Re: One more modeling question. and updates to Ohio's Lead	 Emissions

Jennifer Hunter

to:

Andy Chang

04/05/2010 11:00 AM

Cc:

Douglas Aburano, Jay Bortzer, Michael Compher, Tom Rosendahl, John
Summerhays,

Rhonda Wright

Andy, here is 1.

We will need another week for #2 - our inventory person is out.

First, our we only did a modeling/interp analysis on sources over 0.7
TPY of lead.  Deciding wether a source was at or above 0.7 TPY was based
on actual emissions, including both point and fugitive. Ohio EPA also
used actual emissions when performing the modeling/spatial
interpolation.  Ohio EPA evaluated actual reported emissions over a
range of years (2004-2006) from the National Emissions Inventory (NEI)
(which was submitted based upon emissions reported in Ohio's FER (fee
emissions report) and Toxics Release Inventory (TRI).  Ohio's FER
contains both stack and fugitive emissions.  Ohio ensured the maximum
emission rate modeled corresponded to the maximum TPY contained in the
NEI/FER and TRI between 2004 and 2006. In many cases, the modeled lead
emission rate was higher than the highest facility reported emissions in
that year, thus producing a conservative modeled concentrations.   We
went to each facility to obtain information regarding their lead sources
before we modeled. We requested information on both fugitive and stack
emissions.  Of all facilities modeled only one, Timkin, had fugitive
sources.  We did model those as fugitive.  Keep in mind, these weren't
fugitive in the sense you may be inquiring (e.g., a roadway) (building
fugitives instead).

other fugitive emissions or re-entrainment of dust were not explicitly
modeled by Ohio EPA.  Modeling the re-entrainment of dust would be very
difficult using the air dispersion model AERMOD.  It is Ohio EPA’s
belief that unusual methods, such as soil samples surrounding the
facility, would be needed in order to determine the lead emission rate
for dust.  In addition, many other factors would need to be considered
before modeling fugitive emissions or re-entrainment of dust.  These
factors are currently unknown to Ohio EPA and were not provided by the
facility.  Additional guidance and research would be needed to be able
to accurately perform such an assessment.

Thanks, Jen


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 55 (Friday, March 21, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15689-15691]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06229]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2014-0159]
RIN 1625-AA11

Regulated Navigation Area; Piscataqua River Channel Obstruction
Near Memorial Bridge, Piscataqua River, Portsmouth, NH

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary regulated
navigation area (RNA) on the Piscataqua River near the Memorial Bridge,
Portsmouth, NH, due to debris obstructing the channel. This RNA
establishes draft restrictions on vessels transiting the regulated area
and prohibits vessels whose draft exceeds 12 feet from coming within
300 yards of the Memorial Bridge unless authorized by the First
District Commander or the Captain of the Port (COTP), Sector Northern
New England, or until the obstruction is cleared.

DATES: This rule is effective without actual notice from March 21, 2014
until March 31, 2014. For the purposes of enforcement, actual notice
will be used from the date the rule was signed, March 7, 2014, until
March 21, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
[USCG-2014-0159]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also
visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call Lieutenant Junior Grade Elizabeth V. Gunn, Waterways Management
Division at Coast Guard Sector Northern New England, at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call Lieutenant Myles Greenway,
Waterways Management at Coast Guard First District at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing or
submitting material to the docket, call Barbara Hairston, Program
Manager, Docket Operations at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

A. Regulatory History and Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because doing so would be impracticable. Good
cause exists because the Coast Guard was not notified of the
obstruction until shortly after its discovery early on the morning of
March 7, 2014. Thus, delaying the effectiveness of this rule to allow
for a notice and comment period to run would inhibit the Coast Guard's
ability to protect the boating public from the hazards associated with
an unmarked underwater obstruction.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. For the reasons discussed in the
preceding paragraph, delaying the effective date of this rule would be
impracticable.

B. Basis and Purpose

    Under the Ports and Waterways Safety Act, 33 U.S.C. 1221 et seq.,
the Coast Guard has the authority to establish RNAs in defined water
areas that are determined to have hazardous conditions and in which
vessel traffic can be regulated in the interest of safety.
    The regulated navigation area is being issued to ensure the safety
of vessels drawing more than 12 feet in draft which could potentially
strike known debris.

C. Discussion of the Final Rule

    At approximately 5:15 a.m. on March 7th, 2014, a 600' oil tanker
was outbound on the Piscataqua River when it struck pier 3 of the
Memorial Bridge with its bow. The allision tore one fender panel
completely off of the pier and damaged the two adjacent panels. The
missing fender panel now presents a danger to vessels drawing a draft
greater than 12 feet. This RNA is required to restrict the draft of
vessels entering the area to protect said vessels from the safety
hazards associated with this obstruction to the channel. This RNA will
encompass all waters within a 300 yard radius of a position
43[deg]04'46'' N, 70[deg]45'10'' W, in the vicinity of the Memorial
Bridge between Portsmouth, NH and Badgers Island in Kittery, ME, and
will be effective on March 7, 2014, at 4:00 p.m. until March 31, 2014
at 11:59 p.m.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on these statutes and executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    The economic effect of this rule will not be significant for the
following reasons: the RNA will be of limited duration. Vessels drawing
a draft of less than 12 feet may still transit the area freely while
vessels drawing a draft exceeding 12 feet may be authorized to transit
the area with permission of the District Commander or the Captain of
the Port, Sector Northern New England. Additionally, maritime
advisories will be broadcast during the duration of the enforcement
period.

2. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    This rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: the owners or operators of vessels drawing a draft
greater than 12 feet. However, this temporary final rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
for the same reasons discussed in the Regulatory Planning and Review
section above.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain

about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard.

4. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and determined
that this rule does not have implications for federalism.

6. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

8. Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

9. Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

10. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

11. Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

12. Energy Effects

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use.

13. Technical Standards

    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1,
paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction because it involves the creation
of an RNA. An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical
exclusion determination will be available in the docket where indicated
under ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, and Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR Part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703;
50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Pub. L.
107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T01-0159 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T01-0159  Regulated Navigation Area; Piscataqua River Channel
Obstruction near Memorial Bridge, Piscataqua River, Portsmouth, NH.

    (a) Location. The following area is a Regulated Navigation Area
(RNA): all navigable waters from surface to bottom within a 300 yard
radius of position 43[deg]04'46'' N, 70[deg]45'10'' W.
    (b) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in 33 CFR
165.10, 165.11, and 165.13 apply within the RNA, and in addition:
    (2) No vessel with a draft of greater than 12 feet may transit this
area unless authorized by the First District Commander or the Captain
of the Port, Sector Northern New England.
    (3) Persons and vessels may request permission to enter the
Regulated Navigation Area by contacting the COTP or the COTP's on-scene
representative on VHF-16 or via phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) The ``designated representative'' is any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been designated by the
Captain of the Port to act on his behalf. The on-scene representative
may be on a Coast Guard vessel, a Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel, or
onboard a local or state agency vessel that is authorized to act in
support of the Coast Guard. Additionally, the Coast Guard Auxiliary may
be present to inform vessel operators of this regulation.
    (5) Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by siren, radio,
flashing light or other means, the operator of the vessel must proceed
as directed.
    (c) Effective and Enforcement Period. This rule is effective and
will be enforced from March 7, 2014 until March 31, 2014.

    Dated: March 7, 2014.
D. B. Abel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2014-06229 Filed 3-20-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: October 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 207)]
[Notices]
[Page 60832-60833]
[DOCID:fr26oc07-48]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP08-6-000 and Docket No. PF07-4-000]

Midcontinent Express Pipeline LLC; Notice of Application

October 23, 2007.
    Take notice that on October 9, 2007, and supplemented on October
19, 2007, Midcontinent Express Pipeline LLC (Midcontinent), 747 East
22nd Street, Lombard, Illinois 60148, filed an abbreviated application
pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of
the Commission's regulations, for a certificate of public convenience
and necessity to construct and operate a new 502-mile natural gas
pipeline system from southeastern

Oklahoma to western Alabama. This filing is available for review at the
Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the
Commission's Web site 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, please
contact FERC Online Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free
at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Midcontinent requests: (1) Authorization to construct a new natural
gas pipeline system consisting of 502 miles of primarily 30-inch to 42-
inch diameter pipeline, a booster compressor station (9,470 hp), and 4
mainline compressor stations (102,250 hp), which will originate in
southeastern Oklahoma, continue through Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi,
and terminate in western Alabama; (2) authorization to lease up to
800,000 Dth/d in the Enogex Inc. intrastate system in Oklahoma to be
connected at the origin of the Midcontinent system; (3) approval of
Midcontinent's pro forma tariff and proposed recourse rates; and (4)
issuance of a blanket construction certificate pursuant to Subpart F of
Part 157 and a blanket transportation certificate pursuant to Subpart G
of Part 284. On October 9, 2007, Enogex Inc. filed a related
application, in Docket No. CP08-9-000, seeking a limited-jurisdiction
certificate authorizing Enogex to lease up to 800,000 Dth/d of its
intrastate pipeline capacity to Midcontinent.
    Midcontinent proposes phased in-service dates and recourse rates.
Midcontinent has committed to lease 275,334 Dth/d of capacity on the
Enogex system but requests authority to increase the lease capacity up
to 800,000 Dth/d at any time during the first 5 years after the
project's in-service date. Midcontinent also requests that it be
allowed up to 5 years after the project's in-service date in which to
construct 2 of the requested mainline compressor stations. The project
will have two zones. Without the 2 delayed-construction compressor
stations, Zone 1 will have a capacity of 1,400,000 Dth/d and Zone 2
capacity will be 1,000,000 Dth/d. Construction of the final 2
compressor stations will provide an additional 100,000 Dth/d of
capacity in Zone 1 and an additional 200,000 Dth/d in Zone 2. Estimated
initial project cost is $1.28 billion without the final 2 compressor
stations, rising to $1.34 billion with the final 2 compressor stations.
Midcontinent requests a preliminary determination on non-environmental
issues by March 2008, and a final order by July 2008, in order to
commence construction by August 1, 2008. Midcontinent anticipates
placing some pipeline facilities in-service on October 31, 2008, with
all of the proposed facilities, except the final 2 compressor stations,
going into service on February 28, 2009.
    Any questions regarding the application are to be directed to Bruce
H. Newsome, Vice President, Regulatory, Midcontinent Express Pipeline
LLC, 747 East 22nd Street, Lombard, Illinois 60148-5072, telephone:
(630) 691-3526 or e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    On February 22, 2007, the Commission staff granted Midcontinent's
request to utilize the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Pre-
Filing Process and assigned Docket No. PF07-4-000 to staff activities
involving the project. Now, as of the filing of this application on
October 9, 2007, the NEPA Pre-Filing Process for this project has
ended. From this time forward, this proceeding will be conducted in
Docket No. CP08-6-000, as noted in the caption of this notice.
    Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9,
within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either:
complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the
Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding, or issue a
Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule
for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other
milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of
the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this
proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for
this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for
Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of
the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the
subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days
of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant. On or before the comment date, it is
not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons
other than the Applicant.
    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 commenters 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 commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters 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 encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit the

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    Comment Date: November 13, 2007.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21229 Filed 10-25-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: June 14, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 114)]
[Notices]
[Page 34407-34408]
[DOCID:fr14jn06-141]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53948; File No. SR-ISE-2006-14]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange,
Inc.; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1
Thereto Relating to ISE Rule 720

June 6, 2006.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 22, 2006, the International Securities Exchange, Inc. (``ISE''
or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the Exchange. On May
18, 2006, the ISE submitted Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule
change.\3\ The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments
on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-b.
    \3\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange amended proposed new
supplementary Material .08 to ISE Rule 720 to state that unless all
parties to a trade agree otherwise, ISE Market Control may nullify a
trade if all parties to a trade fail to receive a trade execution
report due to a verifiable system outage. Amendment No. 1 also
clarified that the proposed rule change operates under the
assumption that a trade has taken place, but due to a system outage,
the parties to the trade never received a trade execution report and
thus were unaware of the trade having taken place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
    The ISE proposes to amend ISE Rule 720 (``Obvious Error Rule'').
The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new language is
in italics. Proposed delitions are in [brackets].

Rule 720. Obvious Errors

    The Exchange shall either bust a transaction or adjust the
execution price of a transaction that results from an Obvious Error as
provided in this Rule. In limited circumstances, the Exchange may
nullify transactions, pursuant to Supplementary Material .08 below.
    (a)-(c) No change.
    (d) [(e)] Obvious Error Panel.
    (1)-(4) No change.

Supplementary Material to Rule 720

    .01-.07 No change.
     .08 Unless all parties to a trade agree otherwise, Market Control
may nullify a trade if all parties to a trade fail to receive a trade
execution report due to a verifiable system outage.
* * * * *

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend ISE Rule 720 to
expand its application. Specifically, ISE proposes to expand its
Obvious Error Rule to provide the Exchange with the ability, in limited
circumstances, to nullify a transaction when all parties to a trade do
not receive a trade execution report \4\ due to a system outage. The

Exchange routinely sends out trade execution reports to all Members
that are parties to a trade.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ A trade execution report is an ISE system message sent to
all parties to a trade to inform them that a trade has been
consummated. Among other things, a trade execution report contains
pertinent details such as the underlying security, the price, number
of contracts traded, the strike price and the expiration date.
    \5\ See Amendment No. 1, supra note 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ISE developed the Obvious Error Rule to address the need to
handle errors in a fully electronic market where orders and quotes are
executed automatically before an obvious error may be discovered and
corrected by Members. The Exchange states that in formulating the
Obvious Error Rule, it has weighed carefully the need to assure that
one market participant is not permitted to receive a windfall at the
expense of another market participant that made an obvious error,
against the need to assure that market participants are not simply
being given an opportunity to reconsider poor trading decisions. The
Exchange believes that the proposed rule change would strengthen ISE's
Obvious Error Rule because it would ensure that parties are not
adversely affected by a trade whose terms were never fully communicated
to them due to a system outage. The Exchange states that the proposed
rule change reflects the Exchange's constant evaluation of the Obvious
Error Rule and its fairness to all market participants. The Exchange
also believes that the proposed rule change is necessary to assure that
those transactions where a trade execution report is not sent to all
the participants to a trade are eligible to be busted under the Obvious
Error Rule.
    Finally, as a matter of ``housekeeping,'' the Exchange proposes a
technical correction of the numbering within ISE Rule 720 to change
what is now ISE Rule 720(e) to ISE Rule 720(d).
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposal is consistent with section 6(b)
of the Act, \6\ in general, and furthers the objectives of section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\7\ in particular, in that it is designed 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 for a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change does not impose any
burden on competition that is 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

    No written comments were solicited or received by the Exchange on
this 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 Exchange consents, the Commission will:
    (A) By order approve the proposed rule change, or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change, as amended, 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 Number SR-ISE-2006-14 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2006-14. 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, 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 inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-IE-2006-14 and should be submitted on or before July 5,
2006.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.

[FR Doc. 06-5373 Filed 6-13-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-M


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 14 (Monday, January 22, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2973-2974]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01029]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER18-634-000]

Access Energy Solutions, 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
Access Energy Solutions, 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 February 1, 2018.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
[email protected]. or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: January 12, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-01029 Filed 1-19-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P