[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 73 (Monday, April 17, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23450-23451]
[FR Doc No: 2023-08034]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID: FEMA-2022-0029; OMB No. 1660-NW152]

Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB
Review, Comment Request; Logistics Supply Chain Management System Cloud
(LSCMS-C) Access Control Form

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: 30-Day notice of new collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will submit the
information collection abstracted below to the Office of Management and
Budget for review and clearance in accordance with the requirements of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The submission seeks comments
concerning the Logistics Supply Chain Management System Cloud (LSCMS-C)
Access Control Form, which is required for internal and external
personnel who need access to the LSCMS-C operational system to process
supply chain management transactions.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before May 17, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of
this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular
information collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--
Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection should be made to Director,
Information Management Division, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,
email address: [email protected] or
Natasha Hinkson, Logistics Management Directorate, Logistics System
Division IT Support Branch Chief,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The LSCMS-C system requires role-based
access, which is based on an individual's position, to complete day to
day supply chain management transactions for the Office of Response and
Recovery's Logistics Management Directorate (LMD). Transactions include
the ordering, tracking, monitoring, reporting, and shipping of FEMA
assets and critical commodities both domestically and Outside the
Continental United States (OCONUS) in support of disaster operations.
    Authorized users of the LSCMS-C operational system will have access
to minimal personally identifiable information, primarily point of
contact information associated with the disaster commodities and assets
order entry request for other end users to complete the fulfillment of
FEMA orders for ordering, receiving, and delivery of the commodities
and assets for FEMA Disaster Response and Recovery activities, as well
as non-disaster activities for Mission Support.
    The Transportation Service Providers (TSP) Registration Form is
additionally required for Transportation Service Providers who would
like to apply to be a part of the FEMA Standard Tender of Service (FEMA
STOS) program for FEMA STOS specific information that will be included
in their LSCMS-C profiles.
    The authorities to collect and use this information are applicable
to all Federal agencies under the Interstate Commerce Act, Federal
Acquisition Regulation (FAR), and General Services Administration's
Federal Management Regulation. The authorities include:
     Interstate Commerce Act, 49 U.S.C. 10721, 13712;
     Federal Acquisition Regulation, subpart A--General; part
47, ``Transportation'';
     Federal Management Regulation, 41 CFR parts 102-117, 102-
118;
     The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207;
     Homeland Security Act of 2002, 6 U.S.C. 311 et seq.
    This proposed information collection previously published in the
Federal Register on November 10, 2022, at 87 FR 67923 with a 60 day
public comment period. One complimentary comment was received and FEMA
thanks the anonymous commentor. The purpose of this notice is to notify
the public that FEMA will submit the information collection abstracted
below to the Office of Management and Budget for review and clearance.

Collection of Information

    Title: Logistics Supply Chain Management System Cloud (LSCMS-C)
Access Control Form.
    Type of Information Collection: Existing collection in use without
an OMB control number.
    OMB Number: 1660-NW152.

    FEMA Forms: FEMA Form FF-145-FY-22-102 (formerly 119-0-0-20),
Logistics Supply Chain Management System Cloud (LSCMS-C) Access Control
Form; FEMA Form FF-145-FY-22-103, Transportation Service Providers
(TSP) Registration Form.
    Abstract: The Logistics Supply Chain Management System Cloud
(LSCMS-C) Access Control Form is required for FEMA or Non-FEMA
personnel who require access to the LSCMS-C operational system,
enabling end users to process supply chain management transactions. The
LSCMS-C Access Control Form is completed by internal and external users
who require access. The Transportation Service Providers (TSP)
Registration Form is additionally required for Transportation Service
Providers who would like to apply to be a part of the FEMA Standard
Tender of Service (FEMA STOS) program for FEMA STOS specific
information that will be included in their LSCMS-C profiles.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 984.
    Estimated Number of Responses: 2,952.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 885.6.
    Estimated Total Annual Respondent Cost: $25,531.
    Estimated Respondents' Operation and Maintenance Costs: $0.
    Estimated Respondents' Capital and Start-Up Costs: $0.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost to the Federal Government: $3,958,942.

Comments

    Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption
above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data
collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency,
including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b)
evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden
of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Millicent Brown Wilson,
Records Management Branch Chief, Office of the Chief Administrative
Officer, Mission Support, Federal Emergency Management Agency,
Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2023-08034 Filed 4-14-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-24-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 89 (Tuesday, May 9, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29935-29938]
[FR Doc No: 2023-09791]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2023-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2335]

Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice lists communities where the addition or
modification of Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths,
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, or
the regulatory floodway (hereinafter referred to as flood hazard
determinations), as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and
where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS)
reports, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for
each community, is appropriate because of new scientific or technical
data. The FIRM, and where applicable, portions of the FIS report, have
been revised to reflect these flood hazard determinations through
issuance of a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR), in accordance with Federal
Regulations. The currently effective community number is shown in the
table below and must be used for all new policies and renewals.

DATES: These flood hazard determinations will be finalized on the dates
listed in the table below and revise the FIRM panels and FIS report in
effect prior to this determination for the listed communities.
    From the date of the second publication of notification of these
changes in a newspaper of local circulation, any person has 90 days in
which to request through the community that the Deputy Associate
Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation reconsider the changes. The
flood hazard determination information may be changed during the 90-day
period.

ADDRESSES: The affected communities are listed in the table below.
Revised flood hazard information for each community is available for
inspection at both the online location and the respective community map
repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current
effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for
comparison.
    Submit comments and/or appeals to the Chief Executive Officer of
the community as listed in the table below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The specific flood hazard determinations are
not described for each community in this notice. However, the online
location and local community map repository address where the flood
hazard determination information is available for inspection is
provided.
    Any request for reconsideration of flood hazard determinations must
be submitted to the Chief Executive Officer of the community as listed
in the table below.
    The modifications are made pursuant to section 201 of the Flood
Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance
with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.,
and with 44 CFR part 65.
    The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management
measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show
evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified
for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
    These flood hazard determinations, together with the floodplain
management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are
required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must
change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their
floodplain

management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter
requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other
Federal, State, or regional entities. The flood hazard determinations
are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
    The affected communities are listed in the following table. Flood
hazard determination information for each community is available for
inspection at both the online location and the respective community map
repository address listed in the table below. Additionally, the current
effective FIRM and FIS report for each community are accessible online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for
comparison.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Nicholas A. Shufro,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Chief executive officer  of                                       Online location of  letter of map                              Community
     State and county      Location and  case No.             community                Community map  repository                   revision                  Date of  modification       No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colorado:
    Boulder..............  City of Boulder (22-08- The Honorable Aaron Brockett,    City Hall, 1777 Broadway         https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 17, 2023...........       080024
                            0586P).                 Mayor, City of Boulder, 1777     Street, Boulder, CO 80306.       advanceSearch.
                                                    Broadway Street, Boulder, CO
                                                    80306.
    Denver...............  City and County of      The Honorable Michael B.         Department of Transportation     https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 24, 2023...........       080046
                            Denver (21-08-0294P).   Hancock, Mayor, City and         and Infrastructure, 201 West     advanceSearch.
                                                    County of Denver, 1437 Bannock   Colfax Avenue, Department 608,
                                                    Street, Suite 300, Denver, CO    Denver, CO 80202.
                                                    80202.
    Grand................  Town of Fraser (22-08-  Ed Cannon, Manager, Town of      Planning Department, 153 Fraser  https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jun. 23, 2023...........       080073
                            0389P).                 Fraser, P.O. Box 370, Fraser,    Avenue, Fraser, CO 80442.        advanceSearch.
                                                    CO 80442.
    Grand................  Unincorporated areas    Edward T. Moyer, Grand County    Grand County Community           https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jun. 23, 2023...........       080280
                            of Grand County (22-    Manager, P.O. Box 264, Hot       Development Department, 308      advanceSearch.
                            08-0389P).              Sulphur Springs, CO 80451.       Byers Avenue, Hot Sulphur
                                                                                Springs, CO 80451.
Florida:
    Collier..............  City of Naples (22-04-  Jay Boodheshwar, Manager, City   Building Department, 295         https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jun. 12, 2023...........       125130
                            5499P).                 of Naples, 735 8th Street        Riverside Circle, Naples, FL     advanceSearch.
                                                    South, Naples, FL 34102.         34102.
    Hillsborough.........  City of Plant City (22- Bill McDaniel, Manager, City of  City Hall, 302 West Reynolds     https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 20, 2023...........       120113
                            04-3498P).              Plant City, 302 West Reynolds    Street, Plant City, FL 33563.    advanceSearch.
                                                    Street, Plant City, FL 33563.
    Hillsborough.........  City of Tampa (23-04-   The Honorable Jane Castor,       Planning Department, 1400 North  https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 27, 2023...........       120114
                            0603P).                 Mayor, City of Tampa, 306 East   Boulevard, Tampa, FL 33607.      advanceSearch.
                                                    Jackson Street, Tampa, FL
                                                    33602.
    Palm Beach...........  Unincorporated areas    Verdenia C. Baker, Palm Beach    Palm Beach County Planning,      https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 24, 2023...........       120192
                            of Palm Beach County    County Administrator, 301        Zoning, and Building             advanceSearch.
                            (22-04-0127P).          North Olive Avenue, Suite        Department, 2300 North Jog
                                                    1101, West Palm Beach, FL        Road, West Palm Beach, FL
                                                    33401.                           33411.
    Volusia..............  City of Edgewater (22-  The Honorable Diezel DePew,      Stormwater Department, 409       https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 14, 2023...........       120308
                            04-4207P).              Mayor, City of Edgewater, P.O.   Mango Tree Drive, Edgewater,     advanceSearch.
                                                    Box 100, Edgewater, FL 32132.    FL 32132.
    Volusia..............  Unincorporated areas    George Recktenwald, Manager,     Volusia County Thomas C. Kelly   https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 14, 2023...........       125155
                            of Volusia County (22-  Volusia County, 123 West         Administration Center, 123       advanceSearch.
                            04-4207P).              Indiana Avenue, DeLand, FL       West Indiana Avenue, DeLand,
                                                    32720.                           FL 32720.
New Mexico:
    Curry................  City of Clovis (22-06-  The Honorable Mike Morris,       City Hall, 321 North Connelly    https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 13, 2023...........       350010
                            0491P).                 Mayor, City of Clovis, 321       Street, Clovis, NM 88101.        advanceSearch.
                                                    North Connelly Street, Clovis,
                                                    NM 88101.
    Curry................  Unincorporated areas    Lance A. Pyle, Curry County      Curry County Clerk's Office,     https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 13, 2023...........       350127
                            of Curry County (22-    Manager, 417 Gidding Street,     417 Gidding Street, Suite 130,   advanceSearch.
                            06-0491P).              Suite 100, Clovis, NM 88101.     Clovis, NM 88101.
South Carolina:
    Berkeley.............  Town of Moncks Corner   The Honorable Michael A.         Community Development            https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 20, 2023...........       450031
                            (22-04-1920P).          Lockliear, Mayor, Town of        Department, 118 Carolina         advanceSearch.
                                                    Moncks Corner, P.O. Box 700,     Avenue, Moncks Corner, SC
                                                    Moncks Corner, SC 29461.         29461.

    Berkeley.............  Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Johnny Cribb,      Berkeley County Building and     https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 20, 2023...........       450029
                            of Berkeley County      Supervisor, Berkeley County      Codes Enforcement Department,    advanceSearch.
                            (22-04-1920P).          Council, 1003 North Highway      1003 North Highway 52, Moncks
                                                    52, Moncks Corner, SC 29461.     Corner, SC 29461.
Texas:
    Collin...............  City of Lucas (22-06-   The Honorable Jim Olk, Mayor,    Public Works Department, 665     https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jun. 26, 2023...........       481545
                            1259P).                 City of Lucas, 665 Country       Country Club Road, Lucas, TX     advanceSearch.
                                                    Club Road, Lucas, TX 75002.      75002.
    Collin...............  City of Parker (22-06-  The Honorable Lee Pettle,        Public Works Department, 5700    https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jun. 26, 2023...........       480139
                            1259P).                 Mayor, City of Parker, 5700      East Parker Road, Parker, TX     advanceSearch.
                                                    East Parker Road, Parker, TX     75002.
                                                    75002.
    Collin...............  Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Chris Hill,        Collin County Engineering        https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jun. 26, 2023...........       480130
                            of Collin County (22-   Collin County Judge, 2300        Department, 4690 Community       advanceSearch.
                            06-1259P).              Bloomdale Road, Suite 4192,      Avenue, Suite 200, McKinney,
                                                    McKinney, TX 75071.              TX 75071.
    Dallas...............  City of Dallas (22-06-  The Honorable Eric Johnson,      Oak Cliff Municipal Center, 320  https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jun. 20, 2023...........       480171
                            2590P).                 Mayor, City of Dallas, 1500      East Jefferson Blvd. Suite       advanceSearch.
                                                    Marilla Street, Suite 5EN,       312, Dallas, TX 75203.
                                                    Dallas, TX 75201.
    Fannin...............  Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Randy Moore,       Fannin County Emergency          https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 5, 2023............       480807
                            of Fannin County (22-   Fannin County Judge, 101 East    Management Department, 2375      advanceSearch.
                            06-0044P).              Sam Rayburn Drive, Suite 214,    Silo Road, Bonham, TX 75418.
                                                    Bonham, TX 75418.
    Starr................  City of Rio Grande      The Honorable Joel Villarreal,   City Hall, 101 South Washington  https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Aug. 14, 2023...........       481678
                            City (22-06-2596P).     Mayor, City of Rio Grande        Street, Rio Grande City, TX      advanceSearch.
                                                    City, 5332 East Highway 83,      78582.
                                                    Rio Grande City, TX 78582.
    Starr................  Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Eloy Vera, Starr   Starr County Courthouse Annex,   https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Aug. 14, 2023...........       480575
                            of Starr County (22-    County Judge, 100 North F.M.     100 North F.M. 3167, Rio         advanceSearch.
                            06-2596P).              3167, Rio Grande City, TX        Grande City, TX 78582.
                                                    78582.
    Tarrant..............  City of Fort Worth (22- The Honorable Mattie Parker,     Transportation and Public Works  https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 20, 2023...........       480596
                            06-2617P).              Mayor, City of Fort Worth, 200   Department, Engineering Vault,   advanceSearch.
                                                    Texas Street, Fort Worth, TX     200 Texas Street, Fort Worth,
                                                    76102.                           TX 76102.
    Tarrant..............  City of Keller (22-06-  The Honorable Armin R. Mizani,   Town Hall, 1100 Bear Creek       https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 24, 2023...........       480602
                            2447P).                 Mayor, City of Keller, P.O.      Parkway, Keller, TX 76248.       advanceSearch.
                                                    Box 770, Keller, TX 76244.
    Travis...............  City of Round Rock (22- The Honorable Craig Morgan,      City Hall, 221 East Main         https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 10, 2023...........       481048
                            06-0823P).              Mayor, City of Round Rock, 221   Street, Round Rock, TX 78664.    advanceSearch.
                                                    East Main Street, Round Rock,
                                                    TX 78664.
    Travis...............  Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Andy Brown,        Travis County Transportation     https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 10, 2023...........       481026
                            of Travis County (22-   Travis County Judge, P.O. Box    and Natural Resources            advanceSearch.
                            06-0823P).              1748, Austin, TX 78767.          Department, 700 Lavaca Street,
                                                                                5th Floor, Austin, TX 78701.
    Williamson...........  Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Bill Gravell,      Williamson County Engineering    https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 13, 2023...........       481079
                            of Williamson County    Jr., Williamson County Judge,    Department, 3151 Southeast       advanceSearch.
                            (22-06-2448P).          Mayor, City of Keller, 710       Inner Loop, Georgetown, TX
                                                    South Main Street, Suite 101,    78626.
                                                    Georgetown, TX 78626.
Utah:
    Washington...........  City of St. George (22- John Willis, Manager, City of    Public Works and Engineering     https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jun. 30, 2023...........       491177
                            08-0422P).              St. George, 175 East 200         Department, 175 East 200         advanceSearch.
                                                    North, St. George, UT 84770.     North, St. George, UT 84770.
Virginia:
    Loudoun..............  Unincorporated areas    Tim Hemstreet, Loudoun County    Loudoun County Government        https://msc.fema.gov/portal/          Jul. 10, 2023...........       510090
                            of Loudoun County (22-  Administrator, 1 Harrison        Center, 1 Harrison Street        advanceSearch.
                            03-1016P).              Street, Southeast, 5th Floor,    Southeast, 3rd Floor, MSC #60,
                                                    Leesburg, VA 20175.              Leesburg, VA 20175.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2023-09791 Filed 5-8-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


MEMORANDUM

To: Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket id: OAR-2013-0602

From: Region 5, EPA

Summary: The following questions were submitted to EPA prior to an 8/28/14 conference call between EPA and Michigan Department of Environmental Quality about the proposed carbon power plan for existing power plants.

Additional comments from Michigan submitted on August 21, 2014.

                     QUESTIONS FOR EPA ON 111(D) PROPOSAL

   1. It does not appear EPA's calculation of coal plant efficiency savings includes the degradation of efficiency at coal plants when they are cycled up and down to accommodate greater use of natural gas combined cycle generation. If not why not? The degradation is a fact that is cited in EPA's own Technical Support Document "GHG Abatement Measures" pages 2-5. There EPA states:
   "Operating an EGU as a baseload unit is more efficient than operating an EGU as a load following unit to respond to fluctuations in customer electricity demand."
   2.  Please provide the exact calculation, including all corresponding data and assumptions, of the 2012 MI carbon Intensity ratio.  It is important to understand how it is adjusted and  how nuclear affects the target.
   3. Michigan's assigned natural gas rate of 810 lbs/MWh is not consistent with proposed 111(b) requirements for new plants which are typically more efficient than existing plants. Please explain the basis for the assigned rate EPA used in the proposed rule.
   4. EPA's calculation includes 6% "at risk" nuclear which lowers Michigan's goal to 1,161 lbs/MWh instead of a goal of 1,183 lbs/MWh if there was 0% "at risk"  nuclear. Why does existing nuclear lower the target? This presents a penalty to states that have invested in zero carbon generation and a disincentive for any utility contemplating upratings at existing nuclear plants.
   5. How would electrical generation from hydro, biomass, and land-fill gas count toward meeting the goal?
   6. Would Ludington Pumped Storage count as hydro? How should its generation be treated in reaching Michigan's goal? Was the load represented by Ludington PS reflected in our state generation totals?
   7. How can we accommodate unanticipated load growth in a mass-based system?  Would mid-term corrections be permissible?
   8. Would EM&V have to be harmonized with other trading states if Michigan decides to take a multi-state approach to meet 111(d)?
   9. How do we determine/control dispatch of any fossil-fueled EGU when this is performed by the RTO (MISO) under an economic market-based system of dispatch?
   10. How do we calculate retirements of EGUs during the compliance period for federal enforceability under 111(d)?
   11. How will EPA guarantee that heat rate improvements will not be considered subject to NSR permitting considering that the EPA and DOJ made the opposite argument in United States v. DTE Energy Co., 711 F.3d 643, 644 (6th Cir. 2013) even though actual emissions did not increase?
   12. Is it accurate to describe that RE prior to 2014 will not be counted towards our CO2 reduction goal?
   13. What is more important to EPA  -  the percent reductions Michigan obtains from a 2012 baseline or the intensity targets?
   14. How will EPA allow states flexibility accounting for units that are prevented from retirement due to reliability requirements?
   15. Because the proposed rule relies heavily on natural gas generation to replace coal generation, will the EPA allow relief from its GHG limits if the price of natural gas increases significantly beyond assumptions used in EPA's modeling?
   16. With its firm and significantly reduced limits on future GHG emissions, does the proposed rule establish a de facto cap on population and industrial growth in many states?
   17. Because the rule may cause some states to mandate closure of some coal-fired power plants, has the EPA evaluated whether the rule is likely to jeopardize the future of public power in the United States given that public entities are generally not as well positioned to replace that generation as investor-owned utilities?
   18. What is the EPA's rationale for rejecting hydroelectric generation from every state's renewable energy portfolio, while at the same time crediting all other renewable energy in states that have much higher renewable energy capacity factors than other states? For example, Kansas has a great deal more potential for generating energy from wind than Virginia, but Virginia has a greater potential for hydroelectric generation than Kansas. Why is Kansas allowed to use all of its wind generation to satisfy the EPA's GHG limit, but Virginia is not allowed to use any of its hydroelectric generation?
   19. Can EPA provide a sample conversion of a rate-based to a mass-based goal that relies on a portfolio approach?
   20. Do energy efficiency measures require extensive monitoring or verification if the state employs a mass-based goal?
   21. How can a state utilizing a mass goal successfully incorporate energy efficiency measures into their programs?
   22. Will states have the option to count efficiency investments on the utility side of the meter towards meeting carbon limits?  They are as effective as customer improvements. Utility side of the meter improvements could provide additional advantages. Improvements to utility distribution could provide both carbon reduction and reliability improvements.
   23. For the state plan, do final legislation, final rules, and other enforceable measures have to be in place or can they be proposed or draft requirements?
   24. Please provide your rational for how heat rate improvements are going to be useful as part of the goal calculation in light of how to measure the improvements?  Utility comments to us have indicated that current methods used to estimate and report fuel heat input to EPA are not sufficiently precise to consistently detect a heat rate improvement of 6% or less.  We are also hearing that the 6% heat rate improvement is too high and expected heat rate improvements on coal-fired units are more in the neighborhood of 2  -  3%.  So potentially any heat rate improvements may not be measureable, and therefore, not helpful in achieving Michigan's goal.
   25. How will measures purchased in conjunction with federal incentives (new furnaces, for example) or new appliance standards count?

   26. How will MISO, which dispatches on a regional (not state-by-state) basis, be able to economically dispatch NGCC units over coal to the extent that Michigan maximizes the savings from building block II?

   27. What happens 8 years out when a new source is no longer considered new? (see p. 34,908 end of third column of FR version.)

   28. How could a rate-based approach work in a regional cap-and-trade program?

   29. What if a state meets the final goal, but does not continue meeting it at some point past 2030?

   30. Would EPA have the authority to administer EE programs if Michigan failed to achieve its 2030 goal?

   31. What happens if a state does not meet the interim goal but does meet the final goal?

   32. What are acceptable guidelines for forecasting electricity demand growth over the compliance period (2020  -  2029)?  How will new plants be accounted for?

   33. Under a mass based approach, if a coal plant is retired, are the total pounds of CO2 adjusted downward?  If a new plant replaces it, do the new CO2 emissions count?  If so, wouldn't this encroach on 111(b)?

   34. Under a rate-based approach, if a coal plant is retired, are the numerator and denominator adjusted downward?  If a new, more efficient plant replaces it, are the numerator and denominator adjusted upward?  If so, wouldn't this encroach on 111(b)?


[Federal Register: March 19, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 52)]
[Notices]
[Page 12852-12853]
[DOCID:fr19mr07-111]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55440; File No. SR-NASD-2007-019]

Self-Regulatory Organizations: National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed
Rule Change To Revise Effective Date of Amendments to NASD's Order
Audit Trail System Rules

March 9, 2007.
    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 1, 2007, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.
(``NASD'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I,
II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by NASD. NASD has
designated the proposed rule change as constituting a ``non-
controversial'' rule change under paragraph (f)(6) of Rule 19b-4 under
the Act,\3\ which renders the proposal effective upon receipt of this
filing by the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    NASD is filing the proposed rule change to establish February 4,
2008, as the effective date of the amendments to NASD Rules 6951, 6952,
and 6955 that the Commission approved on October 10, 2006.\4\ The
amendments expand the Order Audit Trail System (``OATS'') reporting
requirements to over-the-counter (``OTC'') equity securities. No
changes are being proposed to NASD rule text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54585 (October 10,
2006), 71 FR 61112 (October 17, 2006) (SR-NASD-2005-101).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In its filing with the Commission, NASD 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. NASD 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
    NASD is filing the proposed rule change to establish February 4,
2008, as the effective date for the amendments to the OATS rules
expanding the OATS reporting requirements to OTC equity securities.
    On October 10, 2006, the SEC approved SR-NASD-2005-101, which
amended NASD Rules 6951, 6952, and 6955 to expand the OATS reporting
requirements to include ``OTC equity securities,'' as defined in NASD
Rule 6951.\5\ On December 11, 2006, NASD published (1) Notice to
Members 06-70 announcing the Commission's approval of the amendments
and (2) a new version of the OATS Reporting Technical Specifications.
Pursuant to the SEC's approval of SR-NASD-2005-101, the amendments to
the OATS rules will go into effect on June 11, 2007, six months
following the publication of the revised OATS Reporting Technical
Specifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since the publication of the Notice to Members and the OATS
Reporting Technical Specifications, many firms have requested that the
effective date for the new reporting requirements be delayed to allow
firms sufficient time to make necessary systems updates and changes. As
a result of these discussions, NASD seeks to delay the implementation
of the new requirements until February 4, 2008, to give firms
sufficient time to make necessary changes to their systems to enable
them to comply with the expanded OATS reporting requirements. NASD also
seeks to delay the implementation of these provisions until after firms
have completed technological and systems changes required by the
complete implementation of Regulation NMS, which is scheduled for
October 2007.
    NASD has filed the proposed rule change for immediate
effectiveness.
2. Statutory Basis
    NASD believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
provisions of Section 15A(b)(6) of the Act,\6\ which requires, among
other things, that NASD rules must be designed to prevent fraudulent
and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable
principles of trade, and, in general, to protect investors and the
public interest. NASD believes that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the provisions of the Act noted above because extending
the effective date will ensure that firms have sufficient time to make
the necessary changes to their systems to be able to comply with the
new OATS reporting requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASD does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in
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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section

19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \7\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to the
Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule
change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule
change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of
the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Commission has determined to waive the five-day pre-
filing notice requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it
appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate
in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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 Number SR-NASD-2007-019 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-NASD-2007-019. 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 such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of NASD.
    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-NASD-2007-019
and should be submitted on or before April 9, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-4894 Filed 3-16-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: November 23, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 225)]
[Notices]
[Page 65798-65800]
[DOCID:fr23no07-117]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-56797; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2007-106]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSEArca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of a Proposed Rule Change, as
Modified by Amendment No. 1, To List and Trade Options Already Listed
on Another National Securities Exchange

November 15, 2007.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that on October 9, 2007, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' 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
November 6, 2007, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed
rule change.\4\ This order provides notice of the proposal, as amended,
and approves the proposal, as amended, on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange corrected typographical
errors in the rule text and the purpose section where NYSE Arca Rule
5.4 was incorrectly referenced as NYSE Arca Rule 5.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NYSE Arca proposes to revise the options original listing
guidelines so that as long as the continued listing standards set forth
in NYSE Arca Rule 5.4 are met and the option is listed and traded on
another national securities exchange, the Exchange would be able to
list and trade the option. The text of the proposed rule change is
available at on NYSE Arca's Web site (http://www.nyse.com), at NYSE's

principal office and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item III 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 this proposed rule change is to revise the options
original listing guidelines so that as long as the options maintenance
listing standards set forth in NYSE Arca Rule 5.4 are met and the
option is listed and traded on another national securities exchange,
NYSE Arca would be able to list and trade the option. NYSE Arca Rule
5.3(a)-(c) sets forth the guidelines that an underlying individual
equity security must meet before the Exchange may initially list
options on that security. These guidelines or requirements are uniform
among the options exchanges.
    NYSE Arca Rule 5.3(a)(4) relates to the minimum market price at
which an underlying security must trade for an option to be listed on
it. NYSE Arca Rule 5.3(a)(4) permits the listing of individual equity
options on both ``covered'' and ``uncovered'' underlying securities.\5\
In the case of an underlying security that is a ``covered security'' as
defined under section 18(b)(1)(A) of the Securities Act of 1933 (``1933
Act''), the closing market price of the underlying security must be at
least $3 per share for the five (5) previous consecutive business days
prior to the date on which the Exchange submits an option class
certification to The Options Clearing Corporation (``OCC''). In
connection with underlying securities deemed to be ``uncovered,''
Exchange rules require that such underlying security be at least $7.50
for the majority of business days during the three (3) calendar months
preceding the date of selection for such listing. In addition, an
alternative listing procedure for ``uncovered'' securities also permits
the listing of such options so long as: (1) The underlying security
meets the guidelines for continued listing contained in NYSE Arca Rule
5.4; \6\ (2) options on such underlying security are traded on at least
one other registered national securities exchange; and (3) the average
daily trading volume (``ADTV'') for such options over the last three
calendar months preceding the date of selection has been at least 5,000
contracts. Paragraphs (1) through (3) of NYSE Arca Rule 5.3(a) further
set forth minimum requirements for an underlying security such as
shares outstanding, number of holders and trading volume.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Section 18(b)(1)(A) of the 1933 Act provides that, ``[a]
security is a covered security if such security is-listed, or
authorized for listing, on the New York Stock Exchange or the
American Stock Exchange, or listed, or authorized for listing, on
the National Market System of the Nasdaq Stock Market (or any
successor to such entities) * * * '' See 15 U.S.C. 77r(b)(1)(A).
    \6\ The rule text of NYSE Arca Rule 5.3 refers to NYSE Arca Rule
5.6 instead of NYSE Arca Rule 5.4, which contains NYSE Arca's
continued listing standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange submits that the alternative listing procedure has
limited usefulness. The options exchange (or exchanges) that may be
fortunate enough to list an option that at first met the original
listing standards but subsequently fails to do so, is provided a
trading monopoly inconsistent with the multiple trading of options,
fostering competition and the maintenance of a national market system.
Under this proposal, an option may be multiply-listed and traded as
long as one other options exchange is trading the particular option and
such underlying security of the option meets existing continued listing
guidelines or requirements.
    The Exchange notes that the requirements for listing additional
series of an existing listed option (i.e., continued listing
guidelines) are less stringent, largely because, in total, the
Exchange's guidelines assure that options will be listed and traded on
securities of companies that are financially sound and subject to
adequate minimum standards.
    NYSE Arca believes that although the continued listing requirements
are uniform among the options exchanges, the application of both the
original and continued listing standards in the current market
environment has had an anti-competitive effect.
    Specifically, the Exchange notes that on several occasions it has
been unable to list and trade options classes that trade elsewhere
because the underlying security of such option did not at that time
meet original listing standards. However, the other options exchange(s)
may continue to trade such options (and list additional series) based
on the lower maintenance listing standards, while NYSE Arca may not
list any options on such underlying security. The Exchange believes
that this is anti-competitive and inconsistent with the aims and goals
of a national market system in options.
    To address this situation, the Exchange proposes to add new
paragraph (6) to NYSE Arca Rule 5.3(a) and amend the alternative
original listing requirement set forth in paragraph (4)(b) of NYSE Arca
Rule 5.3(a). Specifically, paragraph (6) would be added to provide that
notwithstanding that a particular underlying security may not meet the
requirements set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 4 of NYSE Arca Rule
5.3(a), the Exchange nonetheless could list and trade an option on such
underlying security if (i) the underlying security meets the guidelines
for continued listing in NYSE Arca Rule 5.4 and (ii) options on such
underlying security are listed and traded on at least one other
registered national securities exchange. Paragraph (4)(b) of NYSE Arca
Rule 5.3(a) would be amended to delete the reference to the alternative
original listing guideline for ``uncovered'' securities. In connection
with the proposed changes, the Exchange represents that the procedures
currently employed to determine whether a particular underlying
security meets the initial listing criteria will similarly be applied
to the continued listing criteria.
    The Exchange believes that this proposal is narrowly tailored to
address the circumstances where an options class is currently
ineligible for listing on NYSE Arca while at the same time, such option
is trading on another options exchange(s). The Exchange notes that when
an underlying security meets the maintenance listing guidelines and at
least one other exchange lists and trades options on the underlying
security, the option is available to the investing public. Therefore,
the Exchange does not believe that the current proposal will introduce
any inappropriate additional listed options classes. The Exchange
submits that the adoption of the proposal is essential for competitive
purposes and to promote a free and open market for the benefit of
investors.
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 section 6(b)(5) \8\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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.

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
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 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-NYSEArca-2007-106 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-NYSEArca-2007-106. 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, 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 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-NYSEArca-2007-106 and should
be submitted on or before December 14, 2007.

IV. Commission's Findings and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of
the Proposed Rule Change

    After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the
regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange.\9\
In particular, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ which requires that the
rules of an exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest. The proposal is narrowly tailored to
address the circumstances where an equity option class is currently
ineligible for initial listing on the Exchange even though it meets the
Exchange's continued listing standards and is trading on another
options exchange. Allowing NYSE Arca to list and trade options on such
underlying securities should help promote competition among the
exchanges that list and trade options. The Commission notes, and the
Exchange represents, that the procedures that the Exchange currently
employs to determine whether a particular underlying security meets the
initial equity option listing criteria for the Exchange will similarly
be applied when determining whether an underlying security meets the
Exchange's continued listing criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ In approving this rule change, the Commission notes that it
has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency,
competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission finds good cause, pursuant to section 19(b)(2)(B) of
the Act,\11\ for approving the proposed rule change prior to the 30th
day after the publication of the notice of the filing thereof in the
Federal Register. The Commission notes that the proposed rule change is
substantially identical to the proposed rule change submitted by
American Stock Exchange LLC,\12\ which was previously approved by the
Commission after an opportunity for notice and comment, and therefore
does not raise any new regulatory issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
    \12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56598 (October 2,
2007), 72 FR 57615 (October 10, 2007) (SR-Amex-2007-48). See also
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 56647 (October 11, 2007), 72 FR
58702 (October 16, 2007) (SR-ISE-2007-80) (substantially identical
proposed rule change approved on an accelerated basis); 56717
(October 29, 2007), 72 FR 62508 (November 5, 2007) (SR-Phlx-2007-73)
(substantially identical proposed rule change approved on an
accelerated basis); and 56774 (November 8, 2007) (SR-CBOE-2007-114)
(substantially identical proposed rule change approved on an
accelerated basis).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\13\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2007-106), as
amended, be, and it hereby is, approved on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-22781 Filed 11-21-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register: November 17, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 220)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 59104-59106]
[DOCID:fr17no09-12]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 3

[EPA-HQ-OEI-2003-0001; FRL-8980-7]
RIN 2025-AA26

Technical Amendment of Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is amending the Final Cross-Media Electronic Reporting
Rule (CROMERR) to exclude from the regulation all documents and
information submitted electronically to EPA by applicants for, and
recipients of grants, cooperative agreements and other forms of
financial assistance pursuant to EPA financial assistance regulations.

DATES: This final rule is effective on November 17, 2009.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under No. EPA-
HQ-OEI-2003-0001. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://
www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically through http://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the CROMERR Docket, EPA/DC, EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the
CROMERR Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Evi Huffer, Office of Environmental
Information (2823T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460;<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or David Schwarz, Office of Environmental Information (2823T),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460;<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Does this action apply to me?

    This action will affect governments, non-profit organizations,
international organizations, commercial firms, individuals and other
entities who are eligible for EPA financial assistance (recipients)
that submit information electronically to EPA for financial assistance
awards pursuant to Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
Subchapter B--Grants and Other Federal Assistance.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Examples of affected
                    Category                             entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Governments.....................................  Foreign governments,
                                                   States, tribes or
                                                   territories,
                                                   including intertribal
                                                   consortia and Tribal
                                                   education agencies.
                                                   County, municipality,
                                                   city, town, township,
                                                   local public
                                                   authority, school
                                                   district, special
                                                   district, intrastate
                                                   district, council of
                                                   governments, any
                                                   other regional or
                                                   interstate government
                                                   entity, or any agency
                                                   or instrumentality of
                                                   a local government.
                                                   For purposes of this
                                                   rulemaking, the term
                                                   ``state'' includes
                                                   the District of
                                                   Columbia and the
                                                   United States
                                                   territories, as
                                                   specified in the
                                                   applicable statutes.
                                                   That is, the term
                                                   ``state'' includes
                                                   the District of
                                                   Columbia, the
                                                   Commonwealth of
                                                   Puerto Rico, the
                                                   Virgin Islands, Guam,
                                                   American Samoa, the
                                                   Commonwealth of
                                                   Northern Marina
                                                   Islands and the Trust
                                                   Territory of the
                                                   Pacific Islands,
                                                   depending on the
                                                   statute.
International organizations.....................  Agencies of the United
                                                   Nations, the European
                                                   Union, the World
                                                   Health Organization
                                                   and similar
                                                   international bodies.
Non-profit organizations........................  Environmental
                                                   organizations, trade
                                                   associations,
                                                   associations of
                                                   government officials,
                                                   institutions of
                                                   higher education,
                                                   public and private
                                                   hospitals, and other
                                                   quasi-public and
                                                   other private non-
                                                   profit organizations
                                                   such as, but not
                                                   limited to, community
                                                   action agencies,
                                                   research institutes,
                                                   educational
                                                   associations, and
                                                   private health
                                                   centers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

II. What does this rule do?

    This rule extends the current Cross-Media Electronic Reporting
Regulation (CROMERR) applicability exemption for financial assistance
regulations (grants) to include all financial assistance regulations
under Title 40, providing regulatory relief to applicants for, and
recipients of, EPA financial assistance who submit information
electronically to EPA pursuant to other parts of Title 40 of the CFR.
Specifically, this final rule amends 40 CFR 3.1(b) by adding a new
paragraph (3) which excludes such documents and data from Part 3.

III. Why is EPA taking this action?

    EPA published the CROMERR final rulemaking on October 13, 2005 (70
FR 59853). In publishing the final rule, EPA did not intend for the new
part 3 requirements to apply to the Agency's financial assistance
regulations. This is evidenced by the statement in the final rule
preamble that the ``new part 3 does not address contracts, grants or
financial management regulations contained in Title 48 of the CFR.''
(70 FR 59853, October 13, 2005). EPA recently discovered, however, that
CROMERR does apply to grants found in parts of Title 40 of the CFR.
Augmenting this discrepancy, states, tribes, and local governments
submitting applications, reports, or data to satisfy grant requirements
under Title 40 are currently exempt under CROMERR section 3.1(c) when
the environmental grant programs are linked to EPA-authorized programs.
Today's final rule excludes all documents and data submitted
electronically to EPA by financial assistance applicants and recipients
pursuant to financial assistance requirements under Title 40 of the CFR
from CROMERR.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
is, therefore, not subject to review under the EO.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any information collection burden.
However, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has previously
approved the information collection requirements contained in the
existing regulations (40 CFR part 3) under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB
control number 2025-0003. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Today's final rule is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA), which generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis for any rule that will have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The RFA applies only
to rules subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) or any other statute. This rule
is not subject to notice and comment requirements under the APA or any
other statute because this rule pertains to grants which the section
553 of the APA specifically exempts from notice and comment rulemaking
requirements (5 USC 553(a)(2)). Thus, EPA is not required to promulgate
a proposed rule or take comment on the rule.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C.
1531-1538 for state, tribal, or local governments or the private
sector. The action imposes no additional requirements or enforceable
duty on any State, tribal, or local governments or the private sector.
Therefore, this action is not subject to the requirements of sections
202 or 205 of the UMRA. This rule relieves a regulatory burden to
environmental grant applicants and grantees submitting electronic
documents and information to EPA.
    This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203
of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects 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, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. This action provides regulatory
relief to grant applicants and grantees and imposes no additional
requirements. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). It will neither
impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal governments, nor
preempt Tribal law. This action provides regulatory relief to tribal,
state, local government, and non-profit organization grant applicants
and

grantees. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children's Health From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as applying
only to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks,
such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the EO has the
potential to influence the regulation. This action is not subject to EO
13045 because it does not establish an environmental standard intended
to mitigate health or safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001), because it is not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA
did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental
justice in this final rulemaking because it does not affect the level
of protection provided to human health or the environment. This final
rule exempts grant applicants and grantees submitting documents and
information electronically to EPA pursuant to environmental grant
regulations under 40 CFR from CROMERR.

K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A Major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2) and provides regulatory relief to state, tribe, local
government, and non-profit organization environmental grant applicants
and grantees. This rule will be effective on November 17, 2009.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 3

    Environmental protection, Conflict of interests, Electronic
records, Electronic reporting requirements, Electronic reports,
Intergovernmental relations.

    Dated: November 5, 2009.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.

    Therefore, title 40 chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 3--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 3 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  7 U.S.C. 136 to 136y; 15 U.S.C. 2601 to 2692; 33
U.S.C. 1251 to 1387; 33 U.S.C. 1401 to 1445; 33 U.S.C. 2701 to 2761;
42 U.S.C. 300f to 300j-26; 42 U.S.C. 4852d; 42 U.S.C. 6901-6992k; 42
U.S.C. 7401 to 7671q; 42 U.S.C. 9601 to 9675; 42 U.S.C. 11001 to
11050; 15 U.S.C. 7001; 44 U.S.C. 3504 to 3506.

Subpart A--General Provisions

0
2. Section 3.1 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) and
by adding paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows:

Sec.  3.1  Who does this part apply to?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Documents submitted via facsimile in satisfaction of reporting
requirements as permitted under other parts of Title 40 or under
authorized programs;
    (2) Electronic documents submitted via magnetic or optical media
such as diskette, compact disc, digital video disc, or tape in
satisfaction of reporting requirements, as permitted under other parts
of Title 40 or under authorized programs; or
    (3) Documents and information submitted under grants, cooperative
agreements, or financial assistant regulations contained in Title 40.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E9-27304 Filed 11-16-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


Subject:	Meeting with Portland Cement Association (PCA) and Holcim

Location:	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, RTP, NC

Date: 		August 31, 2010

Participants:

Industry

Andy O’Hare, PCA*

Hector Ybanez, Holcim

Curtis Lesslie, Ash Grove*

Mike Pelan, Lafarge*

Dan Nugent, Buzzi*

Robert Crawford, Consultant to PCA*	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA)

Steve Silverman*

Keith Barnett

RTI International

Mike Laney

Breda Munoz

*By telephone

The Portland Cement Association (PCA) met with EPA and presented
information on a statistical analysis of the mercury emissions data
using the 30-day averages instead of the daily emission values. They
also discussed the use of PM compliance test data that has been
collected for all portland cement kilns. Handouts were provided
including a meeting agenda and tables illustrating the results of their
statistical analysis.  They are attached to these meeting notes.

Following the meeting with PCA, Hector Ybanez of Holcim presented issues
associated with the final rule that were of concern to Holcim. They
included:

-Determination of clinker production

-Alternate PM limit for kilns with an alkali bypass

-Operation and Maintenance Plan submission

-Use of scrubbers for SO2 and HCl control

-Use of Affirmative Defense

-Data acquisition systems

-Use of CEMS for THC

-PM CEMS requirements in NESHAP and NSPS

-Use of consecutive days for startup and shutdowns

-Modifications under NSPS

-Use of CEMS for 90% SO2 option


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 20 (Tuesday, January 30, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4200-4201]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01792]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP18-46-000]

Adelphia Gateway, LLC; Notice of Applications

    Take notice that on January 12, 2018, Adelphia Gateway, LLC
(Adelphia), 1415 Wyckoff Road Wall, New Jersey 07719, filed an
application under section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part
157 of the Commission's rules and regulations requesting certificate
authority to acquire and convert certain existing pipeline and
auxiliary facilities, to construct additional auxiliary facilities, and
to own and operate the existing and new facilities as an interstate
natural gas pipeline system for its proposed Adelphia Gateway Pipeline
Project located in Pennsylvania and Delaware. Adelphia plans to provide
250,000 Dekatherms per day (Dth/d) of natural gas transportation
capacity from an interconnection with Texas Eastern Transmission, LP
(Texas Eastern) in Bucks County, Pennsylvania to Marcus Hook, Delaware
County, Pennsylvania, and 525,000 Dth/d of combined natural gas
transportation capacity from an interconnection with Texas Eastern in
Bucks County and an interconnection with Transcontinental Gas Pipeline
Company, LLC in Northampton County to Martins Creek Terminal, Martins
Creek, Pennsylvania, all as more fully described in the application
which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The
filing may also be viewed on the 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 protected] or call toll-
free,<PHONE_NUMBER> or TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Specifically, Adelphia proposes to (i) acquire an existing 84-mile,
18-inch-diameter mainline and 4.5-mile, 20-inch-diameter lateral gas
pipeline, and existing appurtenant and auxiliary facilities, all of
which are currently owned and operated in non-FERC jurisdictional
service by Interstate Energy Company (ICE); (ii) convert a portion of
these existing facilities from dual oil and gas intrastate
transportation service to solely natural gas transportation service;
and (iii) construct additional new facilities including two compressor
stations totaling 11,250 horsepower, two pipeline laterals totaling
4.6-miles extending from the planned Marcus Hook Compressor Station to
interconnections in Chester, Delaware County, Pennsylvania and
Claymont, New Castle County, Delaware, and various M&R stations.
    Additionally, Adelphia requests: (i) A blanket certificate pursuant
to Part 157, Subpart F and a blanket certificate pursuant to Part 284,
Subpart G of the Commission's regulations; (ii) approval of its
proposed pro forma tariff and certain non-conforming provisions in its
firm service agreements with existing shippers on the IEC system; and
(iii) any such other authorizations and waivers as may be necessary
from the Commission to allow Adelphia to undertake the activities
described in its Application.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
William P. Scharfenberg, Assistant General Counsel, Adelphia Gateway,
LLC, 1415 Wyckoff Road, Wall, NJ 07719, or call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
email: [email protected].
    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.
    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 7 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 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on February 13, 2018.

    Dated: January 23, 2018.
 Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-01792 Filed 1-29-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P