From: Billy Martin [ mailto: wpwmm@ huber. com] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 3: 55 PM To: kphanks@ rti. org Cc: KISSELL. MARY@ epamail. epa. gov Subject: Re: Continuous presses Attachments: Katie Hanks Questionnaire. doc, EmissionTestResults. jpg, EmissionTestResults2. jpg, EmissionTestResults3. bmp, EmissionTestResults4. jpg, EmissionTestResults5. jpg Ms. Hanks,

I apologize for the late reply, but I do hope you got my earlier messages. Attached please find the requested information in your note. I took the liberty to repeat your requests onto a separate document and provided the information below each request.

Also attached are the relevant documents that provide some insight to the HAP data you requested. I had to scan the pages and they are in a jpeg. format.

I hope this information meets your needs. Should you have additional questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.

Respectfully,

Billy Billy M. Martin Director, Environmental Affairs Huber Engineered Woods 423 775 8820 423 775 8821 ( fax) wpwmm@ huber. com >>> " Hanks, Katie P." < kphanks@ rti. org> 08/ 22/ 03 12: 06PM >>>

Mr. Martin,

My company is the contractor assisting the U. S. EPA with development of the plywood and composite wood products ( PCWP) national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants ( NESHAP). We received your comments on the proposed NESHAP and we are in the process of evaluating the maximum acheivable control technology ( MACT) options for continuous PCWP presses.

In order to look at the MACT options, we have been reviewing the information you submitted and we are gathering additional information ( as needed) on the types of enclosures used on continuous presses. We have a few questions regarding the continuous press used by J. M. Huber in Spring City, TN.

First, can you describe the enclosure ( if any) or emissions capture method used for the Spring City press? Has actual capture efficiency been determined for the press? Is there a press preheater, and if so, are emissions from the preheater routed to RTO system? More importantly, can you tell us what test method was used to collect the VOC emissions data presented in Attachment I of your comments? We would also be interested in any HAP emissions data that are available. Please call me if you would like to discuss. Thank you.

Katie Hanks RTI International 3040 Cornwallis Road Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 ( 919) 316 3732 ( 919) 541 7155 ( fax) kphanks@ rti. org 1. Describe the enclosure ( if any) or emissions capture method used for the Spring City press?

The original design for emissions capture for the continuous press in TN ( constructed in 1996 97) included the manufacturer ( Siempelkamp) recommended direct exhaust points located at the in feed, out feed and heat tunnel to the press.

The continuous press was enclosed within a building with a separation wall between the finish and handling line, forming line and warehouse and the press control room, thermal oil pump room, and hydraulic room walls.

The total exhaust volume originally recommended by Siempelkamp for capture and control from the continuous press was approximately 35,000 acfm. We utilized the Siempelkamp recommended extraction points and ducted the exhaust gases to our dryer pollution control system which included a common pressure equalization chamber, followed by wet electrostatic precipitators, followed by an RTO. The design of the dryer APC systems was such that the 35,000 acfm from the continuous press could be accommodated.

This proved to be inadequate in practice. To improve capture we added additional single point capture hoods at each frame of the press where decompression of the board took place, which were manifolded to a common duct and taken to a new RTO sized at 65,000 scfm. This RTO was in addition to, not in place of the dryer RTO and was dedicated solely to control of press decompression emissions. The new side capture hoods ran from the outfeed of the press at frame 57 to about frame 28 along each side of the press. This area is the primary emission point for decompression gases. This approach was intended to capture emissions as quickly as possible during board decompression along the press.

Additional pick up points/ hoods were added at the screen return roll at the press out feed and in feed. Therefore, the system was now such that the emissions from the press in feed and pre heater were directed to the dryer APC system and the emissions emanating from the press out feed, heat tunnel, screen return and frame capture hoods were directed to the new RTO.

Since that time, there has been an additional separation wall added at the mid point of the press building to assist in concentrating and improving capture at the press out feed.

2. Has actual capture efficiency been determined for the press? There have been no tests conducted to determine capture efficiency for the press.

3. Is there a press pre heater, and if so, are emissions from the pre heater routed to RTO system?

Yes, there is a press pre heater and these emissions are captured by a series of suspended collection hoods over the pre heater, and are routed to the dryer APC system.

4. What test method was used to collect the VOC emissions data presented in Attachment I of your comments?

VOC area grab sampling was conducted both by FID ( direct reading flame ionization detector) and Summa canister. The FID sampling was conducted at the frame points as listed in Attachment I.

The Summa canister sampling occurred at Frame 50, location D and the north end of the mezzanine ( press out feed area). These samples were analyzed in accordance with EPA Method TO 14.

5. HAP emissions data that are available.

We have results of an investigative emissions test for THC and speciated VOCs conducted at the inlet only to the press RTO and the inlet duct where the press in feed emissions are conveyed to the dryer wasp/ RTO system. These tests were not conducted using NCASI Method CI/ WP 98.01, Chilled Impinger Method for Use at Wood Products Mills to Measure Formaldehyde, Methanol, and Phenol; therefore, we do not have a high degree of confidence in the results. A copy of the emission tables and corresponding test methodology accompanies this response.


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 99 (Monday, May 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32360-32364]
[FR Doc No: 2016-12017]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-77850; File No. SR-NYSE-2016-22]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing of Amendment No. 5 to Proposed Rule Change Adopting
Initial and Continued Listing Standards for the Listing of Equity
Investment Tracking Stocks and Adopting Listing Fees Specific to Equity
Investment Tracking Stocks

May 17, 2016.

I. Introduction

    On April 7, 2016, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE'' or the
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to adopt initial and continued listing standards
for the listing of Equity Investment Tracking Stocks and to adopt fees
for Equity Investment Tracking Stocks. The proposed rule change was
published for comment in the Federal Register on April 27, 2016.\3\ On
April 20, 2016, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule

change, which superseded the original filing in its entirety. On May
17, 2016, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 5 to the proposal, which
superseded the filing, as amended by Amendment No. 1.\4\ Amendment No.
5 is described in Item II below. The Commission is publishing this
notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 5, from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77674 (April 21,
2016), 81 FR 24919 (April 27, 2016).
    \4\ On May 13, 2016, the Exchange submitted and withdrew
Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change. On May 13, 2016, the
Exchange filed Amendment No. 3 to the proposed rule change, and on
May 16, 2016 the Exchange withdrew Amendment No. 3 to the proposed
rule change. On May 16, 2016 the Exchange submitted Amendment No. 4
to the proposal, and on May 17, 2016, the Exchange withdrew
Amendment No. 4 to the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment
No. 5

    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 III 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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to adopt initial and continued listing
standards for the listing of Equity Investment Tracking Stocks. The
Exchange also proposes to adopt listing fees specific to Equity
Investment Tracking Stocks that are the sole listed common equity
security of the issuer.
    For purposes of proposed new Section 102.07 of the Manual, an
Equity Investment Tracking Stock is defined as a class of common equity
securities that tracks on an unleveraged basis the performance of an
investment by the issuer in the common equity securities of a single
other company listed on the Exchange. An Equity Investment Tracking
Stock may track multiple classes of common equity securities of a
single issuer, so long as all of those classes have identical economic
rights and at least one of those classes is listed on the Exchange.
    In order to qualify for initial listing under proposed Section
102.07, an Equity Investment Tracking Stock will be required to meet
the distribution and public float requirements currently applicable for
initial public offerings set forth in Sections 102.01A and 102.01B of
the Manual, respectively, and the Global Market Capitalization set
forth in Section 102.01C. As such, as required under Section 102.01A,
an Equity Investment Tracking Stock, at the time of initial listing,
will be required to have at least 400 holders of 100 shares or more and
1,100,000 public [sic] held shares available for trading. Further, as
required under Section 102.01B, an Equity Investment Tracking Stock
must have an aggregated [sic] market value of publicly-held shares of
$40,000,000 and a per share price of $4 at the time of initial listing.
Under Section 102.01C, the issuer of an Equity Investment Tracking
Stock will be required to meet the Global Market Capitalization Test,
under which the issuer must have $200 million in global market
capitalization at the time of initial listing. The issuer of the Equity
Investment Tracking Stock must also own (directly or indirectly \5\) at
least 50% of both the economic interest and voting power of all of the
outstanding classes of common equity of the issuer whose equity is
tracked by the Equity Investment Tracking Stock. The Issuer of Equity
Investment Tracking Stock must also fully comply with the Exchange's
corporate governance requirements set forth in Section 303A of the
Manual, subject to applicable exemptions such as those applicable to
controlled companies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ An example of an indirect ownership would be where the
listed company has a 100%-owned subsidiary and that subsidiary in
turn owns the stock of the company whose performance is being
tracked. Another example would be where the listed company owns 100%
of each of two subsidiaries, each of which owns stock in the company
whose performance is being tracked.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange will not list an Equity Investment Tracking Stock if,
at the time of the proposed listing, the issuer of the equity tracked
by the Equity Investment Tracking Stock has been deemed below
compliance with listing standards by the Exchange.
    The Exchange proposes to subject the issuer of an Equity Investment
Tracking Stock to the same continued listing standards under Sections
802.01A and 802.01B as are applicable to other companies listing common
stocks on the Exchange. As such, these companies will be considered to
be below compliance with Section 802.01A if (i) their number of total
stockholders is less than 400 or (ii) their number of total
stockholders is less than 1,200 and their average monthly trading
volume is less than 100,000 shares (for the most recent 12 months) or
(iii) their number of publicly-held shares is less than 600,000. Such
companies will be deemed to be below compliance with Section 802.01B if
their average global market capitalization over a consecutive 30
trading-day period is less than $50,000,000 and, at the same time
stockholders' equity is less than $50,000,000 and (will be subject to
immediate delisting if they are determined to have average global
market capitalization over a consecutive 30 trading-day period of less
than $15,000,000).
    In the case of an Equity Investment Tracking Stock, the Exchange
will review the continued listing status of that security if:
     The underlying listed equity security or securities whose
value is tracked by the Equity Investment Tracking Stock ceases or
cease to be listed on the Exchange.
     The issuer of the Equity Investment Tracking Stock owns
(directly or indirectly) less than 50% of either the economic interest
or the voting power of all of the outstanding classes of common equity
of the issuer whose equity is tracked by the Equity Investment Tracking
Stock.
     The Equity Investment Tracking Stock ceases to track the
performance of the listed equity security or securities that was
tracked at the time of initial listing.
    In the event that any of the foregoing conditions exist [sic], the
Exchange will determine whether the Equity Investment Tracking Stock
meets any other applicable initial listing standard in place at that
time. If the Equity Investment Tracking Stock does not qualify for
initial listing at that time under another applicable listing standard
the issuer will not be eligible to follow the procedures set forth in
Sections 802.02 and 802.03 and the Exchange will immediately suspend
the Equity Investment Tracking Stock and commence delisting
proceedings. Furthermore, whenever trading in the equity security whose
value is tracked by an Equity Investment Tracking Stock is suspended or
delisting proceedings are commenced with respect to such security, such
Equity Investment Tracking Stock will be suspended and/or delisting
proceedings commenced with respect to such Equity Investment Tracking
Stock at the same time.
    The Exchange proposes to amend Section 202.06(B) of the Manual to
provide that, in the event that the issuer of the common equity
security tracked by an Equity Investment Tracking Stock

intends to issue a material news release during the trading day and the
staff of NYSE Regulation determines that a regulatory trading halt
required by Section 202.06 should be implemented pending dissemination
of the news or any other required regulatory trading halt should be
implemented, the Exchange will also halt trading in the Equity
Investment Tracking Stock simultaneously with the halt in the
underlying security and will also recommence trading at the same time.
    The Exchange represents that it will monitor activity in Equity
Investment Tracking Stocks to identify and deter any potential improper
trading activity in such securities. The Exchange will adopt enhanced
surveillance procedures to enable it to monitor Equity Investment
Tracking Stocks alongside the securities whose value they track.
Additionally, the Exchange represents that its surveillance procedures
are generally adequate to properly monitor the trading of Equity
Investment Tracking Stocks. Specifically, the Exchange will rely on its
existing trading surveillances, administered by the Exchange, or the
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (``FINRA'') on behalf of the
Exchange, which are designed to detect violations of Exchange rules and
applicable federal securities laws.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ FINRA conducts cross-market surveillances on behalf of the
Exchange pursuant to a regulatory services agreement. The Exchange
is responsible for FINRA's performance under this regulatory
services agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The surveillances referred to above generally focus on detecting
securities trading outside their normal patterns, which could be
indicative of manipulative or other violative activity. When such
situations are detected, surveillance analysis follows and
investigations are opened, where appropriate, to review the behavior of
all relevant parties for all relevant trading violations.
    Given the novel investment characteristics of Equity Investment
Tracking Stocks, the Exchange will conduct a review of the trading and
compliance with continued listing standards of Equity Investment
Tracking Stocks and their issuers over the initial two year period for
which the proposed listing standard is in operation. The Exchange will
furnish two reports to the SEC based on this review, one to be provided
one year after the initial listing date of the first security listed
under the proposed standard and the second to be provided on the second
anniversary of such initial listing. At a minimum, the reports will
address the relationship between the trading prices of listed Equity
Investment Tracking Stocks and those of the securities whose values
they track, the liquidity of the market for the two securities, and any
manipulation concerns arising in connection with the trading of
securities listed under the standard and the securities whose values
are being tracked. The reports will also discuss any recommendations
the Exchange may have for enhancements to the listing standard based on
its review.
    The proposed rule will provide that, prior to the commencement of
trading of any Equity Investment Tracking Stock, the Exchange will
distribute an Information Memorandum to its Members and Member
Organizations that includes (a) any special characteristics and risks
of trading the Equity Investment Tracking Stock, and (b) the Exchange
Rules that will apply to the Equity Investment Tracking Stock including
Exchange Rules that require Member Organizations:
     To use reasonable diligence in regard to the opening and
maintenance of every account, to know (and retain) the essential facts
concerning every customer and concerning the authority of each person
acting on behalf of such customer.
     In recommending transactions in the Equity Investment
Tracking Stock to have a reasonable basis to believe that (1) the
recommendation is suitable for a customer given reasonable inquiry
concerning the customer's investment objectives, financial situation,
needs, and any other information known by such Member Organization, and
(2) the customer can evaluate the special characteristics, and is able
to bear the financial risks, of an investment in the Equity Investment
Tracking Stock.
    The Exchange proposes to amend Sections 902.02 and 902.03 of the
Manual to provide that, where an Equity Investment Tracking Stock is
the only common equity security of the issuer listed on the Exchange,
listing and annual fees for such security will be subject to a single
fee cap at the time of original listing and on an annual basis. The
Exchange further proposes to amend Section 907.00 of the Manual to
limit the products and services provided to the issuer of an Equity
Investment Tracking Stock for so long as it is the only common equity
security of the issuer listed on the Exchange.
    Pursuant to Sections 902.02 and 902.03 of the Manual, listed
companies are charged an annual fee for each class or series of
security listed on the Exchange. The annual fee is calculated based on
the number of shares issued and outstanding and is currently set at a
rate of $0.001025 for the primary listed class of equity, subject to an
annual minimum of $52,500. In its first year of listing, a company's
annual fee is prorated from the date of initial listing through the
year end. Listed companies also pay other fees to the Exchange,
including fees associated with initial and supplemental listing
applications. In any given calendar year, however, Section 902.02 of
the Manual specifies that the total fees that the Exchange may bill a
listed company are capped at $500,000 (the ``Total Maximum Fee''). For
an Equity Investment Tracking Stock that is the issuer's only common
equity security listed on the Exchange, the Exchange proposes to adopt
a Total Maximum Fee of $200,000.
    Section 902.03 of the Manual currently provides, in part, for
listing fees the first time an issuer lists a class of common shares,
charged on a per share basis based on tiers set forth in the rule. The
first time that an issuer lists a class of common shares, the issuer is
also subject to a one-time special charge of $50,000. Once listed, if
an issuer lists additional shares of a class of previously listed
securities, the issuer is subject to listing fees for such additional
shares. The minimum and maximum listing fees applicable the first time
an issuer lists a class of common shares are $125,000 and $250,000,
respectively, which amounts include the special charge of $50,000. In
lieu of the foregoing, the Exchange proposes to establish for an Equity
Investment Tracking Stock that is its issuer's only common equity
security listed on the Exchange a fixed initial listing fee (inclusive
of the one-time charge) of $100,000. Subject to the Total Maximum Fee
of $200,000 per year described above, the Exchange proposes to charge
the same per share annual fee for Equity Investment Tracking Stocks as
for the primary class of equity of a listed operating company (i.e.,
currently $0.001025 per share, subject to the minimum annual fee of
$52,500).
    Finally, Section 907.00 of the Manual sets forth certain
complimentary products and services that are offered to certain
currently and newly listed issuers. These products and services are
developed or delivered by NYSE or by a third party for use by NYSE-
listed companies. Some of these products are commercially available
from such third-party vendors. All listed issuers receive some
complimentary products and services through the NYSE Market Access
Center. The Exchange proposes to exclude issuers of an Equity
Investment Tracking Stock that is the issuer's only common equity
security listed on the Exchange from receiving

the products and services provided for under Section 907.00, with the
exception that such issuers will receive the complimentary products and
services and access to discounted third-party products and services
through the NYSE Market Access Center available to all listed issuers.
Issuers of Equity Investment Tracking Stocks will be eligible for tier-
based services commencing when they have an additional class of common
equity securities listed. In determining eligibility for the various
service tiers under Section 907.00, the Exchange will aggregate all of
the outstanding shares of listed classes of common equity securities of
a company, including all outstanding shares of any listed Equity
Investment Tracking Stock that is not the issuer's only listed class of
common equity securities.
    The Exchange proposes to limit the fees that would be payable for
the listing on an Equity Investment Tracking Stock as an incentive for
the issuer to list such security on the Exchange. As described below,
the Exchange proposes to make the aforementioned fee changes to better
reflect the Exchange's costs related to listing Equity Investment
Tracking Stocks and the corresponding value of such listing to issuers.
    The Exchange proposes to make three other minor changes in this
filing: (i) To remove from Section 902.03 references to the annual fee
schedule applicable to years prior to 2016; (ii) to update the web link
included in Section 907.00 and (iii) to delete the word ``four'' from
Section 802.01B, as there are no longer four continued listing
standards referred to in that rule.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\7\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(4) \8\ and 6(b)(5) \9\ of the Act, in
particular.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f (b).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed initial and continued
listing standards for Equity Investment Tracking Stocks further the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ in particular in that
they are designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, 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
and is [sic] not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, the proposed listing standards are designed to
protect investors and the public interest by ensuring that Equity
Investment Tracking Stocks listed on the Exchange meet stringent
quantitative and qualitative listing standards to qualify for initial
and continued listing. The Exchange notes that an Equity Investment
Tracking Stock will be subject to delisting if they [sic] do [sic] not
meet another applicable initial listing standard and (i) the underlying
equity security whose value is tracked by the Equity Investment
Tracking Stock ceases to be listed on the Exchange; (ii) the issuer of
the Equity Investment Tracking Stock owns (directly or indirectly) less
than 50% of either the economic interest or the voting power of all of
the outstanding classes of common equity of the issuer whose equity is
tracked by the Equity Investment Tracking Stock; or (iii) the Equity
Investment Tracking Stock ceases to track the performance of the listed
equity security that was tracked at the time of initial listing. The
Issuer of Equity Investment Tracking Stock must also fully comply with
the Exchange's corporate governance requirements set forth in Section
303A of the Manual, subject to applicable exemptions such as those
applicable to controlled companies.
    The Exchange notes that it is proposing to amend Section 202.06(B)
to provide that, in the event that the issuer of the common equity
security tracked by an Equity Investment Tracking Stock intends to
issue a material news release during the trading day and the staff of
NYSE Regulation determines that a regulatory trading halt pursuant to
Section 202.06 should be implemented pending dissemination of the news
or if the staff of NYSE Regulation determine [sic] that any other
required regulatory trading halt should be implemented, the Exchange
will also halt trading in the Equity Investment Tracking Stock
simultaneously with the halt in the underlying security and will also
recommence trading at the same time. The Exchange believes that this
proposed amendment will protect investors and the public interest by
preventing market participants from gaining an advantage in trading in
an Equity Investment Tracking Stock based on their possession of
material nonpublic information with respect to the company whose value
is being tracked by the Equity Investment Tracking Stock.
    The proposed rule requires the issuer of an Equity Investment
Tracking Stock to meet the Global Market Capitalization Test in Section
102.01C of the Manual at the time of initial listing and does not allow
applicants the alternative of meeting the Earnings Test, as would
normally be available to an operating company applicant. The Exchange
does not believe this is unfairly discriminatory, as many applicants
will likely not have prepared standalone financial statements
applicable to the equity investment being tracked and would therefore
be unable to demonstrate compliance with the Earnings Test.
    The proposed fee provisions further the objectives of Sections
6(b)(4) in that they are designed to provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its
members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. The
Exchange believes that the proposed fee provisions are consistent with
Section 6(b)(5) of the Act in that they do not unfairly discriminate
among listed companies because there is a reasonable justification for
charging the issuer of an Equity Investment Tracking Stock different
fees from those charged to other issuers as there are cost and
regulatory efficiencies for the Exchange when the issuer of an Equity
Investment Tracking Stock and the issuer of the underlying equity
security are both listed on the Exchange. Under the Exchange's
proposal, the issuer of an Equity Investment Tracking Stock that is the
issuer's only common equity security listed on the Exchange would pay a
fixed initial listing fee of $100,000, which is less than the minimum
fee charged in connection with the listing of the primary class of
equity of an operating company. In addition, Equity Investment Tracking
Stocks would be billed annual fees at the same rate per share as the
primary class of equity of an operating company, but, so long as the
Equity Investment Tracking Stock is the issuer's only common equity
security listed on the exchange, they [sic] will be subject to a lower
annual fee cap that may cause an issuer of an Equity Investment
Tracking Stock to be subject to a lower effective fee rate per share
than if it were a regular operating company. Given the unique nature of
an Equity Investment Tracking Stock, including especially the fact that
its trading price will likely be primarily derivative of the trading
price of the security of another company, most of the services provided
by the

Exchange under Section 907.00 would be of limited value and appeal to
issuers of Equity Investment Tracking Stocks and the Exchange believes
it is appropriate to exclude the issuers of Equity Investment Tracking
Stocks from its services program. The Exchange believes that the fact
that it will not provide these costly services makes it appropriate to
charge lower fees. In addition, the Exchange believes there will be
regulatory efficiencies when the same regulatory staff is responsible
for oversight of an Equity Investment Tracking Stock and the underlying
equity security. This would include, for example, the fact that news
that is material to the issuer of the underlying security would also be
material to an investment in the Equity Investment Tracking Stock.
    The Exchange does not expect many issuers will seek to list an
Equity Investment Tracking Stock. Accordingly, the Exchange does not
anticipate that it will experience any meaningful diminution in revenue
as a result of the proposed lower fees and therefore does not believe
that the proposed fees would in any way negatively affect its ability
to continue to adequately fund its regulatory program or the services
the Exchange provides to issuers

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 proposed rule change is
designed to provide listing standards for Equity Investment Tracking
Stocks that are appropriately protective of investors and is not
designed to limit the ability of the issuers of those securities to
list them on any other national securities exchange. The proposed rule
change is designed to ensure that the fees charged by the Exchange
accurately reflect the services provided and benefits realized by
listed companies. The market for listing services is extremely
competitive. Each listing exchange has a different fee schedule that
applies to issuers seeking to list securities on its exchange. Issuers
have the option to list their securities on these alternative venues
based on the fees charged and the value provided by each listing.
Because issuers have a choice to list their securities on a different
national securities exchange, the Exchange does not believe that the
proposed listing standards and fee changes impose a burden on
competition.

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. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, as modified by Amendment No. 5 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-2016-22 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-NYSE-2016-22. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing 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-2016-22, and should be
submitted on or before June 13, 2016.

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

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

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-12017 Filed 5-20-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: April 14, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 71)]
[Notices]
[Page 19439-19441]
[DOCID:fr14ap10-111]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-61859; File No. SR-CBOE-2010-018]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Proposed Rule Change, as Modified by Amendment
No. 1 Thereto, To List and Trade CBOE Gold ETF Volatility Index Options

April 7, 2010.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on March 18, 2010, the Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated (``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as
described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared
by the Exchange. On March 22, 2010, CBOE filed Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change.\3\ The Commission is publishing this notice, as
amended, to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ In Amendment No. 1, CBOE made technical, non-substantive
corrections to the rule text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    CBOE proposes to amend certain of its rules to provide for the
listing and trading of options that overlie the CBOE Gold ETF
Volatility Index (``GVZ''), which will be cash-settled and will have
European-style exercise. The text of the rule proposal is available on
the Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.org/legal), at the Exchange's
Office of the Secretary and at the Commission.

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 the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The purpose of this proposed rule change is to permit the Exchange
to list and trade cash-settled, European-style options on the CBOE Gold
ETF Volatility Index (``GVZ'').
    Index Design and Calculation:
    The calculation of GVZ is based on the VIX methodology applied to
options on the SPDR Gold Trust (``GLD''). The index was introduced by
CBOE on August 1, 2008 and has been disseminated in real-time on every
trading day since that time.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ CBOE maintains a micro-site for GVZ options at: http://
www.cboe.com/gvz. See proposed amendment to Rule 24.9(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    GVZ is an up-to-the-minute market estimate of the expected
volatility of GLD calculated by using real-time bid/ask quotes of CBOE
listed GLD options. GVZ uses nearby and second nearby options with at
least 8 days left to expiration and then weights them to yield a
constant, 30-day measure of the expected (implied) volatility.
    For each contract month, CBOE will determine the at-the-money
strike price. The Exchange will then select the at-the-money and out-
of-the money series with non-zero bid prices and determine the midpoint
of the bid-ask quote for each of these series. The midpoint quote of
each series is then weighted so that the further away that series is
from the at-the-money strike, the less weight that is accorded to the
quote. Then, to compute the index level, CBOE will calculate a
volatility measure for the nearby options and then for the second
nearby options. This is done using the weighted mid-point of the
prevailing bid-ask quotes for all included option series with the same
expiration date. These volatility measures are then interpolated to
arrive at a single, constant 30-day measure of volatility.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See proposed amendment to Interpretation and Policy .01 to
Rule 24.1 (designating the Exchange as the reporting authority for
GVZ).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CBOE will compute values for GVZ underlying option series on a
real-time basis throughout each trading day, from 8:30 a.m. until 3
p.m. (CT). GVZ levels will be calculated by CBOE and disseminated at
15-second intervals to major market data vendors.
    Options Trading:
    GVZ options will be quoted in index points and fractions and one
point will equal $100. The minimum tick size for series trading below
$3 will be 0.05 ($5.00) and above $3 will be 0.10

($10.00). Exhibit 3 presents contract specifications for GVZ options.
    The Exchange is proposing to permit 1 point or greater strike price
intervals on GVZ options.\6\ The Exchange believes that 1 point strike
price intervals will provide investors with greater flexibility by
allowing them to establish positions that are better tailored to meet
their investment objectives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See proposed addition to Interpretation and Policy .01(a) of
GVZ to the existing list of options for which $2.50 strike price
intervals are permitted and proposed Interpretation and Policy
.01(i) to Rule 24.9 permitting $1 strike price intervals for GVZ
options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Initially, the Exchange will list in-, at- and out-of-the-money
strike prices and may open for trading up to five series above and five
series below the price of the calculated forward value of GVZ, and
LEAPS series. As for additional series, either in response to customer
demand or as the calculated forward value of GVZ moves from the initial
exercise prices of option series that have been open for trading, the
Exchange may open for trading up to five series above and five series
below the calculated forward value of GVZ, and LEAPs series. The
Exchange will not be permitted to open for trading series with 1 point
strike price intervals within 0.50 point of an existing 2.5 point
strike price with the same expiration month. The Exchange will not be
permitted to list LEAPS on GVZ options at strike price intervals less
than 1 point.
    The Exchange is proposing to add new Interpretation and Policy .14
to Rule 5.5, Series of Option Contracts Open for Trading, which will be
an internal cross reference stating that the intervals between strike
prices for GVZ option series will be determined in accordance with
proposed new Interpretation and Policy .01(i) to Rule 24.9.
    Exercise and Settlement:
    The proposed options will typically expire on the Wednesday that is
30 days prior to the third Friday of the calendar month immediately
following the expiration month (the expiration date of the options used
in the calculation of the index).\7\ If the third Friday of the
calendar month immediately following the expiring month is a CBOE
holiday, the expiration date will be 30 days prior to the CBOE business
day immediately preceding that Friday. For example, June 2010 GVZ
options would expire on Wednesday, June 16, 2010, exactly 30 days prior
to the third Friday of the calendar month immediately following the
expiring month. Trading in the expiring contract month will normally
cease at 3 p.m. (CT) on the business day immediately preceding the
expiration date.\8\ Exercise will result in delivery of cash on the
business day following expiration. GVZ options will be A.M.-settled.\9\
The exercise settlement value will be determined by a Special Opening
Quotations (``SOQ'') of GVZ calculated from the sequence of opening
prices of a single strip of options expiring 30 days after the
settlement date. The opening price for any series in which there are is
no trade shall be the average of that options' bid price and ask price
as determined at the opening of trading.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See proposed amendment to Rule 24.9(a)(3) (adding GVZ to
list of European-style index options approved for trading on the
Exchange).
    \8\ See proposed amendment to Rule 24.6, Days and Hours of
Business.
    \9\ See proposed amendment to Rule 24.9(a)(4) (adding GVZ to the
list of A.M.-settled index options approved for trading on the
Exchange).
    \10\ See proposed amendment to Rule 24.9(a)(5) (adding GVZ to
the provision setting forth the method of determining the day that
the exercise settlement value is calculated and of determining the
expiration date and the last trading day for CBOE Volatility Index
Options). The Exchange is also proposing to make technical changes
to this rule provision as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The exercise-settlement amount will be equal to the difference
between the exercise-settlement value and the exercise price of the
option, multiplied by $100. When the last trading day is moved because
of a CBOE holiday, the last trading day for expiring options will be
the day immediately preceding the last regularly-scheduled trading day.
    Position and Exercise Limits:
    For regular options trading, the Exchange is proposing to establish
position limits for GVZ options at 50,000 contracts on either side of
the market and no more than 30,000 contracts in the nearest expiration
month.\11\ CBOE believes that a 50,000 contract position limit is
appropriate due to the fact that GLD options, which are the underlying
components for GVZ, are among the most actively traded option classes
currently listed. Industry-wide, GLD ranked as the 13th most active
options class in 2009, averaging 136,000 contracts per day. On CBOE,
GLD was the 12th most active options trading class in 2009, averaging
over 50,000 contracts per day. In determining compliance with these
proposed position limits, GVZ options will not be aggregated with GLD
options. Positions in Short Term Option Series, Quarterly Options
Series, and Delayed Start Option Series will be aggregated with
position in options contracts in the same GVZ class. Exercise limits
will be the equivalent to the proposed position limits.\12\ GVZ options
will be subject to the same reporting requirements triggered for other
options dealt in on the Exchange.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See proposed amendment to Rule 24.4, Position Limits for
Broad-Based Index Options.
    \12\ See Rule 24.5, Exercise Limits, which provides that
exercise limits are equivalent to position limits.
    \13\ See Rule 4.13, Reports Related to Position Limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For FLEX options trading, the Exchange is proposing that the
position limits for FLEX GVZ Options will be equal to the position
limits for Non-FLEX GVZ Options established pursuant to Rule 24.4.\14\
Similarly, the Exchange is proposing that the exercise limits for FLEX
GVZ Options will be equivalent to the position limits established
pursuant to Rule 24.4.\15\ The proposed position and exercise limits
for FLEX GVZ Options are consistent with the treatment of position and
exercise limits for other Flex Index Options. The Exchange is also
proposing to add new subparagraph (4) to Rules 24A.7(d) and 24B.7(d) to
provide that as long as the options positions remain open, positions in
FLEX GVZ Options that expire on the same day as Non-FLEX GVZ Options,
as determined pursuant to Rule 24.9(a)(5), shall be aggregated with
positions in Non-FLEX GVZ Options and shall be subject to the position
limits set forth in Rules 4.11, 24.4, 24.4A and 24.4B, and the exercise
limits set forth in Rules 4.12 and 24.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See proposed amendments to Rules 24A.7 and 24B.7, Position
Limits and Reporting Requirements.
    \15\ See proposed amendments to Rules 24A.8 and 24B.8, Exercise
Limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exchange Rules Applicable:
    Except as modified herein, the rules in Chapters I through XIX,
XXIV, XXIVA, and XXIVB will equally apply to GVZ options.
    The Exchange is proposing that the margin requirements for GVZ
options be set at the same levels that apply to equity options under
Exchange Rule 12.3. Margin of up to 100% of the current market value of
the option, plus 20% of the underlying volatility index value must be
deposited and maintained. The pertinent provisions of Rule 12.3, Margin
Requirements, have been amended to reflect these proposed revisions.
Additional margin may be required pursuant to Exchange Rule 12.10.
    The Exchange hereby designates GVZ options as eligible for trading
as Flexible Exchange Options as provided for in Chapters XXIVA
(Flexible Exchange Options) and XXIVB (FLEX Hybrid Trading System). The
Exchange notes that GVZ FLEX Options will only expire on business days
that non-FLEX options on Volatility Indexes expire. This is because the
term ``exercise settlement

value'' in Rules 24A.4(b)(3) and 24B.4(b)(3), Special Terms for FLEX
Index Options, has the same meaning set forth in Rule 24.9(5) [sic]. As
is described earlier, the Exchange is proposing to amend Rule
24.9(a)(5) to provide that the exercise settlement value of GVZ options
for all purposes under CBOE Rules will be calculated as the Wednesday
that is thirty days prior to the third Friday of the calendar month
immediately following the month in which GVZ options expire.
    Capacity:
    CBOE has analyzed its capacity and represents that it believes the
Exchange and the Options Price Reporting Authority have the necessary
systems capacity to handle the additional traffic associated with the
listing of new series that would result from the introduction of GVZ
options.
    Surveillance:
    The Exchange will use the same surveillance procedures currently
utilized for each of the Exchange's other index options to monitor
trading in GVZ options. The Exchange further represents that these
surveillance procedures shall be adequate to monitor trading in options
on these volatility indexes. For surveillance purposes, the Exchange
will have complete access to information regarding trading activity in
the pertinent underlying securities.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b) \16\ of the Act, in general, and furthers the
objectives of Section 6(b)(5) \17\ 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, and thereby will
provide investors with the ability to invest in options based on an
additional volatility index.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    CBOE 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.

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

    The Exchange neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposal.

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

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date 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 such 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 e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File No. SR-CBOE-2010-018 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 No. SR-CBOE-2010-018. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail 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,\18\ 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 a.m. and 3 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be
available for inspection and copying at the principal office of CBOE.
All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-CBOE-2010-018 and
should be submitted on or before May 5, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The text of the proposed rule change is available on the
Commission's Web site at http://www.sec.gov.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-8536 Filed 4-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: May 21, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 97)]
[Notices]
[Page 23850-23851]
[DOCID:fr21my09-31]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP09-237-000]

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC; Notice of
Application

May 14, 2009.
    Take notice that on April 30, 2009, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line
Company, LLC (Transco), Post Office Box 1396, Houston, Texas 77251,
filed in the above referenced docket an application pursuant to section
7(c) of the NGA and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations, for a
certificate of public convenience and authorizing the construction and
operation of Delta Lateral Project (Project) in York County,
Pennsylvania. The Project consists of the construction of a new 3.42
mile 16-inch delivery lateral extending from Transco's mainline Station
195 to the Delta Power Plant in Peach Bottom Township, Pennsylvania.
The Project will provide 208,800 dekatherms per day of firm natural gas
transportation service to Conectiv Energy Supply, Inc., owner of the
Delta Power Plant, all as more fully set forth in the application which
is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The
filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site Web at
http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket
number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll-free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY,
(202) 502-8659.
    Any questions regarding the application are to be directed to Marg
Camardello, Manager, Tariffs and Certificates, PO Box 1396, Houston,
Texas 77251, phone<PHONE_NUMBER>. Additionally, Transco has
established a toll-free telephone number,<PHONE_NUMBER>, and e-mail
address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>so that parties can call with
questions about the Project.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or
before the comment date stated below file with the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a
motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or
385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person
obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by
the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all
documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must
submit 14 copies of filings made in the proceeding with the Commission
and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party. Only
parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders
in the proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments,
protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link
at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should
submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public

Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' link on
the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: June 4, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-11795 Filed 5-20-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 21, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 40297]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14597]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 4283-005]

Fred N. Sutter, Jr.; Shamrock Utilities, LLC; Notice of Transfer
of Exemption

    1. By letter filed May 16, 2016, Fred N. Sutter, Jr. informed the
Commission that the exemption from licensing for the Sutter's Mill
Project No. 4283, originally issued March 1, 1982 \1\ has been
transferred to Shamrock Utilities, LLC. The project is located on
Millseat Creek in Shasta County, California. The transfer of an
exemption does not require Commission approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 FERC ] 62,359 (1982), Order Granting Exemption from
Licensing of a Small Hydroelectric Project of 5 Megawatts or Less.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Shamrock Utilities, LLC is now the exemptee of the Sutter's Mill
Project, No. 4283. All correspondence should be forwarded to: Mr. Rocky
Ungaro, Shamrock Utilities, LLC, P.O. Box 859, Palo Cedro, CA 96073.

    Dated: June 15, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-14597 Filed 6-20-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 16, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28863-28864]
[FR Doc No: 2012-11831]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC12-13-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-915); Comment
Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is soliciting public comment on the
currently approved information collection, FERC-915, Public Utility
Market-Based Rate Authorization Holders--Records Retention Requirement.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due July 16, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (identified by Docket No. IC12-13-
000) by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web Site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at (202)
273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-915 and Public Utility Market-Based Rate Authorization
Holders--Records Retention Requirement.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0223.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-915 information
collection requirements with no changes to the current reporting
requirements.
    Abstract: The Commission has the regulatory responsibility under
section 205 of the Federal Power Act (FPA) to ensure that wholesale
sales of electricity are just and reasonable and provided in a non-
discriminatory manner. The Commission uses the information maintained
by the respondents under FERC-915 to monitor the entities' sales,
ensure that the prices are just and reasonable, maintain the integrity
of the wholesale jurisdictional sales markets, and ensure that the
entities comply with the requirements of the FPA (i.e., the
Commission's regulations) and any orders authorizing market-based rate
sales.
    Type of Respondents: Public Utility Market-Based Rate Authorization
Holders.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: \1\ The Commission estimates the total
Public Reporting Burden for this information collection as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. For
further explanation of what is included in the information
collection burden, reference 5 Code of Federal Regulations 1320.3.
    \2\ Electric utilities with approved market-based rate
authority--http://www.ferc.gov/industries/electric/gen-info/mbr/list.asp as of 4/30/2012.

                      FERC-915 (IC12-13-000)--Public Utility Market-Based Rate Authorization Holders--Records Retention Requirement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of                      Average  burden
                                                                        Number of      responses per   Total number of     hours per     Estimated total
                                                                       respondents       respondent       responses         response      annual burden
                                                                                (A)              (B)    (A) x (B) = (C)            (D)                (C) x (D)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric Utilities with Market-Based Rate Authority................       \2\ 1,730                1            1,730                1            1,730
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The total estimated annual cost burden to respondents is $386,073
[$32,870 (labor costs) + $315,792 (record retention/storage cost) +
$37,411 (electronic record-keeping cost) = $386,073].

     Labor costs: 1,730 hours * $19/hours \3\ = $32,870.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 2012 average hourly wage of filing clerk working within an
electric utility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Record retention/storage cost (using an estimate of 48,891
cubic feet): $315,792.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Commission bases this figure on industry archival
storage costs.

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

     Electronic record retention/storage cost: $37,411.25
[1,730 hours / 2 = 865 hours * $28/hour \5\ = $24,220; \6\ electronic
record storage cost: 865 * $15.25/year \7\ = $13,191; total electronic
record storage cost: $37,411].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Commission bases the $28/hour figure on a FERC staff
study that included estimating public utility recordkeeping costs.
    \6\ Only 50% of records are retained in electronic formats.
    \7\ Per entity; the Commission bases this figure on the
estimated cost to service and to store 1 GB of data (based on the
aggregated cost of an IBM advanced data protection server).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: May 10, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-11831 Filed 5-15-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: December 10, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 236)]
[Notices]
[Page 69719-69720]
[DOCID:fr10de07-111]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collections; Comment Request

Upon Written Request; Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.
Extensions:
    Rule 163; OMB Control No. 3235-0619; SEC File No. 270-556.
    Rule 173; OMB Control No. 3235-0618; SEC File No. 270-557.
    Rule 433; OMB Control No. 3235-0617; SEC File No. 270-558.
    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collections of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit these
existing collections of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for approval.
    Rule 163 (17 CFR 230.163) provides an exemption from section 5(c)
under the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.) for certain
communications by on behalf of a well-known seasoned issuer. The
information filed under Rule 163 that is filed with the Commission is
publicly available. We estimate that it takes approximately .24 burden
hours per response to provide the information required under Rule 163
and that the information is filed by 53 respondents for a total annual
reporting burden of 13

hours. We estimate that 25% of .24 hours per response (.06 hours) is
prepared by the company for a total annual burden of 3 hours (.06 hours
per response x 53 responses).
    Rule 173 (17 CFR 230.173) provides a notice of registration to
investors who purchased securities in a registered offering under the
Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.). The Rule 173 notice
must be provided by each underwriter or dealer to each purchaser of
securities. It is not publicly available. We estimate that it takes
approximately .01 hour per response to provide the information required
under Rule 173 and that the information is filed by 5,338 companies
approximately 43,546 times a year for a total of 232,448,548 responses.
We estimate that the total annual reporting burden for Rule 173 is
2,324,485 hours (.01 hours per response x 232,448,548 responses).
    Rule 433 (17 CFR 230.433) governs the use and filing of free
writing prospectuses under the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et
seq.). The purpose of Rule 433 is to reduce restrictions on
communications that companies can make to investors during a registered
offering, while still maintaining a high level of investor protection.
A free writing prospectus meeting the conditions of Rule 433(d)(1) must
be filed with the Commission and is publicly available. We estimate
that it takes approximately 1.3 burden hours per response to prepare a
free writing prospectus and that the information is filed by 2,906
companies approximately 1.25 times a year for a total of 3,633
responses. We estimate that 25% of the 1.3 burden hours per response
(.32 hours) is prepared by the company for total annual reporting
burden of 1,163 hours (.32 hours x 3,633 responses).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether these proposed
collections of information are necessary for the performance of the
functions of the agency, including whether the information will have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the
burden imposed by the collections of information; (c) ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comment to R. Corey Booth, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O
Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312;
or send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    November 27, 2007.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-23873 Filed 12-7-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 57 (Friday, March 24, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 17835]
[FR Doc No: 2023-06149]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER23-1411-000]

Newport Solar LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based
Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Newport Solar LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with
an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is April 10, 2023.
    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 may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 20, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-06149 Filed 3-23-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 217 (Monday, November 10, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 66766]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26592]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE-2014-134 ]

Petition for Exemption; Summary of Petition Received

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petition for exemption received.

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

SUMMARY: This notice contains a summary of a petition seeking relief
from specified requirements of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR). The purpose of this notice is to improve the public's
awareness of, and participation in, this aspect of the FAA's regulatory
activities. Neither publication of this notice nor the inclusion or
omission of information in the summary is intended to affect the legal
status of the petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on this petition must identify the petition docket
number involved and must be received on or before December 1, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by docket number FAA-2012-
1291 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 digitally.
     Mail: Send comments to the Docket Management Facility;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
     Fax: Fax comments to the Docket Management Facility at
202-493-2251.
     Hand Delivery: Bring comments to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Privacy: We will post all comments we receive, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide. Using the search function of our docket Web site, anyone can
find and read the comments received into any of our dockets, including
the name of the individual sending the comment (or signing the comment
for an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the
DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published
on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the Docket Management
Facility in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deana Stedman, ANM-113, Federal
Aviation Administration, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356,
email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone<PHONE_NUMBER>; or Sandra Long, ARM-
200, Office of Rulemaking, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    This notice is published pursuant to 14 CFR 11.85.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 4, 2014.
Lirio Liu,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.

Petition for Exemption

Docket No.: FAA-2012-1291
Petitioner: Kalitta Charters II, LLC
Section of 14 CFR Affected: Sec. Sec.  25.855(a), 25.857(e), and
25.1447(c)(1)
Description of Relief Sought: The petitioner seeks to amend several of
the conditions and limitations in Exemption No. 10739. The petitioner
proposes removal of (1) limits on the type and number of
supernumeraries allowed on board the airplane; (2) the escape slides at
door 2 (left and right); and (3) alerting requirements and preflight
briefings.

[FR Doc. 2014-26592 Filed 11-7-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Appendix A: Verification Codes

MODFLOW2000

The MODFLOW ground water software has been developed by the USGS and has
been continuously upgraded since the first version, MODFLOW88 was
released in 1988 (McDonald and Harbaugh 2003). MODFLOW-2005 is the
newest version currently available. Together, the different versions of
MODFLOW have an international user base of over 1,000 users. As a ground
water flow and transport simulator, the MODFLOW and related software is
suited to the simulation of a wide variety of saturated zone flow and
transport problems.

As part of EPA’s regulatory oversight of the Waste Isolation Pilot
Plant (WIPP), located in southeastern New Mexico, the U.S. Department of
Energy (the Department or DOE) that operates the WIPP repository must
continue to meet the certification requirements of the EPA and, in part,
must demonstrate on an ongoing basis that Performance Assessment
computer software is in compliance with regulations outlined in Section
§194.23 – Models and Computer Codes. This section presents DOE’s
verification and validation of MODFLOW2000.

Introduction

MODFLOW is a computer program that numerically solves the
three-dimensional ground water flow equation for a porous medium by
using a finite-difference method. MODFLOW is designed to be modular, in
that different functionalities, such as wells, rivers,
evapotranspiration, etc., can be added as modules to the basic ground
water flow solutions. Although MODFLOW was designed to be easily
enhanced, the design was oriented toward additions to the ground water
flow equation. Frequently, there is a need to solve additional
equations; for example, transport equations and equations for estimating
parameter values that produce the closest match between model-calculated
heads and flows and measured values. The version of MODFLOW used by DOE,
MODFLOW2000 (MF2K) is designed to simulate more complex boundary
conditions (WIPP 2002; Donald and Harbaugh 1988; Harbaugh et al. 2000;
MODFLOW 2000). The user’s manual for MODFLOW 2000 (Harbaugh et al.
2000) contains an overview of the old and added design concepts,
documents one new package, and contains input instructions for using the
model to solve the ground water flow equation. For transient and
steady-state, single-phase, ground water flow problems, the MODFLOW2000
software is executed with the prescribed boundary and initial
conditions. MODFLOW was not used for the CCA.

Software Requirements (SNL NP 19-1) requires that the following seven
primary documents be developed, reviewed, and maintained for the MODFLOW
software:

Software Quality Assurance (QA) Plan

Requirements Document (RD)

Verification and Validation Plan (VVP)

User’s Manual (UM)

Design Document (DD)

Implementation Document (ID)

Validation Document (VD)

DOE reviewed the pre-existing documentation available for MODFLOW2000
from the USGS and found it to provide the necessary information that is
usually within the RD, DD, UM, and VVP. Therefore, the only additional
documents that were produced by DOE are the Software QA Plan (WIPP PA
2003c), the ID (WIPP PA 2003b), VD (WIPP PA 2003a), and the Installation
and Check Out forms (WIPP PA 2003d). DOE notes that documentation for
Version 1.6 will remain as the base document for any future versions of
the software, with addenda for each of the documents defining the
additional scope of the revised software. Configuration control is
maintained through completion of Installation & Checkout (I&C)
documentation for all changes made to MODFLOW2000 and system software
and/or system hardware. In addition, Change Control (CC) and Software
Problem Report (SPR) documents are completed, as appropriate.

The construction of newer clusters of Linux-based computers has required
the testing of certain codes that have been previously qualified on
older hardware.

In 2003, MODFLOW2000 Version 1.6 was qualified for use on the PC-based
Linux cluster (WIPP PA 2003a). The Agency reviewed DOE’s qualification
and accepted the verification of MODFLOW2000 Version 1.6 on the Linux
platform (EPA 2004). DOE used these EPA approved software and hardware
configurations to support CRA-2004 and PABC-2004.

The Linux-based cluster was upgraded in 2006 (new processors and other
hardware) and is now called the “Geo-Hydro Linux Cluster” (WIPP PA
2008). This cluster is comprised of three different hardware groups,
each with a group name:  (1) eleionomae, (2) pegaeae, and (3) crinaeae.
The computers are connected to a job control server,
“tethys.sandia.gov,” which is not used for execution of codes.
Because the hardware is new, but the software codes are unchanged and
are not going to be recompiled, DOE only conducted regression testing to
validate that the codes perform correctly on the new systems. For both
CRA-2009 and PABC-2009, DOE used MODFLOW 1.6 in conjunction with the
three hardware groups associated with the “Geo-Hydro Linux Cluster”
mentioned above. The approach, results and Agency findings pertaining to
this upgraded hardware are discussed below.

Test Methodology

The DOE designed eight test cases to verify the functional requirements
necessary for the verification/validation of the computer code for WIPP.
The input files and corresponding output files are provided with the
installation package. Listings of these files are included in
Appendix A to the VD corresponding to the test number and test name.
Validation testing consisted of running all test cases and checking
resulting output for consistency with documented results. The test cases
were run with the production executable (e.g., the executable version
used for PA compliance calculations) for MF2K. The production executable
was created on the target platform by the code sponsor and stored using
CVS (e.g., Concurrent Versions System) version control on the target
platform (CVSROOT - /h/WIPPcvs, repository - src/mf2k). The executable,
source code and test problems were also stored in SCMS on the WIPP
Compaq Alpha cluster (Library- MF2K, class- VER_0160).

The MF2K production executable and input and output test files were
obtained from configuration management and placed in the test
directories on the target platform. All of the input files were used
unmodified from the source code package, except for the *.nam file,
where the file pathnames were modified to reflect the different syntax
between the Windows and Linux operating systems. The MF2K output listing
files, *.lst, created during testing were compared to the output listing
files obtained from the MF2K installation package, and differences were
noted and addressed. The listing file is the primary ASCII text file
created by MF2K and contains an input echo, solver performance
information, calculated head and a budget summary. This same procedure
was used for all the tests, with the exception of Test Case 8, the
algebraic multi-grid (AMG) test. The intent of Test Case 8 is to verify
the Linked algebraic Multi-Grid solver (LMG) package that was not
included in the MODFLOW2000 test suite. A test identical to Test Case 1,
BCF2SS, was chosen, except that the solver has been switched from the
Strongly Implicit Procedure (SIP) to the LMG or linked algebraic
Multi-Grid solver. The results of Test Case 8 were compared to the
results of Test Case 1.

After the code was verified, it was regression tested against the
verification results (WIPP PA 2009a, 2009b, and 2009c). The run-control
for these tests was done using the csh script RunReadScript and the
Python programs ReadScript.py and Format.py. RunReadScript was used to
run ReadScript.py (for processing the list of files to be checked out,
checked in, executed and compared), run Fomat.py (for formatting the
output of ReadScript.py into an Word file), and then check the log and
Word files into the repository. The specific input script and the
locations within the CVS repository where the input script and log file
can be found are presented in the regression test documentation (WIPP PA
2009a, 2009b, and 2009c).

The UNIX diff (e.g., difference) command was used to compare the output
to original data. The diff command does a character-by-character
comparison of two ASCII files (binary files cannot be compared). Any
differences are reported by listing the line number in the first file,
the type of change (“a” for addition, “c” for change, “d”
for deletion), and then the line numbers in the second file.

The test was considered successful if the MODFLOW2000 output listing
file was the same as the documented listing file within reasonable
accuracy, and accounting for date and filename changes. Reasonable
accuracy was defined as numerically equal, except in the last printed
digit for numbers printed with 6 or less digits, or in the digits
greater than the 6th for numbers printed with greater than 6 digits.
Original output files are listed in the appendix, while the output files
generated during testing were stored in CVS on the target platform and
in SCMS accessible from the WIPP VMS Alpha cluster. The same criteria
were used for all the test cases.

Test Results

The regression testing performed on the “eleionomae” cluster shows
that MODFLOW2000 Version 1.6 is working in the same manner as the
software performed on the original test platform.

The Agency’s Conclusions

All test results met the acceptance criteria specified in Section 5.2 of
the VD (WIPP PA 2003a). Those differences that were present were
character differences, due to the addition of the build date to the
listing header, and in syntax differences between Windows and Linux
pathnames, or were floating-point differences in insignificant digits.
The AMG/LMG test produced very different output listings due to
solver-specific output, but the head results and ground water budgets
were the same as the PCG (Test Case 1, BCF2SS) results to within the
acceptance criteria. Therefore, the Agency concludes that MODFLOW2000
Version 1.6 can be considered verified for use on the “eleionomae,
pegaeae, and crinaeae” cluster of machines.

MT3D

MT3D (Modular 3D Solute Transport Model) is a comprehensive
three-dimensional numerical model for simulating solute transport in
complex hydrogeologic settings. MT3D has a modular design that permits
simulation of transport processes independently or jointly. MT3D is
capable of modeling advection in complex steady-state and transient flow
fields, anisotropic dispersion, first-order decay and production
reactions, and linear and nonlinear sorption. It can also handle
bioplume-type reactions, monad reactions, and daughter products. This
enables MT3D to do multi-species reactions and simulate or assess
natural attenuation within a contaminant plume. MT3D is linked with the
USGS ground water flow simulator, MODFLOW, and is designed specifically
to handle advectively dominated transport problems without the need to
construct refined models specifically for solute transport.

MT3D was developed by the University of Alabama’s Hydrogeology Group
and the verification of MT3D is provided in Zheng (2006) and Zheng and
Wang (1999).

References

Donald, M.G., and A.W. Harbaugh, A.W., 1988. A Modular Three-Dimensional
Finite-Difference Ground-water Flow Model, TWI 6-A1, 588 p. U.S.
Geologic Survey, Reston, Virginia. ERMS #522202.

EPA 2004. “Review of WIPP Performance Assessment Computer Code
Migration, March 31, 2004.”  Environmental Protection Agency.

Harbaugh, A.W., E.R. Banta, M.C. Hill, and M.G. McDonald, 2000.
MODFLOW-2000, The U.S. Geological Survey Modular Ground-Water Model –
User Guide To Modularization Concepts And The Ground-Water Flow Process,
U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-92. ERMS #522197.

MODFLOW 2000. The U.S. Geological Survey Modular Ground-Water Model –
User Guide to the LINK-AMG (LMG) Package for Solving MATRIX Equations
Using an Algebraic Multigrid Solver, MODFLOW-2000. U.S. Geological
Survey Open-File Report 00-92. ERMS #52220.

WIPP PA 2002. Code Classification and Review of Pre-Existing
Documentation for MODFLOW. Memo from Sean McKenna to Mario Chavez, Sept.
30, 2002, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico. ERMS
#523942.

WIPP PA 2003a. “Validation Document for MODFLOW-2000 Version 1.6 dated
March 2003.”  Sandia WIPP Central Files. ERMS#523867

WIPP PA 2003b. “Implementation Document for MODFLOW-2000 Version 1.6
dated March 2003.”  Sandia WIPP Central Files. ERMS#523868.

WIPP PA 2003a. “QA Plan for MODFLOW-2000 Version 1.6 dated March
2003.”  Sandia WIPP Central Files. ERMS#523869.

WIPP PA 2003d. “Installation and Checkout for MODFLOW-2000 Version 1.6
dated March 5, 2003.”

WIPP PA (Performance Assessment) 2008. “Change Control Form for
MODFLOW 2000, Version 1.6.”  Sandia National Laboratories. Sandia WIPP
Central Files WPO. ERMS #550152.

WIPP PA 2009a. “Regression Testing Document for MODFLOW-2000 Version
1.6 on the “eleionomae” subset of the GeoHydro cluster dated
February 25, 2009.”  Sandia National Laboratories. Sandia WIPP Central
Files. ERMS #550911.

WIPP PA 2009b. “Regression Testing Document for MODFLOW-2000 Version
1.6 on the “pegaeae” subset of the GeoHydro cluster dated February
25, 2009.”  Sandia National Laboratories. Sandia WIPP Central Files.
ERMS #550915.

WIPP PA 2009c. “Regression Testing Document for MODFLOW-2000 Version
1.6 on the “crinaeae” subset of the GeoHydro cluster dated February
25, 2009.”  Sandia National Laboratories. Sandia WIPP Central Files.
ERMS #550916.

Zheng, C., 2006. MT3DMS v5.2 A Modular Three-Dimensional Multispecies
Transport Model for Simulation of Advection, Dispersion and Chemical
Reactions of Contaminants in Groundwater Systems Supplemental User's
Guide, University of Alabama, Tucsaloosa, Alabama.

Zheng, C. and P. Wang, 1999. MT3DMS: A Modular Three-Dimensional
Multispecies Transport Model for Simulation of Advection, Dispersion,
and Chemical Reactions of Contaminants in Groundwater Systems;
Documentation and User's Guide, SERDP-99-1, University of Alabama,
Tuscaloosa, Alabama.

A-  PAGE   \* MERGEFORMAT  1