[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 51 (Thursday, March 16, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 16301]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05365]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Intent To Release Certain Properties From All Terms,
Conditions, Reservations and Restrictions of a Quitclaim Deed Agreement
Between the City of Lakeland and the Federal Aviation Administration
for the Lakeland Linder Regional Airport, Lakeland, FL

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA hereby provides notice of intent to release 0.69 acres
at the Lakeland Linder Regional Airport, Lakeland, FL from the
conditions, reservations, and restrictions as contained in a Quitclaim
Deed agreement between the FAA and the City of Lakeland, dated
September 26, 1947. The release of property will allow the City of
Lakeland to use the property for other than aeronautical purposes. The
property is located off of Air Park Drive at the Lakeland Linder
Regional Airport in Polk County. The parcel is currently designated as
surplus property. The property will be released of its federal
obligations for the purpose of selling the property at fair market
value for construction of commercial/industrial development. The fair
market value lease of this parcel has been determined to be $120,000.
Documents reflecting the Sponsor's request are available, by
appointment only, for inspection at the Lakeland Linder Regional
Airport and the FAA Airports District Office.

DATES: Comments are due on or before April 17, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Documents are available for review at Melbourne
International Airport, and the FAA Airports District Office, 8427
SouthPark Circle, Suite 524, Orlando, FL 32819. Written comments on the
Sponsor's request must be delivered or mailed to: Marisol Elliott,
Community Planner, Orlando Airports District Office, 8427 SouthPark
Circle, Suite 524, Orlando, FL 32819.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marisol Elliott<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Community Planner, Orlando Airports District Office, 8427 SouthPark
Circle, Suite 524, Orlando, FL 32819.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 125 of The Wendell H. Ford Aviation
Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR-21) requires the
FAA to provide an opportunity for public notice and comment prior to
the ``waiver'' or ``modification'' of a sponsor's Federal obligation to
use certain airport land for non-aeronautical purposes.

Bartholomew Vernace,
Manager, Orlando Airports District Office, Southern Region.
[FR Doc. 2023-05365 Filed 3-15-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 188 (Friday, September 29, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45631-45634]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20892]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-81717; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2017-96]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Rule 6.40-
O To Allow Certain Order Types To Be Excluded From the Risk Limitation
Mechanism

September 25, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the ``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby
given that on September 11, 2017, NYSE Arca, Inc. (the ``Exchange'' or
``NYSE Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit

comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 6.40-O (Risk Limitation
Mechanism) to allow certain order types to be excluded from the risk
limitation mechanism. The proposed rule change is available on the
Exchange's Web site at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 6.40-O (Risk Limitation
Mechanism) to allow certain order types to be excluded from the risk
limitation mechanism. Specifically, the Exchange proposes to provide
OTP Holder and OTP Firms (collectively, ``OTPs'') with the option to
exclude Immediate-Or-Cancel (``IOC'') orders from being counted against
risk limitation thresholds.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ An IOC order is ``[a] Limit Order that is to be executed in
whole or in part on the Exchange as soon as such order is received,
and the portion not so executed is to be canceled.'' See Rule
6.62(k).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Risk Limitation Mechanisms
    The Exchange offers OTPs the option of utilizing risk limitation
settings to assist OTPs in managing risk related to submitting orders
during periods of increased and significant trading activity.\5\ An OTP
can utilize one of three risk limitation mechanisms for its orders--
based on the number of transactions executed, the number of contracts
traded, or the percent of the OTP's order size--which automatically
cancels such orders when certain parameter settings are breached.\6\
The Exchange maintains trade counters that increment based on the
number of trades executed, either from a single-leg order or any leg of
a Complex Order, in any series in a specified class.\7\ The trade
counters reset after an Exchange-determined time period.\8\ When an OTP
has breached its risk settings (i.e., has traded more than the contract
or volume limit or cumulative percentage limit of a class during the
specified measurement interval), the Exchange will cancel all of the
OTP's open orders in that class until the OTP notifies the Exchange it
will resume submitting orders.\9\ The temporary suspension of orders
from the market that results when the risk settings are triggered is
meant to operate as a safety valve that enables OTPs to re-evaluate
their positions before requesting to re-enter the market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Commentary .04(b) to Rule 6.40-O (providing that OTPs
may avail themselves of one of the three risk limitation mechanisms
for certain of their orders). Under the current Rule, Market Makers
are required to utilize the risk limitation settings for quotes and
the Exchange is not proposing to alter any aspect of this Rule in
this regard. See also Commentary .04(a) to Rule 6.40-O; and Rule
6.40(b)(2), (c)(2), (d)(2) and (e)(2).
    \6\ See Rule 6.40-O(b)(1), (c)(1), (d)(1) and Commentaries .01
to Rule 6.40-O (regarding the cancellation of orders once the risk
settings have been breached).
    \7\ See Rule 6.40-O(a)(1), (f). See also Commentaries .05-.07 to
Rule 6.40 (regarding the operation of the trade counters).
    \8\ See Commentary .06 to Rule 6.40-O.
    \9\ See Commentaries .01 and .02 to Rule 6.40-O (requiring that
an OTP request that it be re-enabled after a breach of its risk
settings). In the event that an OTP experiences multiple, successive
triggers of its risk settings, the Exchange would cancel all of the
open orders--as opposed to cancelling only those in the option class
(underlying symbol) in which the risk settings were triggered. See
Rule 6.40-O(f) and Commentary .02 to Rule 6.40-O.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Exclusion of IOC Orders From Risk Settings
    Under the current Rule, an OTP may activate a Risk Limitation
Mechanism, and corresponding settings, for orders in a specified class
and, once activated, the mechanism and the settings established will
remain active unless, and until, the OTP deactivates the Risk
Limitation Mechanism or changes the settings.\10\ Thus, once an OTP
activates risk settings for orders in a specified class, the risk
settings apply to all order types in that options class. The Exchange
proposes to modify the rule to provide an OTP that chooses to utilize
risk settings for its orders the option to exclude both single-legged
orders and Complex Orders designated as IOC from being considered by
the trade counter. To effect this change, proposed Commentary .07 to
Rule 6.40-O would be amended to provide that ``[a]ny OTP that activates
the Risk Limitation Mechanisms for orders pursuant to Commentary .04(b)
of this Rule may opt to exclude any orders (i.e., whether single-leg
orders or Complex Orders) designated with a time-in-force of IOC from
being considered by a trade counter.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Commentary .04(b) to Rule 6.40-O.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By their terms, IOC orders (or portions thereof) will cancel if not
immediately executed. As such, IOC orders are never ranked (as resting
interest) in the Consolidated Book. The Exchange believes that certain
OTPs utilize IOC orders to access liquidity on the Exchange. Thus, the
proposed change is designed to accommodate participants that utilize
IOCs in this manner by enabling them to exclude IOC orders from being
counted and avoid potentially triggering their risk settings
(prematurely), resulting in the cancellation of open orders. The
Exchange believes that providing OTPs this additional flexibility may
encourage more OTPs to utilize the risk settings, which benefits all
market participants. The Exchange also believes that the proposed
change would result in risk settings that may be better calibrated to
suit the needs of certain OTPs (i.e., those that routinely utilize IOC
orders to access liquidity on the Exchange), which improved risk
settings should encourage OTPs to direct additional order flow and
liquidity to the Exchange.
    The Exchange notes that the proposed change is limited to IOC
orders being counted towards whether a risk limitation threshold has
been reached. In the event an OTP breaches its risk limitation
settings, any new orders in the specified class, including incoming IOC
orders, sent by the OTP would be rejected until the OTP requests that
the Exchange enable the entry of new orders.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Commentary .02 to Rule 6.40-O.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Implementation
    The Exchange will announce by Trader Update the implementation date
of the proposed rule change, which implementation will be no later than
90 days after the effectiveness of this rule change.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\12\ in
general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\13\
in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative

acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to,
and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change removes
impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open market by
providing OTPs greater control and flexibility over setting their risk
tolerance, which may enhance the efficacy of the risk settings. By
their terms, IOC orders (or portions thereof) will cancel if not
immediately executed. As such, IOC orders are never ranked (as resting
interest) in the Consolidated Book. The Exchange believes that certain
market participants utilize IOC orders to access liquidity on the
Exchange. Thus, the proposed change is designed to accommodate
participants that utilize IOCs in this manner by enabling them to
exclude IOC orders from being counted and avoid potentially triggering
their risk settings (prematurely), resulting in the cancellation of
open orders. The Exchange believes that providing OTPs this additional
flexibility may encourage more OTPs to utilize the risk settings, which
benefits all market participants. Further, the proposed change would
promote just and equitable principles of trade because it would result
in risk settings that may be better calibrated to suit the needs of
certain OTPs (i.e., those that routinely utilize IOC orders to access
liquidity on the Exchange), which improved risk settings should
encourage OTPs to direct additional order flow and liquidity to the
Exchange. To the extent additional order flow is submitted to the
Exchange as a result of the proposed change, all market participants
stand to benefit from increased trading.
    The Exchange notes that an OTP has the option of utilizing risk
settings for all orders submitted to the Exchange and, as proposed,
would have the additional option of excluding from these risk settings
any IOC orders in a given options class submitted to the Exchange.
    This proposed change, which was specifically requested by some
OTPs, would foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
regulating, clearing, settling, and processing information with respect
to, and facilitating transactions in, securities as it will be
available to all OTPs on an optional basis and may encourage more OTPs
to utilize this enhanced functionality to [sic] benefit of all market
participants. Because the risk controls are designed to prevent the
execution of erroneously priced trades, the Exchange believes that any
proposal designed to increase the number of OTPs that utilize the
functionality would benefit all market participants.

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange is proposing a
market enhancement that would provide OTPs with greater control and
flexibility over setting their risk tolerance and, potentially, more
protection over risk exposure. The proposal is structured to offer the
same enhancement to all OTPs, regardless of size, and would not impose
a competitive burden on any participant. The Exchange does not believe
that the proposed enhancement to the existing risk limitation mechanism
would impose a burden on competing options exchanges. Rather, the
availability of this mechanism may foster more competition.
Specifically, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues. When an exchange offers enhanced functionality that
distinguishes it from the competition and participants find it useful,
it has been the Exchange's experience that competing exchanges will
move to adopt similar functionality. Thus, the Exchange believes that
this type of competition amongst exchanges is beneficial to the market
place [sic] as a whole as it can result in enhanced processes,
functionality, and technologies.

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

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

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

    Because the proposed rule change does not (i) significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative for 30
days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \14\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \15\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). As required under Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii), the Exchange provided the Commission with written
notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description and the text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(f)(6) under the
Act \16\ normally does not become operative for 30 days after the date
of its filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \17\ permits the
Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange
has asked the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that
the Exchange can implement the proposal without delay. The Exchange
believes that waiver of the operative delay would be consistent with
the protection of investors and the public interest because it would
enable the Exchange to implement without delay the proposed optional
functionality, which the Exchange believes may, in turn, encourage more
OTPs to utilize the optional risk settings for orders. Thus, the
Exchange believes waiver of the operative delay would protect investors
by enabling the Exchange to provide greater flexibility to its Risk
Limitation Mechanisms for orders, which may result in increased usage
of the risk settings to the benefit of all market participants. The
Commission believes that waiver of the operative delay is consistent
with the protection of investors and the public interest because it
will provide OTP Holders with the flexibility to exclude IOC orders
from consideration by a trade counter, which, the Exchange believes,
could encourage additional OTP Holders to use the risk limitation
settings. As noted above, the risk limitation settings are designed to
assist OTP Holders in managing risk related to submitting orders during
periods of increased and significant trading activity. Under the
proposal, the ability to exclude IOC orders from consideration by a
trade counter is optional; thus, an OTP Holder that utilizes the risk
limitation settings and wishes to continue to have its IOC orders
considered by a trade counter will be able to do so. Accordingly, the
Commission hereby waives the operative delay and designates the

proposed rule change operative upon filing.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
    \18\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission also has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or
disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NYSEArca-2017-96 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2017-96. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEArca-2017-96, and should
be submitted on or before October 20, 2017.

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

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

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-20892 Filed 9-28-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 187 (Tuesday, September 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59696-59697]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24814]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OEI-2006-0037; FRL-9472-3]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for
Review and Approval; Comment Request; Exchange Network Grants Progress
Reports (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that an Information
Collection Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an
existing approved collection. The ICR, which is abstracted below,
describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated
burden and cost.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before October 27,
2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OEI-
2006-0037, to (1) EPA online using http://www.regulations.gov (our
preferred method), by e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA
Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental
Information Docket, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB by mail to: Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention:
Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryan Humrighouse, Information Exchange
Services Division, Office of Information Collection (2823T),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number: 202-
566-1684; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB
for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR
1320.12. On June 28, 2011 (76 FR 37811), EPA sought comments on this
ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any
additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB
within 30 days of this notice.
    EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OEI-2006-0037, which is available for online viewing at
http://www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the OEI Docket in
the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>,
and the telephone number for the OEI Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at http://www.regulations.gov to submit or view public comments, access the index
listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in
the docket that are available electronically. Once in the system,
select ``docket search,'' then key in the docket ID number identified
above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether
submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public
viewing at http://www.regulations.gov as EPA receives them and without
change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, confidential
business information (CBI), or other information whose public
disclosure is restricted by statute. For further information about the
electronic docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
    Title: Exchange Network Grants Progress Reports (Renewal).
    ICR Numbers: EPA ICR No. 2207.04, OMB Control No. 2025-0006.
    ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on November 30, 2011.
Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor
the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB.
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
in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by
publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such
as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The
display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: This notice announces the collection of information
related to the U.S. EPA National Environmental Information Exchange
Network (NEIEN) Grant Program. The EPA Office of Environmental
Information provides funding to EPA's Exchange Network partners
(states, territories, and Federally recognized Indian Tribes) to
support the development of the NEIEN. The NEIEN is an Internet and-
standards-based, secure information system that supports the electronic
collection, exchange, and integration of data among its partners.
Funding for the Grant Program has been provided through annual
congressional appropriations for the EPA.
    To enhance the quality and overall public benefit of the Network,
EPA proposes to collect information from the NEIEN grantees about how
they intend to ensure quality in their projects and the environmental
outcomes and outputs from their projects. The proposed Quality
Assurance Reporting Form is intended to provide a simple means for
grant recipients to describe how quality will be addressed throughout
their projects. The Quality Assurance Reporting Form is derived from
guidelines provided in the NEIEN 2011 grant solicitation notice. As a
stipulation of their award, grant recipients are to submit the form
within ninety days of grant award.
    Grantees are currently required to submit semi-annual progress
reports as a stipulation of their award. In these reports, grantees
outline project goals, activities required to meet these goals, and
outputs and outcomes of activities to date. At the request of numerous
grantees, we are proposing to offer the Progress Reporting Form as a
vehicle for collecting information. This form is easier to complete
than an unstructured narrative; it can be used as the semi-annual and
final report form and the information returned will be of higher
quality and comparable.
    Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1
hour per response. 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 which have subsequently changed; 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.

    Respondents/Affected Entities: State, tribal, or territorial
environmental government offices.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 300.
    Frequency of Response: Twice per year for progress reporting;
annually for quality assurance reporting form.
    Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 956.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $37,370 in labor costs. There are no
annualized capital or O&M costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase of 223 hours in the
total estimated burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of
Approved ICR Burdens. This increase is due to an increase in the number
of grants that are currently active and the adjustments were made
accordingly.

    Dated: September 21, 2011.
John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2011-24814 Filed 9-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 189 (Thursday, September 29, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66810-66812]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23574]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2016-0825]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone: Monte Foundation Fireworks Extravaganza, Capitola,
CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in the
navigable waters at Capitola Wharf in Capitola, CA in support of Monte
Foundation Fireworks Extravaganza on October 9, 2016. This safety zone
is established to ensure the safety of mariners and spectators from the
dangers associated with the pyrotechnics. Unauthorized persons or
vessels are prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or
remaining in the safety zone without permission of the Captain of the
Port or their designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 8:30 p.m. to 9 p.m. on October 9,
2016.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2016-0825 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Junior Grade Christina Ramirez, U.S. Coast
Guard Sector San Francisco; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER> or email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Abbreviations

APA Administrative Procedure Act
COTP Captain of the Port
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register

A. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule without prior notice pursuant
to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a
rule without prior notice when the agency for good cause finds that
those procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the
public interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that
good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days
after publication in the Federal Register. The Coast Guard received the
information about the fireworks display on August 10, 2016, and the
fireworks display would occur before the rulemaking process would be
completed. Because of the dangers posed by the pyrotechnics used in
this fireworks display, the safety zone is necessary to provide for the
safety of event participants, spectators, spectator craft, and other
vessels transiting the event area. For those reasons, it would be
impracticable to publish an NPRM.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. For these same reasons, the Coast
Guard finds good cause for implementing this rule less than thirty days
before the effective date.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, 160.5; Department
of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1, which collectively
authorize the Coast Guard to establish safety zones.
    The Monte Foundation will sponsor the Monte Foundation Fireworks
Extravaganza on October 9, 2016, at Capitola Wharf in Capitola, CA in
approximate position 36[deg]58'10'' N., 121[deg]57'12'' W. (NAD 83) as
depicted in National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
Chart 18685. Upon the commencement of the fireworks display, a safety
zone is necessary to protect spectators, vessels, and other property
from the hazards associated with pyrotechnics.

C. Discussion of the Interim Rule

    This temporary safety zone will encompass the navigable waters
around the land based launch site at the Capitola Wharf in Capitola,
CA. Upon the commencement of the 25-minute fireworks display, scheduled
to begin at 8:30 p.m. on October 9, 2016, the safety zone will
encompass the navigable waters around the fireworks launch site within
a radius of 1,000 feet in approximate position 36[deg]58'10'' N.,
121[deg]57'12'' W. (NAD 83) for the Monte Foundation Fireworks
Extravaganza. At the conclusion of the fireworks display the safety
zone shall terminate.
    The effect of the temporary safety zone will be to restrict
navigation in the vicinity of the launch site until the conclusion of
the scheduled display. Except for persons or vessels authorized by the
Coast Guard Patrol Commander, no person or vessel may enter or remain
in the restricted area. These regulations are needed to keep spectators
and vessels away from the immediate vicinity of the launch site to
ensure the safety of participants, spectators, and transiting vessels.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive Orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.
1. Regulatory Planning and Review
    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing
rules, and of promoting flexibility. This rule has not been designated
a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866.
Accordingly, it has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget.
    We expect the economic impact of this rule will not rise to the
level of necessitating a full Regulatory Evaluation. The safety zone is
limited in duration, and is limited to a narrowly tailored geographic
area. In addition, although this rule restricts access to the waters
encompassed by the safety zone, the effect of this rule will not be
significant because the local waterway users will be notified via
public Broadcast Notice to Mariners to ensure the safety zone will
result in minimum impact. The entities most likely to be affected are
waterfront facilities, commercial vessels, and pleasure craft engaged
in recreational activities.
2. Impact on Small Entities
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    This rule may affect owners and operators of waterfront facilities,
commercial vessels, and pleasure craft engaged in recreational
activities and sightseeing. This safety zone would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
for the following reasons. This safety zone would be activated, and
thus subject to enforcement, for a limited duration. When the safety
zone is activated, vessel traffic could pass safely around the safety
zone. The maritime public will be advised in advance of this

safety zone via Broadcast Notice to Mariners.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
above.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.
3. Collection of Information
    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).
4. Federalism and Tribal Governments
    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and determined
that this rule does not have implications for federalism.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.
5. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.
6. Environment
    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that
this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This
rule involves a safety zone of limited size and duration. This rule is
categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of
Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis
checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion
Determination are available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule.
7. Protest Activities
    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-802 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-802   Safety Zone; Monte Foundation Fireworks
Extravaganza, Capitola, CA.

    (a) Location. This safety zone is established in the navigable
waters at Capitola Wharf in Capitola, CA, as depicted in National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Chart 18685. The
temporary safety zone will encompass the navigable waters around the
fireworks launch site in approximate position 36[deg]58'10'' N.,
121[deg]57'12'' W. (NAD83) within a radius of 1,000 feet.
    (b) Enforcement period. The zone described in paragraph (a) of this
section will be enforced from 8:30 p.m. through 9 p.m. on October 9,
2016. The Captain of the Port San Francisco (COTP) will notify the
maritime community of periods during which this zone will be enforced
via Broadcast Notice to Mariners in accordance with Sec.  165.7.
    (c) Definitions. As used in this section, ``designated
representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a
Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer on a Coast Guard
vessel or a Federal, State, or local officer designated by or assisting
the COTP to assist in the patrol and enforcement of the safety zones.
    (d) Regulations. (1) Under the general regulations in subpart C of
this part, entry into, transiting or anchoring within this safety zone
is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or a designated
representative.
    (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the COTP or a designated representative.
    (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the COTP or a designated representative to obtain
permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or
operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to
them by the COTP or a designated representative. Persons and vessels
may request permission to enter the safety zone on VHF-23A or through
the 24-hour Command Center at telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 26, 2016.
Anthony J. Ceraolo,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2016-23574 Filed 9-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 16 (Friday, January 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4178-4180]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01323]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[Docket No. OSHA-2009-0035]

Standard on Ethylene Oxide; Extension of the Office of Management
and Budget's (OMB) Approval of Information Collection (Paperwork)
Requirements

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning its proposal to
extend OMB approval of the information collection requirements
specified in the Standard on Ethylene Oxide (EtO) (29 CFR 1910.1047).
The standard protects workers from adverse health effects from
occupational exposure to ethylene oxide.

DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by
March 25, 2014.

ADDRESSES:
    Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting
comments.
    Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-
1648.
    Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:
When using this method, you must submit a copy of your comments and
attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, OSHA Docket No. OSHA-2009-0035,
U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20210. Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier
service) are accepted during the Department of Labor's and Docket
Office's normal business hours, 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., e.t.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and the
OSHA docket number (OSHA-2009-0035) for the Information Collection
Request (ICR). All comments, including any personal information you
provide, are

placed in the public docket without change, and may be made available
online at http://www.regulations.gov. For further information on
submitting comments see the ``Public Participation'' heading in the
section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the
docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at
the address above. All documents in the docket (including this Federal
Register notice) are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index;
however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly
available to read or download from the Web site. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and
copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Theda Kenney at
the address below to obtain a copy of the ICR.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Theda Kenney or Todd Owen, Directorate
of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3609,
200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-
2222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent (i.e, employer) burden, conducts a
preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information
collection requirements in accord with the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (PRA-95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that
information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs)
is minimal, collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's
estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651
et seq.) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or
appropriate for enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing
information regarding the causes and prevention of occupational
injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also
requires OSHA to obtain such information with minimum burden upon
employers, especially those operating small businesses, and to reduce
to the maximum extent feasible unnecessary duplication of efforts in
obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657).
    The EtO Standard specifies a number of paperwork requirements. The
following is a brief description of the collection of information
requirements contained in the standard.
    The information collection requirements specified in the Ethylene
Oxide Standard protect workers from the adverse health effects that may
result from occupational exposure to ethylene oxide. The principal
information collection requirements in the EtO Standard include
conducting worker exposure monitoring, notifying workers of the
exposure, implementing a written compliance program, and implementing
medical surveillance of workers. Also, the examining physician must
provide specific information to ensure that workers receive a copy of
their medical examination results. The employer must maintain exposure-
monitoring and medical records for specific periods, and provide access
to these records by OSHA, the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health, the affected workers, and their authorized
representatives and other designated parties.

II. Special Issues for Comment

    OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
     Whether the proposed information collection requirements
are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions,
including whether the information is useful;
     The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and
costs) of the information collection requirements, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
     The quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and
     Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply;
for example, by using automated or other technological information
collection and transmission techniques.

III. Proposed Actions

    OSHA is requesting that OMB extend its approval of the information
collection requirements specified in the Ethylene Oxide Standard. The
Agency is requesting an overall adjustment decrease of 6,433 burden
hours, from 41,484 to 35,051 burden hours. The decrease in burden hours
is primarily due to the decrease in the number of hospital facilities,
from 4,001 to 3,155 facilities. The Agency will summarize the comments
submitted in response to this notice, and will include this summary in
its request to OMB.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Title: Standard on Ethylene Oxide (29 CFR 1910.1047).
    OMB Control Number: 1218-0108.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profits.
    Number of Respondents: 3,155.
    Frequency of Responses: On occasion.
    Total Responses: 204,878.
    Average Time per Response: Varies from five minutes (.08 hour) for
employers to maintain records to one hour for employers to update their
compliance plans.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 35,051.
    Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance): $5,910,696.

IV. Public Participation--Submission of Comments on This Notice and
Internet Access to Comments and Submissions

    You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1) Electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal
eRulemaking Portal; (2) by facsimile (fax); or (3) by hard copy. All
comments, attachments, and other material must identify the Agency name
and the OSHA docket number for the ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2009-0035). You
may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files
electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference
to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit them to the
OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled ADDRESSES).
The additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments
by your name, date, and the docket number so the Agency can attach them
to your comments.
    Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a
significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about
security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand,
express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the
OSHA Docket Office at<PHONE_NUMBER>, (TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>).
    Comments and submissions are posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about
submitting personal information such as social security numbers and
date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index, some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to read or download from this Web
site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available
for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on
using the http://

www.regulations.gov Web site to submit comments and access the docket
is available at the Web site's ``User Tips'' link. Contact the OSHA
Docket Office for information about materials not available from this
Web site and for assistance in using the Internet to locate docket
submissions.

V. Authority and Signature

    David Michaels, Ph.D., MPH, Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this
notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 et seq.) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 1-2012
(77 FR 3912).

    Signed at Washington, DC, on January 17, 2014.
David Michaels,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2014-01323 Filed 1-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-26-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 227 (Tuesday, November 24, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75003-75004]
[FR Doc No: 2020-25983]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2972-000]

City of Woonsocket (City); Notice of Authorization for Continued
Project Operation

    On November 1, 2018, City of Woonsocket, licensee for the
Woonsocket Falls Hydroelectric Project, filed an Application for a New
License pursuant to the Federal Power Act (FPA) and the Commission's
regulations thereunder. The Woonsocket Falls Hydroelectric Project is
on the Blackstone river in Woonsocket city and Providence county, Rhode
Island.
    The license for Project No.2972 was issued for a period ending
October 31, 2020. Section 15(a)(1) of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. 808(a)(1),
requires the Commission, at the expiration of a license term, to issue
from year-to-year an annual license to the then licensee under the
terms and conditions of the prior license until a new license is
issued, or the project is otherwise disposed of as provided in section
15 or any other applicable section of the FPA. If the project's prior
license waived the applicability of section 15 of the FPA, then, based
on section 9(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 558(c),
and as set forth at 18 CFR 16.21(a), if the licensee of such project
has filed an application for a subsequent license, the licensee may
continue to operate the project in accordance with the terms and
conditions of the license after the minor or minor part license
expires, until the Commission acts on its application. If the licensee
of such a project has not filed an application for a subsequent
license, then it may be required, pursuant to 18 CFR 16.21(b), to
continue project operations until the Commission issues someone else a
license for the project or otherwise orders disposition of the project.
    If the project is subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is
hereby given that an annual license for Project No.2972 is issued to
the City of Woonsocket for a period effective Nov 1, 2020 through
October 31, 2021, or until the issuance of a new license for the
project or other disposition under the FPA, whichever comes first. If
issuance of a new license (or other disposition) does not take place on
or before October 31, 2021, notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 18
CFR 16.18(c), an annual license under section 15(a)(1) of the FPA is
renewed automatically without further order or notice by the
Commission,

unless the Commission orders otherwise.
    If the project is not subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is
hereby given that the City of Woonsocket, is authorized to continue
operation of the Woonsocket Falls Hydroelectric Project, until such
time as the Commission acts on its application for a subsequent
license.

    Dated: November 17, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-25983 Filed 11-23-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: August 7, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 151)]
[Notices]
[Page 39719]
[DOCID:fr07au09-106]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request; Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension:
    Form T-3, OMB Control No. 3235-0105, SEC File No. 270-123.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for approval.
    Form T-3 (17 CFR 269.3) is an application for qualification of an
indenture under the Trust Indenture Act of 1939 (15 U.S.C. 77aaa et
seq.). The information provided by Form T-3 is used by the staff to
decide whether to qualify an indenture relating to securities offered
to the public in an offering registered under the Securities Act of
1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.). Form T-3 takes approximately 43 hours per
response to prepare and is filed by 78 respondents. We estimate that
25% of the 43 burden hours (11 hours per response) is prepared by the
filer for a total reporting burden of 858 hours (11 hours per response
x 78 responses).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether this proposed
collection of information is necessary for the performance of the
functions of the agency, including whether the information will have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the
burden imposed by the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will
be given to comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60
days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to Charles Boucher, Director/
CIO, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432
General Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312; or send an e-mail to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: August 3, 2009.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-18981 Filed 8-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


MEMORANDUM

FROM:  Keith Barnett, EPA/OAR/OAQPS/SPPD MMG

TO: Portland Cement Administrative Record

RE:  Meeting between the Portland Cement Association (PCA) and OMB

	On November 30, 2006, the Portland Cement Association met with
representatives of OMB.  In addition EPA staff (Keith Barnett, Steve
Fruh, Wendy Blake, Charlotte Bertrand) attended by phone, and Steve
Silverman attended in person.  OMB personnel were Art Fraas and other
OMB staff and management.  The PCA representatives included Andy
O’Hare, Davis Novello, and Fran Streitman.  The information presented
by the PCA is attached.