minimum quantity, the Order will be cancelled
back to the member. This will avoid an execution of a member's Order
that is inconsistent with its minimum quantity instructions. If shares
remain unexecuted after routing, they return to Nasdaq and check the
System for available shares with remaining shares posted on the Nasdaq
Book as a Non-Displayed Order with a Midpoint Pegging Order Attribute
and the minimum quantity condition specified by the member upon entry
of the Order. For example, if the National Best Bid and Offer
(``NBBO'') is $5.00 x $5.01 and a member enters a Non-Displayed Order
with a Midpoint Pegging Order Attribute to buy 500

shares with a TIF of Day, a limit of $5.01 and no minimum quantity, the
System will first attempt to execute the Order on Nasdaq at the
midpoint of the NBBO and if no shares are executed, the Order will be
routed as a midpoint order to destinations on the System routing table
that support midpoint eligible orders. If the Order does not receive an
execution at the venues to which it was routed, the Order would return
to Nasdaq and check the System for available shares, with remaining
shares posted to the Nasdaq Book at the midpoint price of $5.005. If,
however, the Order also had a minimum quantity of 300 shares and
received an execution of 300 shares at a venue on the System routing
table, instead of continuing to route or post to the Nasdaq Book, the
Order will instead be cancelled back to the member, consistent with the
minimum quantity instruction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ If upon entry the Order size is less than the minimum
quantity designated by the member the Order will be rejected.
    \12\ See Rule 4703(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange does not currently allow an Order with Minimum
Quantity to also have a Routing Order Attribute.\13\ Historically, the
Exchange System has been unable to support Minimum Quantity and Routing
due to limitations in the System. The Exchange has made technical
changes to the System to allow for Minimum Quantity and MIDP, and
Minimum Quantity would only be available for MIDP. Thus, the Exchange
is making a conforming change to Rule 4703(e) to allow Minimum Quantity
with MIDP. Should Participants request Minimum Quantity for other
Routing strategies, the Exchange would consider making the technical
changes to allow for such Routing and submit a rule change proposal to
the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange will implement the proposal in the second quarter of
2019, subject to approval by the Commission. The Exchange will provide
notice of the implementation date at least 30 days prior to
implementation via an Equity Trader Alert.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act,\14\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\15\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general to protect investors and the public
interest, by providing members additional control over the execution of
their Orders so that they may source Midpoint liquidity from venues
other than Nasdaq. Midpoint Orders allow participants to receive price
improvement by executing against other non-displayed liquidity at the
midpoint of the NBBO. An entirely optional routing option, MIDP will
help maximize the potential that members will receive Midpoint
executions for their Orders. In addition, the proposed functionality is
currently offered by competitor exchanges.\16\ The Exchange believes
that allowing Minimum Quantity to be an Order Attribute to an Order
with MIDP is consistent with the Act because it provides market
participants with greater flexibility and control over their Orders. As
noted above, the Exchange has not allowed Orders with both Minimum
Quantity and Routing for technical reasons. The Exchange has made
technical changes that will allow Minimum Quantity with Routing solely
for MIDP, although it may make the change for other Routing strategies
based on market participant interest.\17\ For these reasons, the
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \16\ BYX Rule 11.13(b)(3)(Q) and EDGA Rule 11.11(g)(13). These
rules provide that RMPT and RMPL routing strategies may be used with
a Mid-Point Peg Order to check the exchanges' respective Systems for
available shares and any remaining shares are then sent to
destinations on their routing tables that support midpoint eligible
orders. Any shares remaining unexecuted after routing are posted on
the exchanges' respective books as a Mid-Point Peg Order, unless
otherwise instructed by the exchange participant. It is unclear to
the Exchange if market participants may associate a minimum quantity
attribute with RMPT or RMPL. As a consequence, MIDP may differ from
RMPT and/or RMPL in this way.
    \17\ Subject to submission of a rule change filing with the
Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. To the contrary, the proposed
change is pro-competitive because it may make the Exchange a more
attractive venue to market participants, which may incent other
exchanges and trading venues to adopt similar routing functionality. In
this regard, the proposed change does not create any competitive
barriers or in any way preclude competitor exchanges and other trading
venues from implementing similar functionality. As noted above, the
proposed functionality copies, in part, existing functionality
available on competitor exchanges. In addition, to the extent other
exchanges and other trading venues do not support minimum quantity and
routing, they are free to make the changes to their systems to allow
for such. Thus, the proposed change is reflective of competition among
trading venues, and does not impose any burden thereon.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or
    (B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

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-NASDAQ-2019-004 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2019-004. 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 website (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 website 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. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do
not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment
submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-
NASDAQ-2019-004, and should be submitted on or before March 12, 2019.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-02610 Filed 2-15-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 1 (Tuesday, January 3, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 116-118]
[FR Doc No: 2016-31822]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OGC-2016-0776; FRL 9957-83-OGC]

Proposed Consent Decree, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Consent Decree; Request for Public Comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as
amended (``CAA'' or the ``Act''), notice is hereby given of a proposed
consent decree to address a lawsuit filed by Citizens for Clean Air and
Sierra Club (``Plaintiffs'') in the United States District Court for
the Western District of Washington: Citizens for Clean Air, et al. v.
McCarthy, et al. No. 2:16-cv-01594-RAJ (W.D. WA.). On October 11, 2016,
Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit alleging that Gina McCarthy, in her official
capacity as Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection
Agency and Dennis McLerran, in his official capacity as Regional
Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 10 (collectively, ``EPA''), failed to perform a duty mandated by
CAA to make a determination as to whether the Fairbanks North Star
Borough nonattainment area in Alaska attained the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS by December 31, 2015, and to publish a notice of
that determination within six months of that date. If EPA determines
that the area did not attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by
December 31, 2015, then the nonattainment area will be reclassified
from ``moderate'' to a ``serious'' for these NAAQS. The proposed
consent decree would establish deadlines for EPA to take certain
specified actions.

DATES: Written comments on the proposed consent decree must be received
by February 2, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-HQ-
OGC-2016-0776, online at www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at
www.regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
www.regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
generally will not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact
the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section.
For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Geoffrey L. Wilcox, Air and Radiation
Law Office (2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Additional Information About the Proposed Consent Decree

    The proposed consent decree would resolve a lawsuit filed by the
Plaintiffs seeking to compel EPA to make a determination required under
CAA section 188(b)(2), as to whether the Fairbanks North Star Borough
nonattainment area in Alaska attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS by December 31, 2015. Under the terms of the proposed consent
decree, no later than April 28, 2017, EPA will be required to sign a
notice of final rulemaking determining whether the Fairbanks North Star
Borough area attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS by
December 31, 2015. If EPA determines that the area did not attain the
NAAQS by that date, then EPA must reclassify the area as a ``serious''
nonattainment area for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS pursuant
to CAA section 188(b)(2). By statute, reclassification from
``moderate'' to ``serious'' is required by operation of law for an area
that fails to attain the NAAQS by the outermost permissible attainment
date for moderate nonattainment areas. This reclassification would
obligate the State of Alaska to submit an attainment plan for the area
that meets statutory and regulatory requirements applicable to a
serious nonattainment area for these NAAQS. Under the proposed consent
decree, EPA will also be required to deliver the signed final notice to
the Office of Federal Register for review and publication within 15
business days after signature. See the proposed consent decree for the
specific details.
    For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication
of this notice, the Agency will accept written comments relating to the
proposed consent decree from persons who are not named as parties or
intervenors to the litigation in question. EPA or the Department of
Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed consent decree
if the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that
such consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent
with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of
Justice determines that consent to this proposed consent decree should
be withdrawn, the terms of the consent decree will be affirmed.

II. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Consent
Decree

A. How can I get a copy of the proposed consent decree?

    The official public docket for this action (identified by EPA-HQ-
OGC-2016-0776) contains a copy of the proposed consent decree. The
official public docket is available for public viewing at the Office of
Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA Docket Center, EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The EPA
Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number
for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number
for the OEI Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    An electronic version of the public docket is available through
www.regulations.gov. You may use www.regulations.gov to submit or view
public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the
official public docket, and access those documents in the public docket
that are available electronically. Once in the system, key in the
appropriate docket identification number then select ``search''.
    It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments,
whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available
for public viewing online at www.regulations.gov without change, unless
the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information claimed as CBI
and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute is not
included in the official public docket or in the electronic public
docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material, including
copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not be placed
in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in
printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all
docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access
any of the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket
Center.

B. How and to whom do i submit comments?

    You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section.
Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.
    If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other
contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or
CD-ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or
contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included
as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket,
and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. 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.
    Use of the www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments to EPA
electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. The
electronic public docket system is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity, email address, or other
contact information unless you

provide it in the body of your comment. In contrast to EPA's electronic
public docket, EPA's electronic mail (email) system is not an
``anonymous access'' system. If you send an email comment directly to
the Docket without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address is automatically captured and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in
EPA's electronic public docket.

    Dated: December 22, 2016.
Gautam Srinivasan,
Acting Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2016-31822 Filed 12-30-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: March 11, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 47)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 11476-11477]
[DOCID:fr11mr10-16]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2009-1140; Airspace Docket No. 09-AWP-13]

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

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Class D and E airspace at
Victorville, CA. Additional Class D airspace is needed for Instrument
Flight Rules (IFR) operations at Southern California Logistics Airport
that would allow aircraft operations outside Class D at Adelanto
Airport. This action is necessary for the safety and management of
Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) aircraft utilizing both airports. This
action also would note the airport name change.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 26, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2009-
1140; Airspace Docket No. 09-AWP-13, at the beginning of your comments.
You may also submit comments through the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA 2009-1140 and Airspace Docket No. 09-AWP-13) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed stamped
postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments to FAA
Docket No. FAA-2009-1140 and Airspace Docket No. 09-AWP-13.'' The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified closing date
for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the closing date
for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's Web page at http://
www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/airspace_
amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and

phone number) between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
federal holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Northwest Mountain Regional Office of the Federal
Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service
Center, Operations Support Group, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA
98057.
    Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future
NPRMs should contact the FAA's Office of Rulemaking,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which describes the application
procedure.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by modifying Class D airspace extending
upward from the surface to and including 5,400 feet MSL within a 6-mile
radius of Southern California Logistics Airport, Victorville, CA
excluding that airspace within a 1.5-mile radius of Adelanto Airport.
This would enhance the safety and management of IFR operations at both
airports. This action also would adjust the geographic coordinates and
change the airport name from Southern California International Airport
to Southern California Logistics Airport, in both Class D and E
airspace descriptions. Class D and E airspace designations are
published in paragraph 5000, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order
7400.9T, signed August 27, 2009, and effective September 15, 2009,
which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in this Order.
    The FAA has determined this proposed regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a
``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44
FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since
this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures
and air navigation, it is certified this proposed rule, when
promulgated, would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes
the authority for the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This Rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it modifies controlled airspace at Southern California Logistics
Airport, Victorville, CA.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

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

    1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

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

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

    2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the FAA Order
7400.9T, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, signed August 27,
2009, and effective September 15, 2009 is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D airspace.

* * * * *

AWP CA D Victorville, CA [Modified]

Victorville, Southern California Logistics Airport, CA
    (Lat. 34[deg]35[min]51[sec] N., long. 117[deg]22[min]59[sec] W.)
Adelanto, Adelanto Airport, CA
    (Lat. 34[deg]32[min]15[sec] N., long. 117[deg]27[min]38[sec] W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to 5,400 feet
MSL within a 6-mile radius of the Southern California Logistics
Airport, Victorville, CA, excluding that airspace with a 1.5-mile
radius of Adelanto Airport, Adelanto, CA. This Class D airspace area
is effective during the specific dates and times established in
advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will
thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility
Directory.

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

* * * * *

AWP CA E5 Victorville, CA [Amended]

Southern California Logistics Airport, CA
    (Lat. 34[deg]35[min]51[sec] N., long. 117[deg]22[min]59[sec] W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6-mile radius of the Southern California Logistics Airport.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on February 26, 2010.
William M. Buck,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2010-5179 Filed 3-10-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 3 (Friday, January 4, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 719-721]
[FR Doc No: 2012-31717]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9766-3]

California State Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Standards; Urban
Buses; Request for Waiver of Preemption; Opportunity for Public Hearing
and Comment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has notified EPA
that it has adopted amendments to its emission standards for urban bus
engines in a series of rulemakings. The rulemakings at issue took place
between 2000 and 2005. Principally, these rulemakings set requirements
for California's public transit agencies that operate urban buses and
other transit vehicles; additionally, the rulemakings set emission
standards for new urban bus engines. CARB requests that EPA grant a
waiver of preemption pursuant to section 209(b) of the Clean Air Act
for the emission standards and related test procedures. This notice
announces that EPA has tentatively scheduled a public hearing to
consider California's urban bus regulations, and that EPA is now
accepting written comment on the request.

DATES: EPA has tentatively scheduled a public hearing concerning CARB's
request on January 30, 2013, at 10:00 a.m. ET. EPA will hold a hearing
only if any party notifies EPA by January 17, 2013, expressing interest
in presenting the agency with oral testimony. Parties wishing to
present oral testimony at the public hearing should provide written
notice to Kristien Knapp at the email address noted below. If EPA
receives a request for a public hearing, that hearing will be held at
1310 L Street NW., Washington, DC 20005. If EPA does not receive a
request for a public hearing, then EPA will not hold a hearing, and
instead consider CARB's request based on written submissions to the
docket. Any party may submit written comments until March 1, 2013.
    By January 25, 2013, any person who plans to attend the hearing may
call Kristien Knapp at<PHONE_NUMBER>, to learn if a hearing will be
held.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2012-0745, by one of the following methods:
     On-Line at http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the On-Line
Instructions for Submitting Comments.

     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Air and Radiation Docket, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2012-0745, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total
of two copies.
     Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, Public Reading Room, EPA
West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC
20460. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal
hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
    On-Line Instructions for Submitting Comments: Direct your comments
to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0745. EPA's policy is that all
comments we receive will be included in the public docket without
change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through http://www.regulations.gov or email. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your
email address will automatically be 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. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    EPA will make available for public inspection materials submitted
by CARB, written comments received from any interested parties, and any
testimony given at the public hearing. Materials relevant to this
proceeding are contained in the Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center, maintained in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0745.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and
Radiation Docket in the EPA Headquarters Library, EPA West Building,
Room 3334, located at 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The
Public Reading Room is open to the public on all federal government
work days from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.; generally, it is open Monday
through Friday, excluding holidays. The telephone number for the
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>. The Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center's Web site is http://www.epa.gov/oar/docket.html.
The electronic mail (email) address for the Air and Radiation Docket
is<EMAIL_ADDRESS>the telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and
the fax number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. An electronic version of the public
docket is available through the federal government's electronic public
docket and comment system. You may access EPA dockets at http://www.regulations.gov. After opening the http://www.regulations.gov Web
site, enter EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0745, in the ``Enter Keyword or ID'' fill-
in box to view documents in the record. Although a part of the official
docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business
Information (``CBI'') or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
    EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality also maintains a Web
page that contains general information on its review of California
waiver requests. Included on that page are links to prior waiver and
authorization Federal Register notices. The page can be accessed at
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/cafr.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristien G. Knapp, Attorney-Advisor,
Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue (6405J), NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. California's Urban Bus Regulations

    By letter dated November 16, 2009, CARB submitted to EPA its
request pursuant to section 209(b) of the Clean Air Act (``CAA'' or
``the Act''), regarding its urban bus regulations.\1\ California's
urban bus regulations principally set requirements for California's
public transit agencies that operate urban buses and other transit
vehicles; additionally, the rulemakings set emission standards for new
urban bus engines. CARB formally adopted these urban bus regulations
during five separate rulemakings that took place between 2000 and 2005:
a 2000 rulemaking, a 2002 rulemaking, a 2004 rulemaking, a February
2005 rulemaking, and an October 2005 rulemaking. Collectively, the five
rulemakings elevated the stringency of exhaust emission standards and
test procedures for heavy-duty urban bus engines and vehicles. The 2000
rulemaking accomplished several feats, including more stringent
particulate matter (PM) emission standards for diesel-fueled urban bus
engines through the 2006 model year; more stringent mandatory and
optional nitrogen oxides (NOX) and non-methane hydrocarbon
(NMHC) standards for diesel-fueled urban bus engines through the 2003
model year; more stringent optional combined NMHC+ NOX and
PM standards for alternatively-fueled urban bus engines through the
2006 model year; more stringent primary emission standards for diesel-
fueled urban buses through the 2006 model year; tightening of exhaust
emission standards for 2007 and later model year heavy-duty urban
diesel engines; and adoption of urban bus test procedures and label
specifications. The 2000 rulemaking was formally adopted by CARB on
November 22, 2000 and May 29, 2001,\2\ and became operative under
California law on January 23, 2001 and May 29, 2001, respectively.\3\
The 2002 rulemaking allowed for an optional NMHC+ NOX
standard for 2004-2006 model year diesel-fueled urban bus engines when
used in exempted transit fleets with commitments to demonstrate
advanced NOX after-treatment technology, and established a
certification procedure for hybrid electric buses. The 2002 rulemaking
was formally adopted by CARB on September 2, 2003,\4\ and became
operative under California law on

November 15, 2003.\5\ The 2004 rulemaking added optional exhaust
emission standards for diesel-fueled hybrid-electric urban bus engines
for authorized transit agencies with NOX mitigation plans
for the 2004-2006 model years. The 2004 rulemaking was formally adopted
by CARB on June 24, 2004,\6\ and became operative under California law
on January 31, 2004.\7\ The February 2005 rulemaking clarified the
optional standards for hybrid-electric buses that were allowed in the
2004 rulemaking. The February 2005 rulemaking was formally adopted by
CARB on February 24, 2005,\8\ and became operative under California law
on January 31, 2006.\9\ The October 2005 rulemaking amended the urban
bus standards to align with California's existing exhaust emission
standards for heavy-duty diesel engines. The October 2005 rulemaking
was formally adopted by CARB on July 28, 2006,\10\ and became operative
under California law on October 7, 2006.\11\ The revisions to emission
standards and test procedures resulting from these five sets of
amendments were codified at title 13, California Code of Regulations,
section 1952.2 et seq., which was later renumbered to section 2023 et
seq.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ California Air Resources Board (``CARB''), ``Request for
Waiver Action Pursuant to Clean Air Act Section 209(b) for
California's Urban Bus Emission Standards,'' November 16, 2009.
    \2\ CARB, ``Resolution 00-2,'' February 24, 2000; CARB,
``Executive Order G-00-060,'' November 22, 2000; CARB, ``Executive
Order G-01-010,'' May 29, 2001.
    \3\ CARB, ``Secretary of State Face Sheet and Final Regulation
Order,'' effective January 23, 2001; CARB, ``Secretary of State Face
Sheet and Final Regulation Order,'' effective May 29, 2001.
    \4\ CARB, ``Resolution 02-30,'' October 24, 2002; CARB,
``Executive Order G-03-023,'' September 2, 2003.
    \5\ CARB, ``Secretary of State Face Sheet and Final Regulation
Order,'' effective November 15, 2003.
    \6\ CARB, ``Resolution 04-19,'' June 24, 2004.
    \7\ CARB, ``Secretary of State Face Sheet and Final Regulation
Order,'' effective January 31, 2004.
    \8\ CARB, ``Resolution 05-15,'' February 24, 2005.
    \9\ CARB, ``Secretary of State Face Sheet and Final Regulation
Order,'' effective January 31, 2006.
    \10\ CARB, ``Resolution 05-47,'' September 15, 2005; CARB,
``Resolution 05-53,'' October 20, 2005; CARB Resolution 05-61,''
October 27, 2005; CARB, ``Executive Order R-05-007,'' July 28, 2006.
    \11\ CARB, ``Secretary of State Face Sheet and Final Regulation
Order,'' effective October 7, 2006.
    \12\ See supra notes 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CARB seeks a waiver of preemption pursuant to section 209(b) of the
Clean Air Act for the emission standards and related test procedures
contained in its urban bus regulations, as amended through 2000 and
2005.

II. Clean Air Act Waivers of Preemption

    Section 209(a) of the Clean Air Act preempts states and local
governments from setting emission standards for new motor vehicles and
engines. It provides:

    No State or any political subdivision thereof shall adopt or
attempt to enforce any standard relating to the control of emissions
from new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines subject to this
part. No state shall require certification, inspection or any other
approval relating to the control of emissions from any new motor
vehicle or new motor vehicle engine as condition precedent to the
initial retail sale, titling (if any), or registration of such motor
vehicle, motor vehicle engine, or equipment.

Through operation of section 209(b) of the Act, California is able to
seek and receive a waiver of section 209(a)'s preemption. Section
209(b)(1) requires a waiver to be granted for any State that had
adopted standards (other than crankcase emission standards) for the
control of emissions from new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle
engines prior to March 30, 1966,\13\ if the State determines that its
standards will be, in the aggregate, at least as protective of public
health and welfare as applicable Federal standards (this is known as
California's ``protectiveness determination''). However, no waiver is
to be granted if EPA finds that: (A) California's above-noted
``protectiveness determination'' is arbitrary and capricious; \14\ (B)
California does not need such State standards to meet compelling and
extraordinary conditions; \15\ or (C) California's standards and
accompanying enforcement procedures are not consistent with section
202(a) of the Act.\16\ Regarding consistency with section 202(a), EPA
reviews California's standards for technological feasibility and
evaluates testing and enforcement procedures to determine whether they
would be inconsistent with federal test procedures (e.g., if
manufacturers would be unable to meet both California and federal test
requirements using the same test vehicle).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Because California was the only state to have adopted
standards prior to 1966, it is the only state that is qualified to
seek and receive a waiver. See S.Rep. No. 90-403 at 632 (1967).
    \14\ CAA section 209(b)(1)(A).
    \15\ CAA section 209(b)(1)(B).
    \16\ CAA section 209(b)(1)(C).
    \17\ See, e.g., 74 FR at 32767 (July 8, 2009); see also MEMA I,
627 F.2d at 1126.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. EPA's Request for Comments

    EPA is offering the opportunity for a public hearing, and
requesting written comment on issues relevant to section 209(b) of the
Clean Air Act. Specifically, we request comment on whether: (a)
California's determination that its motor vehicle emission standards
are, in the aggregate, at least as protective of public health and
welfare as applicable Federal standards is arbitrary and capricious,
(b) California needs such standards to meet compelling and
extraordinary conditions, and (c) California's standards and
accompanying enforcement procedures are consistent with section 202(a)
of the Clean Air Act.

IV. Procedures for Public Participation

    If a hearing is held, the Agency will make a verbatim record of the
proceedings. Interested parties may arrange with the reporter at the
hearing to obtain a copy of the transcript at their own expense.
Regardless of whether a public hearing is held, EPA will keep the
record open until March 1, 2013. Upon expiration of the comment period,
the Administrator will render a decision on CARB's request based on the
record from the public hearing, if any, all relevant written
submissions, and other information that she deems pertinent. All
information will be available for inspection at the EPA Air Docket No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0745.
    Persons with comments containing proprietary information must
distinguish such information from other comments to the greatest extent
possible and label it as ``Confidential Business Information''
(``CBI''). If a person making comments wants EPA to base its decision
on a submission labeled as CBI, then a non-confidential version of the
document that summarizes the key data or information should be
submitted to the public docket. To ensure that proprietary information
is not inadvertently placed in the public docket, submissions
containing such information should be sent directly to the contact
person listed above and not to the public docket. Information covered
by a claim of confidentiality will be disclosed by EPA only to the
extent allowed, and according to the procedures set forth in 40 CFR
part 2. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies the submission when
EPA receives it, EPA will make it available to the public without
further notice to the person making comments.

    Dated: December 26, 2012.
Christopher Grundler,
Director, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Air and
Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2012-31717 Filed 1-3-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


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

General Comment:Dear Mr. Zeller:

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

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

I feel very strongly about e-cigarettes, personal vaporizers, and related products to include the liquid for my personal Vaporizer as an alternative to combustible cigarettes. Quite simply, I firmly believe that they saved my life, I know that they have saved me form a diagnoses of COPD/Emphysema . I wish to provide you with my personal story, as well as science- and evidence-based responses to your questions so that you can take my comment into account. I understand that the FDA has the authority under 21 CFR 10.40 to extend this time frame and that the FDA has exercised this authority on numerous occasions in the past. I would therefore ask that you do so here, so that all stakeholders have the opportunity to provide their comments on this proposed regulation.

I appreciate your consideration of my request and am happy to discuss this issue with you further.

Please do not hesitate to contact me to discuss this issue further.


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 227 (Monday, November 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60415-60416]
[FR Doc No: 2018-25587]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14890-000]

Southeast Oklahoma Power Corporation; Notice of Preliminary
Permit Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions
To Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On August 27, 2018, Southeast Oklahoma Power Corporation, filed an
application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the
Federal

Power Act (FPA), proposing to study the feasibility of the Pushmataha
County Pumped Storage Hydroelectric Project (Pushmataha Project or
project) to be located on the Kiamichi River, near the town of
Talihina, in Pushmataha County, Oklahoma. The sole purpose of a
preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority
to file a license application during the permit term. A preliminary
permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-
disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by
others without the owners' express permission.
    The Pushmataha Project permit application describes two adjacent,
alternative developments that the applicant proposes to choose between.
    Alternative 1 would consist of the following: (1) An 886-foot-long,
282-foot-high concrete-faced rockfill upper dam with a 196.85-foot-
long, 17-foot-high emergency spillway with a channel to Long Creek; (2)
an upper reservoir with a surface area of 488.52 acres and a storage
capacity of 43,633 acre-feet; (3) a 98.4-foot-long, 39.4-foot-high
concrete upper intake/outlet structure; (4) a 7,030-foot-long, 32.8-
foot-diameter steel and concrete headrace tunnel; (5) a 550-foot-long,
93-foot-wide, 188.5-foot-high underground concrete pumping station/
powerhouse containing four pump/generating units with a total capacity
of 1,200 megawatts; (6) an 8,243-foot-long, 32.8-foot-diameter tailrace
tunnel; (7) a 98.4-foot-long, 39.4-foot-high concrete lower intake/
outlet structure; (8) a 13,615-foot-long, 68.9-foot-high earthen lower
dam with a 33-foot-long, 13-foot-high emergency spillway with a channel
that becomes a tunnel to the Kiamichi River; (9) a lower reservoir with
a surface area of 727 acres and a storage capacity of 37,965 acre-feet;
(10) two 20-inch-diameter, 1,085-foot-long pipes with 110 kilowatt
pumps to move water from a regulating reservoir to the lower reservoir;
(11) a regulating reservoir with a surface area of 40 acres and a
storage capacity of 1,216 acre-feet; (12) two 20-inch-diameter, 886-
foot-long pipes with two 110 kilowatt pumps to move water from the
Kiamichi River to a regulating reservoir; (13) a 40-foot-long, 40-foot-
wide funnel-shaped intake structure on the Kiamichi River located 1.5-
feet above the bottom of the Kiamichi River tapering down to 10-foot-
long, 10-foot-wide section where it connects to the two withdrawal
pipes; and (14) a 124-mile-long transmission line to the Electric
Reliability Council of Texas grid.
    Alternative 2 would consist of the following: (1) A 1,529-foot-
long, 233-foot-high concrete-faced rockfill upper dam with a 196.85-
foot-long, 17-foot-high emergency spillway with a channel to a creek;
(2) an upper reservoir with a surface area of 366.07 acres, and a
storage capacity of 27,462 acre-feet; (3) a 98.4-foot-long, 39.4-foot-
high concrete upper intake/outlet structure; (4) a 3,979-foot-long,
32.8-foot-diameter steel and concrete headrace tunnel; (5) a 545-foot-
long, 90-foot-wide, 185.4-foot-high underground concrete pumping
station/powerhouse containing four pump/generating units with a total
capacity of 1,200 megawatts; (6) a 5,831-foot-long, 32.8-foot-diameter
tailrace tunnel; (7) a 98.4-foot-long, 39.4-foot-high concrete lower
intake/outlet structure; (8) a 13,911-foot-long, 52.5-foot-high earthen
lower dam with a 33-foot-long, 13-foot-high emergency spillway with a
channel that becomes a tunnel to the Kiamichi River; (9) a lower
reservoir with a surface area of 972.71 acres and a storage capacity of
31,223 acre-feet; (10) two 20-inch-diameter, 1,532-foot-long pipes with
110 kilowatt pumps to move water from a regulating reservoir to the
lower reservoir; (11) a regulating reservoir with a surface area of 40
acres and a storage capacity of 1,216 acre-feet; (12) two 20-inch-
diameter, 886-foot-long pipes with two 110 kilowatt pumps to move water
from the Kiamichi River to the a regulating reservoir; (13) a 40-foot-
long, 40-foot-wide funnel-shaped intake structure on the Kiamichi River
located 1.5-feet above the bottom of the Kiamichi River tapering down
to 10-foot-long, 10-foot-wide section where it connects to the two
withdrawal pipes; and (14) a 124-mile-long transmission line to the
Electric Reliability Council of Texas grid.
    For either alternative, the proposed project would have an
estimated average annual generation of 4,368,000 megawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Mr. John Bobenic, Southeast Oklahoma Power
Corporation, c/o Daytona Power Corp, 1800, 421-7 Avenue SW, Calgary,
Alberta Canada T2P 4K9; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Michael Spencer,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-14890-000.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14890) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: November 16, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-25587 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P