[Federal Register: October 15, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 200)]
[Notices]
[Page 61121-61123]
[DOCID:fr15oc08-83]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0525; FRL-8395-6]

Carbaryl; Notice of Receipt of Requests to Voluntarily Cancel or
to Terminate Uses of Certain Pesticide Registrations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 6(f)(1) of the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended, EPA is issuing a
notice of receipt of requests from Loveland Products, Inc., Value
Garden Supply, and Helena Chemical Company to voluntarily amend their
registrations to terminate uses of certain carbaryl products, or to
eliminate certain application methods for carbaryl products. The
requests would terminate carbaryl use in or on wheat, millet, and
fresh/succulent beans and peas (crop subgroup 6B). These requests would
also terminate the use of drench or dip treatments of seedlings or seed
pieces, dust formulations in agricultural crops, granular applications
to leafy vegetables (except brassica), direct applications (except for
flea collars) to domestic animals (including dogs, cats, and other
pets), and all indoor applications. The requests would not terminate
the last carbaryl products registered for use in the United States. EPA
intends to grant these requests at the close of the comment period for
this announcement unless the Agency receives substantive comments
within the comment period that would merit its further review of the
requests, or unless the registrants withdraw their requests within this
period. Upon acceptance of these requests, any sale, distribution, or
use of products listed in this notice will be permitted only if such
sale, distribution, or use is consistent with the terms as described in
the final order.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 14, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2008-0525, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public
Docket (7502P), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001.
     Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South
Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation (8:30
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays).
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Docket Facility telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-
2008-0525. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index
available at http://www.regulations.gov. 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 in the electronic
docket at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard
copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac
Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christina Scheltema, Special Review
and Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of
interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human
health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide
users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution,
or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency
has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be
affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

     1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
    i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. Background on the Receipt of Requests to Cancel and to Amend
Registrations to Terminate Uses

    This notice announces receipt by EPA of requests from three
registrants, listed in Table 2 below, to amend several carbaryl product
registrations to terminate certain uses and eliminate certain
application methods. Carbaryl is a broad-spectrum insecticide used on a
variety of food and feed crops, ornamentals, turf, pasture, and
rangeland. In letters dated September 2008, registrants of carbaryl
products requested EPA to amend the product registrations identified in
Table 1 of this notice to terminate certain uses and eliminate certain
application methods. Specifically, these registrants are no longer
supporting carbaryl use in or on wheat, millet, and fresh/succulent
beans and peas (crop subgroup 6B). These requests would also terminate
the use of drench or dip treatments of seedlings or seed pieces, dust
formulations in agricultural crops, granular applications to leafy
vegetables (except brassica), direct applications (except for flea
collars) to domestic animals (including dogs, cats, and other pets),
and all indoor applications. The complete list of affected
registrations and registrants are identified in Tables 1 and 2,
respectively. EPA's action on these requests will not terminate the
last carbaryl products registered in the United States, or the last
pesticide products registered in the United States for these uses.

III. What Action is the Agency Taking?

    This notice announces receipt by EPA of requests from various
registrants to amend certain carbaryl product registrations to
terminate various uses. The affected products, uses, and the
registrants making the requests are identified in Tables 1 and 2 of
this unit.
    Under section 6(f)(1)(A) of FIFRA, registrants may request, at any
time, that their pesticide registrations be canceled or amended to
terminate one or more pesticide uses. Section 6(f)(1)(B) of FIFRA
requires that before acting on a request for voluntary cancellation,
EPA must provide a 30-day public comment period on the request for
voluntary cancellation or use termination. In addition, section
6(f)(1)(C) of FIFRA requires that EPA provide a 180-day comment period
on a request for voluntary cancellation or termination of any minor
agricultural use before granting the request, unless:
    1. The registrants request a waiver of the comment period.
    2. The Administrator determines that continued use of the pesticide
would pose an unreasonable adverse effect on the environment.
    All of the carbaryl registrants listed in Table 2 have requested
that EPA waive the 180-day comment period. EPA will provide a 30-day
comment period on the proposed requests.
    Unless a request is withdrawn by the registrant within 30 days of
publication of this notice, or if the Agency determines that there are
substantive comments that warrant further review of this request, an
order will be issued canceling or amending the affected registrations
in the following Table 1.

   Table 1.--Carbaryl Product Registrations with Pending Requests for
                               Amendments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Uses Being
       Registration Number           Product Name         Terminated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
769-574                           Suregard Brand      Pea and bean,
                                   Sevin 80S           succulent shelled
                                   Carbaryl            (subgroup 6B);
                                   Insecticide         preplant dip
                                                       (sweet potato);
                                                       wheat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
769-728                           Sevin Brand         Pea and bean,
                                   Carbaryl            succulent shelled
                                   Insecticide 5%      (subgroup 6B);
                                   Turf Insecticide    leafy vegetables
                                   Granules            (except brassica)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
769-971                           Sevin Brand 80% DB  Pea and bean,
                                                       succulent shelled
                                                       (subgroup 6B);
                                                       preplant dip
                                                       (sweet potatoes);
                                                       use of dust
                                                       formulations in
                                                       agricultural
                                                       crops; wheat
------------------------------------------------------------------------
769-972                           Security Brand 50%  Pea and bean,
                                   Sevin Wettable      succulent shelled
                                                       (subgroup 6B)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
769-976                           Sevin Brand         Leafy vegetables
                                   Carbaryl            (except brassica)
                                   Insecticide 2%
                                   Granular
                                   Insecticide
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5887-43                           Black Leaf Sevin    Pea and bean,
                                   Brand Carbaryl      succulent shelled
                                   Insecticide         (subgroup 6B);
                                                       direct
                                                       application to
                                                       domestic animals
                                                       (dogs and cats)
                                                       and their
                                                       dwellings/
                                                       premises
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5905-251                          Helena Sevimol 4    Pea and bean,
                                   Carbaryl            succulent shelled
                                   Insecticide         (subgroup 6B)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
34704-289                         10% Sevin Granules  Pea and bean,
                                                       succulent shelled
                                                       (subgroup 6B);
                                                       leafy vegetables
                                                       (except brassica)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
34704-447                         Carbaryl 4L         Pea and bean,
                                                       succulent shelled
                                                       (subgroup 6B);
                                                       millet; wheat;
                                                       sweet potato
                                                       preplant root or
                                                       seedling dips or
                                                       drenches; all
                                                       indoor
                                                       applications
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 2 of this unit includes the names and addresses of record for
the registrants of the products listed in Table 1 of this unit.

     Table 2.--Registrants Requesting Voluntary Cancellation and/or
                               Amendments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            EPA Company Number                Company Name and Address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
769                                        Value Garden Supply
                                           9100 W. Bloomington Freeway
                                           Suite 113
                                           Bloomington, MN 55431
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5887                                       Value Garden Supply
                                           9100 W. Bloomington Freeway
                                           Suite 113
                                           Bloomington, MN 55431
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5905                                       Helena Chemical Company
                                           225 Schilling Boulevard
                                           Suite 300
                                           Collierville, TN 38017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
34704                                      Loveland Products, Inc.
                                           7251 W 4th Street (80634)
                                           P.O. Box 1286
                                           Greeley, CO 80632-1286
------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action?

    Section 6(f)(1) of FIFRA provides that a registrant of a pesticide
product may at any time request that any of its pesticide registrations
be canceled or amended to terminate one or more uses. FIFRA further
provides that, before acting on the request, EPA must publish a notice
of receipt of any such request in the Federal Register. Thereafter,
following the public comment period, the Administrator may approve such
a request.

V. Procedures for Withdrawal of Request and Considerations for
Reregistration of Carbaryl

    Registrants who choose to withdraw a request for cancellation must
submit such withdrawal in writing to the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, postmarked before November 14, 2008. This
written withdrawal of the request for cancellation will apply only to
the applicable FIFRA section 6(f)(1) request listed in this notice. If
the products have been subject to a previous cancellation action, the
effective date of cancellation and all other provisions of any earlier
cancellation action are controlling.

VI. Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks

    Existing stocks are those stocks of registered pesticide products
which are currently in the United States and which were packaged,
labeled, and released for shipment prior to the effective date of the
cancellation action.
    In any order issued in response to these requests for cancellation
of product registrations and for amendments to terminate uses, the
Agency proposes to include the following provisions for the treatment
of any existing stocks of the products indentified or referenced in
Table 1. Provided that these stocks bear labels previously approved by
EPA, registrants may sell and distribute existing stocks of the
affected products for 18 months from the effective date of the Agency's
termination order.
    If the request for voluntary cancellation and/or use termination is
granted as discussed in this unit, the Agency intends to issue a
cancellation order that will allow persons other than the registrant to
continue to sell and/or use existing stocks of canceled products until
such stocks are exhausted, provided that such use is consistent with
the terms of the previously approved labeling on, or that accompanied,
the canceled product. The order will specifically prohibit any use of
existing stocks that is not consistent with such previously approved
labeling. EPA intends to publish the cancellation order in the Federal
Register after the end of the 30-day comment period for this notice.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests, Carbaryl,
SEVIN[reg].

    Dated: October 1, 2008.
Steven Bradbury,
Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. E8-24271 Filed 10-14-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 178 (Tuesday, September 15, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 55356]
[FR Doc No: 2015-23130]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OECA-2014-0092; FRL-9932-69-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Printing, Coating and Dyeing of
Fabrics and Other Textiles (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), ``NESHAP for Printing, Coating
and Dyeing of Fabrics and other Textiles (40 CFR part 63, subpart OOOO)
(Renewal)'' (EPA ICR No. 2071.06, OMB Control No. 2060-0522) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved
through September 30, 2015. Public comments were requested previously
via the Federal Register (79 FR 30117) on May 27, 2014, during a 60-day
comment period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public
comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its
estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency may neither conduct
nor sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection
of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before October 15,
2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OECA-2014-0092, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), or by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to:
EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB via email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer
for EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Yellin, Monitoring,
Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail
Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax
number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: The affected entities are subject to the General
Provisions of the NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), and any changes,
or additions, to the Provisions are specified at 40 CFR part 63,
subpart OOOO. Owners or operators of the affected facilities must
submit initial notification reports, performance tests, and periodic
reports and results. Owners or operators are also required to maintain
records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or
malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period
during which the monitoring system is inoperative.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Facilities involved in the printing,
coating, slashing, dyeing or finishing of fabric and other textiles.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart OOOO).
    Estimated number of respondents: 146 (total).
    Frequency of response: Initially and semiannually.
    Total estimated burden: 22,400 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $2,260,000 (per year), which includes a
combined total of $6,750 in both annualized capital/startup and
operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an adjustment increase in both
the respondent and Agency burden, including an increase in the O&M
cost. This is not due to any program changes; rather, it is due to an
increase in the estimated number of sources. We assume an additional
coating and printing facility will become subject to the rule each
year. In addition, we have updated all burden calculations using the
latest labor rates, which contributes to an increase in cost.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2015-23130 Filed 9-14-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 77 (Friday, April 23, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21782-21784]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08456]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2021-0015; Notice 1]

Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Receipt of Petition for
Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Receipt of petition.

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

SUMMARY: Toyota Motor North America, Inc. (TMNA) on behalf of Toyota
Motor Corporation (TMC) (collectively referred to as ``Toyota''), has
determined that certain model year (MY) 2020-2021 Toyota C-HR motor
vehicles do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 110, Tire Selection and Rims and Motor Home/Recreation
Vehicle Trailer Load Carrying Capacity Information for Motor Vehicles
with a GVWR of 4,536 Kilograms (10,000 pounds) or Less. Toyota filed a
noncompliance report dated February 3, 2021, and subsequently
petitioned NHTSA on February 26, 2021, for a decision that the subject
noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
This notice announces receipt of Toyota's petition.

DATES: Send comments on or before May 24, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written data,
views, and arguments on this petition. Comments must refer to the
docket and notice number cited in the title of this notice and
submitted by any of the following methods:
     Mail: Send comments by mail addressed to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver comments by hand to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC
20590. The Docket Section is open on weekdays from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
except for Federal holidays.
     Electronically: Submit comments electronically by logging
onto the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) website at https://www.regulations.gov/. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Comments may also be faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comments must be written in the English language and be no greater
than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to the length of
necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are submitted in
hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are provided. If you wish
to receive confirmation that comments you have submitted by mail were
received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the
comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided.
    All comments and supporting materials received before the close of
business on the closing date indicated above will be filed in the
docket and will be considered. All comments and supporting materials
received after the closing date will also be filed and will be
considered to the fullest extent possible.
    When the petition is granted or denied, notice of the decision will
also be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority
indicated at the end of this notice.
    All comments, background documentation, and supporting materials
submitted to the docket may be viewed by anyone at the address and
times given above. The documents may also be viewed on the internet at
https://www.regulations.gov by following the online instructions for
accessing the docket. The docket ID number for this petition is shown
in the heading of this notice.
    DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement is available for review in a
Federal Register notice published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kerrin Bressant, General Engineer,
NHTSA, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Overview

    Toyota has determined that certain MY 2020-2021 Toyota C-HR motor
vehicles do not fully comply with the requirements of paragraph S4.3(d)
of FMVSS No. 110, Tire Selection and Rims and Motor Home/Recreation
Vehicle Trailer Load Carrying Capacity Information for Motor Vehicles
with a

GVWR of 4,536 Kilograms (10,000 pounds) or Less (49 CFR 571.110).
Toyota filed a noncompliance report dated February 3, 2021, pursuant to
49 CFR part 573, Defect and Noncompliance Responsibility and Reports.
Toyota subsequently petitioned NHTSA on February 26, 2021, for an
exemption from the notification and remedy requirements of 49 U.S.C.
Chapter 301 on the basis that this noncompliance is inconsequential as
it relates to motor vehicle safety, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h) and 49 CFR part 556, Exemption for Inconsequential Defect or
Noncompliance.
    This notice of receipt of Toyota's petition is published under 49
U.S.C. 30118 and 30120 and does not represent any Agency decision or
other exercise of judgment concerning the merits of the petition.

II. Vehicles Involved

    Approximately 3,981 MY 2020-2021 Toyota C-HR motor vehicles,
manufactured between September 16, 2019, and November 30, 2020, are
potentially involved.

III. Noncompliance

    Toyota explains that the noncompliance is that the subject vehicles
are equipped with tire information pressure labels that incorrectly
state the tire size information for the front and rear tires and,
therefore, do not fully meet the requirements specified in paragraph
S4.3(d) of FMVSS No. 110. Specifically, the subject vehicles were
originally equipped with 17-inch wheels, however, the tire information
pressure labels indicate that the vehicles were originally equipped
with 18-inch tires.

IV. Rule Requirements

    Paragraph S4.3(d) of FMVSS No. 110 includes the requirements
relevant to this petition. Each vehicle, except for a trailer or
incomplete vehicle, shall show the information specified in S4.3 (a)
through (g), and may show, at the manufacturer's option, the
information specified in S4.3 (h) and (i) on a placard permanently
affixed to the driver's side B-pillar. Specifically, tire size
designation, indicated by the headings ``size'' or ``original tire
size'' or original size'' must be shown.

V. Summary of Toyota's Petition

    The following views and arguments presented in this section, ``V.
Summary of Toyota's Petition,'' are the views and arguments provided by
Toyota. They have not been evaluated by the Agency and do not reflect
the views of the Agency. Toyota describes the subject noncompliances
and contends that the noncompliances is inconsequential as it relates
to motor vehicle safety.
    In support of its petition, Toyota submitted the following
reasoning:
    1. Toyota states that the tires installed on the vehicle (215/
60R17) meet all other applicable FMVSS requirements. They are the tires
that were designed for the subject vehicle and are appropriate for the
maximum vehicle loads. Only the front and rear tire size information
indicated on the placard is incorrect and reflects the tire size used
on other grade C-HR vehicles. Further, Toyota claims, all the other
information on the placard is accurate, including the spare tire size,
the cold tire inflation pressure, and maximum combined weight of
occupants and cargo.
    Toyota believes that, because the tires installed on the vehicles
are the appropriate tires for the vehicle performance and maximum
loading requirements, there is no risk to motor vehicle safety.
    2. Toyota says that if the vehicle owner is replacing the tires on
the vehicle, the owner can notice that the tire size specified on the
placard does not match the tires installed on the vehicle. Further, the
18-inch wheels are visually different because they are alloy wheels as
opposed to the 17-inch wheels, which are steel. To find the correct
information, the owner could check the tire size that is molded into
the sidewall of each tire or check the tire size listed in the owner's
manual. As required in FMVSS No. 110, the tire placard also directs the
owner to ``SEE OWNER'S MANUAL FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.'' The owner's
manual specifies the appropriate tire and wheel sizes for the vehicle.
The wheel size is also marked on the wheel itself.
    3. Toyota also says that if the owner attempts to replace the
original tires installed on the 17-inch wheel with tires of the size
indicated on the incorrect placard (225/50R18), the installer would not
be able to physically mount them on the 17-inch wheels and would either
need to also replace the wheels with 18-inch wheels or refer to the
tire size information from other sources. As stated above, the correct
information is available in various locations such as the tire size
indicated on the sidewall of the tires that are installed on the
vehicle or the owner's manual.
    4. Toyota states, that in the event that the vehicle owner decided
to change the tire/wheel combination to the size indicated on the
incorrect placard, the replacement tires would be appropriate for the
vehicle. Other grade C-HRs, with the same maximum loading requirements,
use the 225/50R18 tire/wheel combination. This tire wheel size
combination is appropriate for the vehicle maximum loads.
    5. Toyota claims that in similar situations, NHTSA has granted
petitions for inconsequential noncompliance relating to the subject
requirement of FMVSS No. 110.

a. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., (81 FR 88728, December 8, 2016)

    In their petition, Volkswagen stated that the vehicles, in that
case, had a tire placard that is misprinted with an incorrect tire size
as compared to the tires the vehicle was originally equipped with and
therefore did not fully conform to paragraph S4.3(d) of FMVSS No. 110.
Utilizing the ETRTO Tire and Rim Association Manual of 2016, NHTSA
confirmed that the incorrectly listed size tires would still have a
load capacity sufficient to support the listed weight limitation of
occupants and cargo which is printed on the placard. Both the installed
original equipment manufacturer (OEM) tires on the vehicle and the
installation of the incorrect sized tires listed on those vehicles'
placard, when inflated to the placard's recommended cold inflation
pressure, were identified as appropriate to handle the vehicle maximum
loads. Based on that information, NHTSA determined that the
noncompliance, in that case, should not cause any unsafe conditions
associated with the incorrect tire size listed on the placard.
    Similarly, for the Toyota C-HR, the originally installed tires and
the installation of the incorrect sized tires listed on the subject
vehicle's placard, when inflated to the placard's recommended cold
inflation pressure, are appropriate to handle the vehicle maximum
loads.

b. BMW of North America, LLC., (84 FR 26505, June 6, 2019)

    In their petition, BMW stated that the vehicles were equipped, as
designed, with 17-inch tires but the FMVSS No. 110 tire information
placard states that the vehicles were equipped with 18-inch tires. BMW
also explained that the placard overstated the cold tire inflation
pressure for the rear tires (it stated 240 kPa/35 psi when it should
have read 220 kPa/32 psi). Instead of the information for the 17-inch
tires, the placard incorrectly included the cold tire inflation
pressure and tire size designation for the 18-inch tires. Therefore,
BMW stated that the affected vehicles did not conform to FMVSS No. 110
S4.3(c) and 4.3(d). NHTSA agreed,

in their response, that if the vehicle owner installed 18-inch tires on
the vehicle, those tires at the listed cold inflation pressure would
also be appropriate for the vehicle's front and rear GAWRs. In
addition, NHTSA stated that, if a vehicle owner inflated his tires to
the inflation pressure listed for the 18-inch tires, the result would
be an increase to 240 kPa/35 psi for the rear tires and a net increase
in load capacity for the vehicle overall. Alternatively, if the vehicle
owner installed 18-inch tires on the vehicle, those tires at the listed
cold inflation pressure would also be appropriate for the vehicle's
front and rear GAWRs. The agency agreed with BMW that the noncompliance
is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety and that there is no risk of
possible underinflating or overloading of the tires as a result of this
issue. Further, should a vehicle owner question the correct tire size
or corresponding recommended cold tire inflation pressures for their
vehicle, this information is available in other locations such as the
sidewall markings and the owner's manual.
    Similarly, for the Toyota C-HR, the installation of the incorrect
sized tires listed on the subject vehicle's placard when inflated to
the placard's recommended cold inflation pressure are appropriate to
handle the vehicle maximum loads. In addition, as in the BMW petition,
the tire size information is available in other locations such as the
sidewall markings and the owner's manual. Unlike the BMW issue,
however, the cold tire inflation pressure listed on the placard for the
Toyota C-HR is correct.

c. DaimlerChrysler Corporation (73 FR 11462, March 3, 2008); Mercedes-
Benz USA, LLC (MBUSA), (78 FR. 43967, July 22, 2013); Mercedes-Benz
USA, LLC (82 FR 5640, January 18, 2017); General Motors, LLC, (84 FR
25117, May 30, 2019)

    NHTSA has also previously granted at least four similar petitions
for inconsequential noncompliance for the incorrect spare tire size
indicated on the placard, such as those listed above.
    In those cases, NHTSA determined that the noncompliance was
inconsequential to motor vehicle safety for reasons that included the
following: (1) Both the spare tire size indicated on the placard and
the spare tire size installed on the vehicles meet the FMVSS No. 110
loading requirements when inflated to the pressure indicated on the
placard; and (2) other than the vehicle placard error, the vehicles
comply with all other safety performance requirements of FMVSS No. 110.
These reasons also apply to the subject Toyota C-HR front and rear
tires.
    Toyota concludes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential
as it relates to motor vehicle safety and that its petition to be
exempted from providing notification of the noncompliance, as required
by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the noncompliance, as required by
49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
    NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and
30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a
determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers
only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively,
to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance
and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any decision on
this petition only applies to the subject vehicles that Toyota no
longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance
existed. However, any decision on this petition does not relieve
vehicle distributors and dealers of the prohibitions on the sale, offer
for sale, or introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate
commerce of the noncompliant vehicles under their control after Toyota
notified them that the subject noncompliance existed.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.

Otto G. Matheke III,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2021-08456 Filed 4-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 161 (Monday, August 22, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51466-51469]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17947]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-95504; File No. SR-ICC-2022-008]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Stress Testing Framework
and the Liquidity Risk Management Framework

August 16, 2022.

I. Introduction

    On June 23, 2022, ICE Clear Credit LLC (``ICC'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\1\
and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend its
Stress Testing Framework (``STF'') and the ICC Liquidity Risk
Management Framework (``LRMF''). The proposed rule change was published
for comment in the Federal Register on July 11, 2022.\3\ The Commission
did not receive comments regarding the proposed rule change. For the
reasons discussed below, the Commission is approving the proposed rule
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice
of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the Stress Testing
Framework and the Liquidity Risk Management Framework; Exchange Act
Release No. 95200 (Jul. 5, 2022); 87 FR 41149 (Jul. 11, 2022) (File
No. SR-ICC-2022-008) (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    ICC proposes to revise its STF and LRMF to introduce new stress
scenarios, clarify existing stress scenarios, and make other minor
edits.\4\ Specifically, the proposed rule change would introduce new
stress scenarios related to the Coronavirus pandemic and oil price war
(the ``COVID-19/Oil Crisis'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The description that follows is substantially excerpted from
the Notice. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein have the
meanings assigned to them in the STS, LRMF or ICC's Clearing Rules,
as applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. STF

    The proposed amendments to the STF introduce new stress scenarios
related to the COVID-19/Oil Crisis, clarify existing stress scenarios
related to credit default index swaptions (``index options''), and make
other minor edits. Specifically, the proposed changes would amend
Section 5.1 containing the historically observed extreme but plausible
market scenarios with a minor edit to abbreviate a term and to
introduce additional stress scenarios

related to the COVID-19/Oil Crisis. ICC previously introduced price-
based stress scenarios related to the COVID-19/Oil Crisis in the STF,
which replicate observed instrument price changes during this
period.\5\ This proposal would incorporate complementing spread-based
stress scenarios related to the COVID-19/Oil Crisis, which reflect
observed relative spread increases and decreases during this period
(the ``COVID-19/Oil Crisis Spread Scenarios''). Additionally, the
stress scenarios related to index options (i.e., the stress options-
implied Mean Absolute Deviation (``MAD'') scenarios) would be moved
into a separate section and corresponding references throughout the STF
would accordingly refer to this new Section 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to the ICC Risk Management
Framework, ICC Risk Management Model Description, ICC Risk Parameter
Setting and Review Policy, ICC Stress Testing Framework, and ICC
Liquidity Risk Management Framework; Exchange Act Release Number
89639 (Aug. 21, 2020); 85 FR 53036 (Aug. 27, 2020) (File No. SR-ICC-
2020-009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposal would make the following additional clarifications in
Section 5 and throughout the STF. To distinguish between price- and
spread-based stress scenarios, ICC proposes to replace references to
COVID-19/Oil Crisis Scenarios in the current STF with references to
COVID-19/Oil Crisis Price Scenarios. The proposal would also
incorporate the COVID-19/Oil Crisis Spread Scenarios in the other
categories of scenarios, namely in Section 5.3 (hypothetically
constructed (forward looking) extreme but plausible market scenarios)
and Section 5.4 (extreme model response test scenarios), as well as in
Section 14 (interpretation of results).
    Additionally, the proposal would add text describing how the
existing stress scenarios for index option positions are integrated
within the current set of stress scenarios for CDS index and single
name instruments. The stress options-implied MAD scenarios are
currently generated for index option positions and are not applied to
portfolios independently, but rather, are directly incorporated into
the CDS stress scenarios. The proposed rule changes would clarify that
the stress options-implied MAD scenarios complement the underlying
stress scenarios (in Section 6) and reference proposed Section 9 for
more detail on the stress options-implied MAD approach (in Section 8).
    ICC proposes to add a new Section 9 to the STF, which would
memorialize the stress options-implied MAD scenarios and approach. As
described above, information from current Section 5.1 on these
scenarios would move to Section 9 with certain amendments. The proposed
amendments would not change ICC's stress testing methodology, but
instead would add detail and updated terminology for clarity. The
proposed language would explain that when index options are present in
a portfolio, the underlying market stress test scenarios incorporate
the stress options-implied MAD scenarios. ICC proposes terminology
changes that would specify that the scenarios consider an increase/
decrease in the options-implied MAD upon spread widening/tightening and
clarification changes would detail the incorporation of the options-
implied MAD in the scenarios. The proposed changes are intended to more
clearly set forth the process for creation of the stress options-
implied MAD, including how the necessary components are derived. No
changes are proposed with respect to what the final scenario prices of
the index option instruments reflect. ICC also proposes to renumber
sections throughout the STF as necessary, including in Table 1 in
Section 14. Finally, proposed Section 17 adds a revision history to
track changes.

B. LRMF

    ICC proposes corresponding changes to the LRMF to introduce new
stress scenarios related to the COVID-19/Oil Crisis, clarify existing
stress scenarios related to index options, and make other minor edits.
    ICC proposes to revise Section 2.3 of the LRMF regarding liquidity
requirements for client-related accounts. The proposed changes would
specify that Clearing Participants deposit 100% of their Euro
denominated client gross margin in any acceptable collateral to match
Schedule 401 in the ICC Rules. This is intended to be a clean-up change
to remove an outdated provision to ensure consistency across the LRMF
and ICC Rules and would not change current requirements.
    The proposed rule change would update Section 3.3.2 regarding the
historically observed extreme but plausible market scenarios. The
proposal would expand the set of extreme market events to include
COVID-19 and the simultaneous occurrence of the oil price war, and
would also make grammatical edits to change a term to its plural form.
Consistent with the STF, ICC previously introduced the COVID-19/Oil
Crisis price-based stress scenarios in the LRMF \6\ and proposes now to
incorporate the complementing COVID-19/Oil Crisis Spread Scenarios,
which are also referred to as the COVID-19 OCSS, in the LRMF. The
price-based stress scenarios would be referred to as the COVID-19/Oil
Crisis Price Scenarios or COVID-19 OCPS throughout the document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ICC also proposes revisions to Section 3.3.2 of the LRMF regarding
stress options-implied MAD scenarios. To ensure consistency with the
STF, ICC proposes adding language and changes in subsection (b) that
would be similar to the language proposed in the STF. The proposed rule
changes would memorialize the stress options-implied MAD scenarios and
approach more clearly in the LRMF, including how the scenarios for
index option positions are integrated within the current set of stress
scenarios for CDS index and single name instruments. The proposed
amendments would not change ICC's liquidity risk management
methodology, but would instead add detail and update terminology to be
clearer. The proposed terminology changes would specify that the
scenarios consider an increase/decrease in the options-implied MAD and
clarification changes would detail the incorporation of the options-
implied MAD in the scenarios. The proposed changes are intended to more
clearly set forth the process for the creation of the stress options-
implied MAD, including how the necessary components are derived. No
changes are proposed with respect to what the final scenario prices of
the index option instruments reflect. ICC proposes a typographical fix
in the footnotes to refer to the correct reference document. In
addition, the proposal would amend subsection (d) to add a section
symbol and to set out how the stress options-implied MAD scenarios that
complement the extreme model response test scenarios are derived to
match language currently in the STF.
    ICC also proposes minor updates to Section 3.3 of the LRMF.
Specifically, the proposal would incorporate the COVID-19/Oil Crisis
Spread Scenarios in Section 3.3.3 in Table 1 containing the liquidity
stress testing scenarios and in Section 3.3.4 related to the
interpretation of results. The proposed rule changes would also make a
minor edit to the extreme market scenarios in Table 1 to specify that
the COVID19OCPS are extreme.

III. Discussion of Commission Findings

    Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act directs the Commission to approve a
proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that
such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the
Act and the

rules and regulations thereunder applicable to such organization.\7\
For the reasons discussed below, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \8\ and
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii) and (vi), and Rule 17Ad-22 (e)(7)(i) and (vi)
thereunder.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii) and (vi) and 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22
(e)(7)(i) and (vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Consistency With Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act

    Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, among other things, that
the rules of ICC be designed to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions and, to the extent
applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and transactions, as well
as to assure the safeguarding of securities and funds which are in the
custody or control of ICC or for which it is responsible.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, the proposal would incorporate into the STF and
LRMF spread-based stress scenarios related to the COVID-19/Oil Crisis,
which reflect observed relative spread increases and decreases during
this period and which complement previously introduced the COVID-19/Oil
Crisis price-based stress scenarios. By adding spread-based stress
scenarios related to the COVID-19/Oil Crisis, the Commission believes
the proposed rule change should enhance ICC's ability to manage risks
in a way that makes it more flexible and capable of considering events
beyond, for instance, price-based stress scenarios. The Commission
believes that considering additional stress scenarios should, in turn,
increase the likelihood that ICC calculates and collects sufficient
financial resources to mitigate its potential exposures. Managing such
exposures should, in turn, enhance ICC's ability to manage the default
of a clearing participant by continuing to promptly and accurately
clear and settle securities transactions.
    Additionally, as noted above, the proposed rule change would, while
not changing ICC's methodology, clarify in both the STF and LRMF that
the stress options-implied MAD scenarios are integrated within the
current set of stress scenarios for CDS index and single name
instruments. Further, the proposed rule change would reorganize the STF
to memorialize the stress options-implied MAD scenarios and approach in
a separate section. The proposed language would explain that when index
options are present in a portfolio, the underlying market stress test
scenarios incorporate the stress options-implied MAD scenarios.
Proposed terminology changes would specify that the scenarios consider
an increase/decrease in the options-implied MAD upon spread widening/
tightening, and clarification changes would detail the incorporation of
the options-implied MAD in the scenarios. Further, the proposed changes
would more clearly set forth the creation of the stress options-implied
MAD, including how the necessary components are derived. The proposed
rule change would also make various clean-up changes detailed above.
For example, the proposed rule change would make grammatical edits,
renumber sections, make changes to distinguish between price and spread
COVID-19/Oil Crisis scenarios, and specify that Clearing Participants
deposit 100% of their Euro denominated client gross margin in any
acceptable collateral in order to match Schedule 401 in the ICC Rules.
The Commission believes that these proposed organizational and clean-up
changes would enhance the STF and LRMF used to support ICC's risk
management system by increasing readability, transparency, and clarity
regarding its practices, and therefore support the ability of those
utilizing these documents to manage risk and maintain adequate
financial resources, thereby promoting both the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions and the ability to
safeguard securities and funds.
    For these reasons, the Commission believes the proposed rule
changes are consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii) and (vi)

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii) requires ICC to establish, implement,
maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed, as applicable, to effectively identify, measure, monitor, and
manage its credit exposures to participants and those arising from its
payment, clearing, and settlement processes, including by maintaining
additional financial resources at the minimum to enable it to cover a
wide range of foreseeable stress scenarios that include, but are not
limited to, the default of the two participant families that would
potentially cause the largest aggregate credit exposure for ICC in
extreme but plausible market conditions.\12\ Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi)
\13\ requires ICC to establish, implement, maintain, and enforce
written policies and procedures reasonably designed, as applicable, to
effectively identify, measure, monitor, and manage its credit exposures
to participants and those arising from its payment, clearing, and
settlement processes, including by testing the sufficiency of its total
financial resources available to meet the minimum financial resource
requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii).\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii).
    \13\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(vi).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposed introduction of the
COVID-19/Oil Crisis Spread Scenarios would complement the current
scenarios in the risk management policies and procedures and add
additional insight into potential weaknesses in the ICC risk management
methodology, thereby widening the range of stress scenarios that ICC
employs to manage its credit exposures and financial resources.
Additionally, the Commission believes that the proposed changes noted
above to add detail, update terminology, ensure consistency across the
STF and LRMF, and more clearly describe the stress options-implied MAD
scenarios, would ensure transparency and strengthen ICC's risk
management documentation, thereby supporting the effectiveness of ICC's
risk management system to cover a wide range of foreseeable stress
scenarios, including the COVID-19/Oil Crisis Spread Scenarios.
    The Commission also believes that the proposed clarification and
clean-up changes noted above would also enhance the readability of the
policies and procedures, thereby strengthening the documentation for
its users and ensuring that it remains up-to-date, clear, and
transparent to support the effectiveness of ICC's risk management
system.
    For these reasons, the Commission believes that the proposed rule
changes are therefore consistent with the requirements of Rules 17Ad-
22(e)(4)(ii) and (e)(4)(vi).\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii) and (vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(i) and (vi)

    Rule 17Ad-22(e)(7)(i) requires ICC to establish, implement,
maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed, as applicable, to effectively measure, monitor, and manage
the liquidity risk that arises in or is borne by it, including
measuring, monitoring, and managing its settlement and funding flows on
an ongoing and timely basis, and its use of intraday

liquidity by maintaining sufficient liquid resources at the minimum in
all relevant currencies to effect same-day and, where appropriate,
intraday and multiday settlement of payment obligations with a high
degree of confidence under a wide range of foreseeable stress scenarios
that includes, but is not limited to, the default of the participant
family that would generate the largest aggregate payment obligation for
ICC in extreme but plausible market conditions.\16\ Rule 17Ad-
22(e)(7)(vi) \17\ requires ICC to establish, implement, maintain, and
enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed, as
applicable, to effectively measure, monitor, and manage the liquidity
risk that arises in or is borne by it, including determining the amount
and regularly testing the sufficiency of the liquid resources held for
purposes of meeting the minimum liquid resource requirement under Rule
17Ad-22(e)(7)(i).\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(i).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(vi).
    \18\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that the proposed changes noted above
provide further clarity and transparency regarding ICC's liquidity
stress testing practices to strengthen the documentation surrounding
ICC's liquidity stress testing and liquidity risk management, including
by providing additional scenario descriptions. The Commission believes
that the introduction of the COVID-19/Oil Crisis Spread Scenarios would
complement the current scenarios and, in turn, widen the range of
stress scenarios that ICC employs to monitor and manage its liquidity
risks. The Commission further believes that introduction of the COVID-
19/Oil Crisis Spread Scenarios would improve ICC's testing of the
sufficiency of its liquid resources, by providing additional insights
and information using spread-based scenarios.
    The Commission believes that the proposed clarification and clean-
up changes provide further clarity and transparency regarding ICC's
liquidity risk management practices in the LRMF, including by promoting
uniformity with the STF, ensuring consistency between the LRMF and the
ICC Rules regarding the client-related liquidity requirements, and
ensuring that information and references are current, including in
Table 1 which sets out the liquidity stress testing scenarios. The
Commission believes that these proposed changes would strengthen ICC's
STF and LRMF and aid users of the documentation in managing ICC's
liquid resources.
    For the reasons stated above, the Commission believes that the
proposed rule changes are consistent with Rules 17Ad-22(e)(7)(i) and
(vi).\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(7)(i) and (vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act,
and in particular, with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Act \20\ and Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii) and (vi), and Rule 17Ad-22
(e)(7)(i) and (vi) thereunder.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
    \21\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii) and (vi) and (e)(7)(i) and
(vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is therefore ordered pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\22\ that the proposed rule change (SR-ICC-2022-008), be, and hereby
is, approved.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \23\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-17947 Filed 8-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


SF 83 SUPPORTING STATEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Standards of Performance NSPS Subpart PP Ammonium Sulfate Manufacturing Plants 1. Identification of the Information Collection 1( a) Title of the Information Collection ICR for NSPS Subpart PP B Ammonium Sulfate Manufacturing Plants Subject to New Source Performance Standards 1( b) Short Characterization/ Abstract The New Source Performance Standards ( NSPS) for ammonium sulfate manufacturing industry were proposed on February 4, 1980, and promulgated on November 12, 1980. These standards apply to each ammonium sulfate dryer within an ammonium sulfate manufacturing plant in the caprolactam, synthetic, and coke oven by products sectors of the ammonium sulfate manufacturing industry for which construction, modification or reconstruction commenced after the date of proposal. The Agency estimates that there are two sources subject to the standard, based on the pre existing number of applicable sources and the static nature of the industry. It is estimated that no additional sources will become subject to the standard over the next three years. This information is based on discussions with EPA personnel knowledgeable about the ammonium sulfate industry. The industry is dominated by facilities that have been operating since prior to the proposed date of the rule ( February 4, 1980), and there has been a long term static or declining market for the product both domestically and globally. The average annual cost to industry over the next three years of the ICR is estimated to be $ 10,027. Particulate matter is the pollutant regulated under this Subpart. The standards limit particulate emissions to 0.15 kg per megagram of ammonium sulfate produced and exhaust gases to 15 percent opacity.

Owners or operators of the affected facilities described must make the following one timeonly reports: notification of the date of construction or reconstruction; notification of the anticipated and actual dates of startup; notification of any physical or operational change to an existing facility which may increase the regulated pollutant emission rate; and the notification of the date of the initial performance test. Owners or operators are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility. These notifications, reports and records are required, in general, of all sources subject to NSPS.

Recordkeeping requirements specific to the ammonium sulfate industry provides information on the amount of ammonium sulfate processed and the operation of the emission control device. Owners or operators of affected facilities are required to install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a flow monitoring device which can be used to determine the mass flow of ammonium sulfate feed material to the process, and which has an accuracy of ± 5 percent across  2 its operating range. However, if the plant uses weight scales of the same accuracy to directly measure production rate of ammonium sulfate, the use of flow monitoring devices is not required. Owners or operators of all affected facilities shall install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a monitoring device which continuously measures and permanently records the total pressure drop across the emission control system. The capital costs of installing flow and pressure drop monitoring devices is a one time only expense incurred at the startup of an affected facility. No capital/ startup costs are applicable unless new facilities are established.

Therefore, the recordkeeping requirements for ammonium sulfate plants consist of the occurrence and duration of all start ups and malfunctions as described, the initial performance tests results, amount of ammonium sulfate feed material, and the pressure drop across the emission control system. Records of startups, shutdowns and malfunctions shall be noted as they occur. Records of the performance test should include information necessary to determine the conditions of the performance test, and performance test measurements ( including pressure drop across the emission control system) and results. The CMS shall record pressure drop across the scrubbers continuously and automatically.

The reporting requirements for this industry include the initial notifications listed, and the initial performance test results. All reports are sent to the delegated State or local authority. In the event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are sent directly to the EPA Regional Office. Notifications are used to inform the Agency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the standard. The reviewing authority may then inspect the source to check if the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated and the standard is being met. Performance test records are needed as these are the Agency's record of a source's initial capability to comply with the emission standard. This industry is not required to submit excess emission reports.

2. Need for and Use of the Collection 2( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection The EPA is charged under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, to establish standards of performance for new stationary sources that reflect:

. . . application of the best technological system of continuous emissions reduction which ( taking into consideration the cost of achieving such emissions reduction, or any nonair quality health and environmental impact and energy requirements) the Administrator determines has been adequately demonstrated [ Section lll( a)( l)].

The Agency refers to this charge as selecting the best demonstrated technology ( BDT). Section 111 also requires that the Administrator review and, if appropriate, revise such standards every four years. In addition, Section 114( a) states that:  3 . . . the Administrator may require any owner or operator subject to any requirement of this Act to ( A) establish and maintain such records, ( B) make such reports, ( C) install, use and maintain such monitoring equipment or methods ( in accordance with such methods at such locations, at such intervals, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe), and ( D) provide such other information, as he may reasonably require.

In the Administrator's judgment, particulate emissions from the ammonium sulfate manufacturing industry cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. Therefore, NSPS were promulgated for this source category at 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart PP. . 2( b) PRACTICAL UTILITY/ USERS OF THE DATA The control of particulate emissions from ammonium sulfate facilities requires not only the installation of properly designed equipment, but also the operation and maintenance of that equipment. Particulate emissions from this industry are the result of the production of any ammonium sulfate product. These standards rely on control equipment such as a wet scrubbing control device.

In order to ensure compliance with these standards, adequate recordkeeping is necessary. In the absence of such information, enforcement personnel would be unable to determine whether the standards are being met on a continuous basis, as required by the Clean Air Act.

Source data and information requirements for ammonium sulfate manufacturing processes are outlined in Table 1. The standards require initial notification reports with respect to construction, modification, reconstruction, startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions. The standards also require recordkeeping to document information relating to the gas pressure drop across each emission control device.

Notification of construction and startup indicates to enforcement personnel when a new affected facility has been constructed and therefore is subject to the standards. The recordkeeping described above and the semiannual reports of excess emissions are used by the Agency to ensure that facilities affected by the NSPS continue to operate the control equipment used to achieve compliance with the NSPS.

Information is recorded in sufficient detail to enable owners or operators to demonstrate compliance with the standards. If the information required by the standards were not collected, the Agency would have no means for ensuring that compliance with the NSPS is achieved and maintained by new, modified, or reconstructed sources subject to the regulations. Under these circumstances, an owner or operator could elect to reduce operating expenses by not installing, maintaining, or otherwise operating the control technology required by the standards. In the absence of the information collection requirements, compliance with the standards could be ensured only through continuous on site inspections by regulatory agency personnel.  4 Consequently, not collecting the information would result in either greatly increased expenditures of resources, or the inability to ensure compliance with the standards.

The information collected from recordkeeping and reporting requirements is also used for targeting inspections, and is of sufficient quality to be used as evidence in court.

3. Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria 3( a) Nonduplication Certain reports or records required by State or local agencies may duplicate information required by this rule. In such cases, a copy of the report submitted to the State or local agency may be sent to the Administrator in lieu of the report required by these standards.

There are no other sources of similar information since the standards ask for records of daily feed rate unique to each ammonium sulfate plant.

3( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB An announcement of a public comment period for the renewal of this ICR was published in the Federal Register on April 18, 2000.

3( c) Consultations No comments were received in response to the published federal register notice. In addition to soliciting public comment, Agency program personnel with expertise in this industry were consulted.

3( d) Effects of less Frequent Collection If the information required by these standards was collected less frequently, the main consequence would be that the chances of detecting poor operation and maintenance of control equipment would decrease. Less frequent information collection would decrease the margin of assurance that facilities are continuing to meet the required standards. Requirements for information gathering and recordkeeping are useful techniques to ensure that good operation and maintenance practices are applied and emission limitations are met.

3( e) General Guidelines None of the reporting or recordkeeping requirements contained in 40 CFR Part 60 or otherwise pertinent to this request violate any of the regulations established by OMB in 5 CFR 1320.6.  5 3( f) Confidentiality and Sensitive Questions Any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 2, Subpart B  Confidentiality of Business Information ( see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

3( g) Sensitive Questions None of the reporting or recordkeeping requirements contained in 40 CFR Part 60 or otherwise pertinent to this request contain sensitive questions.

4. The Respondents and the Information Requested 4( a) Respondents/ SIC Codes The respondents of the recordkeeping requirements are ammonium sulfate manufacturing facilities ( SIC Code 2873) that commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction after February 4, 1980.

4( b) INFORMATION REQUESTED i. Data Items Reporting Provide notification of  construction/ reconstruction,  anticipated startup,  actual startup, and  initial performance test. Record  daily ammonium sulfate feed rate,  initial performance test results,  startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions, and  control device operating parameters ( continuous). ii. Respondent Activities Read instructions. Perform initial performance test, and repeat performance tests. Write the notifications listed above. Enter information required to be recorded above.  6 5. The Information Collected  Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management 5( a) Agency Activities EPA conducts no activities in connection with the acquisition, analysis, storage, and distribution of the information required under 40 CFR Subpart PP. No new facilities are anticipated to open during the next three years. The only requirement for existing facilities is recordkeeping by the respondents, which does not require activity by the Agency.

5( b) Collection Methodology and Management All reports are sent to the delegated State or local authority. In the event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are sent directly to the EPA Regional Office. Notifications are used to inform the Agency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the standard. Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority might inspect the source to check if the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated. Data obtained during periodic visits by Agency personnel from records maintained by the respondents are tabulated and published for internal Agency use in compliance and enforcement programs.

Information contained in the reports is entered into the Aerometric Information Retrieval System ( AIRS) Facility Subsystem ( AFS) which is operated and maintained by EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. The AFS is EPA's database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance and annual emission inventory data for over 100,000 industrial and government owned facilities. EPA uses AFS for tracking air pollution compliance and enforcement by local and State regulatory agencies, EPA Regional Offices and Headquarters. EPA can edit, store, retrieve and analyze the data via PC terminals.

The records required by this NSPS must be retained by the owner or operator for ( two) years.

5( c) Small Entity Flexibility Currently the number of employees at a typical ammonium sulfate plant exceeds the criterion for small business. No new facilities are expected within the next three years; thus this information collection requirement is not anticipated to impact small businesses.

5( d) Collection Schedule The information collection activity within this request consists of daily ( 365 per year) recordkeeping occurrences of 0.25 hours each.  7 6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection Table 1 documents the computation of individual burdens for each of the recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the industry. The individual burdens are expressed under standardized headings believed to be consistent with the concept of burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Where appropriate, specific tasks and major assumptions have been identified. Responses to this information collection are mandatory as required at 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart PP. The Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden The average annual burden to industry over the next three years from these recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated at 182 ( total from industry table) person hours. These hours are based on Agency studies and background documents from the development of the standards or test methods, Agency knowledge and experience with the ( NSPS, NESHAP, MACT) program, the previously approved ICR, and any comments received about time to prepare reports.

6( b) Estimating Respondent Costs This ICR uses a technical labor rate of $ 54.94 per hour including110 per cent overhead to determine the cost to respondents. This rate is from the United States Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 1999, Table 10: Employment Costs for Private Industry by Occupational and Industry Group. The rates are from column 1: Total compensation. The wage rates have been loaded by adding 110% overhead. The average annual cost to industry over the next three years of the ICR is estimated to be $ 10,027.

The only type of industry costs associated with the information collection activity in the standards are labor costs.

6( c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost The only Federal costs are user costs associated with analysis of the reported information. Publication and distribution of the information are part of the Aerometric Information Retrieval System ( AIRS) Facility Subsystem ( AFS) which is operated and maintained by the EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards with the result that no Federal costs can be directly attributed to the ICR. Examination of records to be maintained by the respondents will occur incidentally as part of the periodic inspection of sources, which is part of EPA's overall compliance and enforcement program.

Since the Agency burden is associated with the analysis of reported information, and reporting is only associated with the construction or reconstruction of facilities, and no such  8 construction or reconstruction is anticipated in the next three years, no Agency burden is anticipated in this ICR.

6( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs The number of existing sources subject to 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart PP is 2. No new sources are anticipated. The total annual labor costs are $ 10,027. There are no annual capital and operating/ maintenance costs to the regulated entity. Details upon which this estimate is based appear in Table 1: Industry Burden.

6( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours And Cost Tables ( See Table 1, attached)

6( f) Reasons for Change in Burden There is no change in burden from the existing ICR.

6( g) Burden Statement Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, Office of Environmental Information ( OEI), U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mail code 2822, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, D. C. 20460; and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Include the EPA ICR number 1066.03 and OMB control number 2060 0032 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in collecting this information.


[Federal Register: February 25, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 37)]
[Notices]
[Page 10093-10094]
[DOCID:fr25fe08-141]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Office of
Hazardous Materials Safety; Notice of Applications for Modification of
Special Permit

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION:  List of applications for modification of special permit.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures governing the application
for, and the processing of, special permits from the Department of
Transportation's Hazardous Material Regulations (49 CFR Part 107,
Subpart B), notice is hereby given that the Office of Hazardous
Materials Safety has received the application described herein. This
notice is abbreviated to expedite docketing and public notice. Because
the sections affected, modes of transportation, and the nature of
application have been shown in earlier Federal Register publications,
they are not repeated here. Request of modifications of special permits
(e.g. to provide for additional hazardous materials, packaging design
changes, additional mode of transportation, etc.) are described in
footnotes to the application number. Application numbers with the
suffix ``M'' denote a modification request. There applications have
been separated from the new application for special permits to
facilitate processing.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 10, 2008.
    Address Comments To: Record Center, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Washington, DC 20590.
    Comments should refer to the application number and be submitted in
triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of comments is desired, include
a self-addressed stamped postcard showing the special permit number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Copies of the applications are
available for inspection in the Records Center, East building, PHH-30,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, Southeast, Washington, DC or at http://
dms.dot.gov.
    This notice of receipt of applications for modification of special
permit is published in accordance with Part 107 of the Federal
hazardous materials transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5117(b); 49 CFR
1.53(b)).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 19, 2008.
Delmer F. Billings,
Director, Office of Hazardous Materials, Special Permits and Approvals.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Regulation(s)     Nature of special permit
   Application No.          Docket No.             Applicant             affected                thereof
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Modification Special Permits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8215-M...............                         Olin Corporation,     49 CFR Part 172,     To modify the special
                                              Brass and             Subpart E;           permit to authorize the
                                              Winchester, Inc.,     172.320;             use of a Division 1.1
                                              East Alton, IL.       173.62(c); 173.230.  placard.
 8723-M..............  ....................   Alaska Pacific        49 CFR 172.101;      To modify the special
                                              Powder Company,       173.62; 173.242;     permit to authorize an
                                              Anchorage, AK.        176.83; 177.848.     additional container
                                                                                type.
 11818-M.............  ....................   ITT Industries        49 CFR 180.205....   To modify the special
                                              Space Systems, LLC,                        permit to authorize the
                                              Rochester, NY.                             transportation in
                                                                                commerce of an
                                                                                additional Division 2.2
                                                                                gas and to increase the
                                                                                maximum width of
                                                                                capillary pumped loops.
 12440-M.............  ....................   Luxfer Gas            49 CFR 173.301(h);   To modify the special
                                              Cylinders,            173.302(a);          permit to establish
                                              Riverside, CA.        178.46(a)(4);        additional testing
                                                                    178.46(c)(i).        matrix guidelines.
 13207-M.............  ....................   BEI, Honolulu, HI..   49 CFR               To modify the special
                                                                    173.32(f)(5).        permit to authorize
                                                                                additional portable
                                                                                tanks for the
                                                                                transportation in
                                                                                commerce of sulfuric
                                                                                acid.
 14333-M.............  ....................   The Columbiana        49 CFR 179.300-      To modify the special
                                              Boiler Co.,           13(b).               permit to authorize a
                                              Columbiana, OH.                            new design in securing/
                                                                                sealing hex plugs.
 14393-M.............  ....................   Hamilton              49 CFR 173.306(e)    To modify the special
                                              Sundstrand, Windsor   (iii), (iv), (v)     permit to authorize the
                                              Locks, CT.            and (vi);            transportation in
                                                                    173.307(a)(4)(iv).   commerce of new
                                                                                supplemental cooling
                                                                                unit refrigeration
                                                                                machines with
                                                                                alternative safety
                                                                                devices as a component
                                                                                part of an aircraft.
 14496-M.............  ....................   Oilphase Division,    49 CFR 173.201(c),   To modify the special
                                              Schlumberger Eval.    173.202(c),          permit to authorize
                                              & Production (UK)     173.203(c),          minor revisions to the
                                              Ltd Dyce, Aberdeen,   173.301(f),          non-DOT specification
                                              UK.                   173.302(a),          oil well sampling
                                                                    173.304(a),          cylinder.
                                                                    173.304(d), 175.3.
 14544-M.............  ....................   DS Containers,        49 CFR               To modify the special
                                              Inc., Batavia, IL.    173.306(a)(3)(v).    permit to authorize
                                                                                additional non-DOT
                                                                                specification
                                                                                containers.

 14568-M.............  ....................   Department of         49 CFR 173.431....   To reissue the special
                                              Defense, Ft.                               permit originally
                                              Eustis, VA.                                issued on an emergency
                                                                                basis for the
                                                                                transportation in
                                                                                commerce of portable
                                                                                nuclear gauges
                                                                                containing certain
                                                                                radioactive materials
                                                                                exceeding the quantity
                                                                                that may be transported
                                                                                in a Type A packaging.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 08-813 Filed 2-22-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4909-60-M


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 13 (Friday, January 20, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2967-2968]
[FR Doc No: 2012-1042]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP12-302-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company,
    Description: Revise Sections 2.4 and 2.5 (PS and ACQ) of Rate
Schedule FT to be effective 2/11/2012.
    Filed Date: 1/11/12.
    Accession Number: 20120111-5115.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-303-000.
    Applicants: Midcontinent Express Pipeline LLC.
    Description: Annual Report of Operational Purchases and Sales of
Midcontinent Express Pipeline LLC.
    Filed Date: 1/11/12.
    Accession Number: 20120111-5129.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-304-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Transmission, Inc.
    Description: DTI--January 11, 2012--Nonconforming Service Agreement
to be effective 1/15/2012.
    Filed Date: 1/11/12.
    Accession Number: 20120111-5136.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-305-000
    Applicants: Discovery Gas Transmission LLC.
    Description: Footnote 4 Removal to be effective 1/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 1/11/12.
    Accession Number: 20120111-5175.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-306-000.
    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.
    Description: Non-Conforming Agreement Filing--GeoMet Operating
Company, Inc. to be effective 1/1/2012.
    Filed Date: 1/11/12.
    Accession Number: 20120111-5225.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/23/12.

    Docket Numbers: RP12-307-000
    Applicants: Texas Eastern Transmission, LP.
    Description: Submits tariff filing per 154.204: Duke Energy Indiana
Negotiated Rate to be effective 1/12/2012.
    Filed Date: 1/12/12.
    Accession Number: 20120112-5055.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/24/12.

    Docket Numbers: CP12-42-000.
    Applicants: Liberty Energy (Midstates) Corporation
    Description: Application for Limited Jurisdiction Blanket
Certificate, and Approval of Rates.
    Filed Date: 1/4/12.
    Accession Number: 20120104-5143.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 12/25/12.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing

requirements, interventions, protests, and service can be found at:
http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other
information, call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-
8659.

    Dated: January 12, 2012.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-1042 Filed 1-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P