         Summary of Track Changes - Ventilation in Shipyard Employment

   1. Page 6, paragraph 3, line 6: Deletion.  "...atmosphere. If using supplied air then the motor must be. Also..."
   2. Page 6, paragraph 4,
         a. Line 2: "these" changed to "the"
         b. Line 3: Deletion. "type"
   3. Page 7, paragraph 2, line 7:"as well as have" changed to "and has"
   4. Page 8, paragraph 2,
         a. Line 3: "is" changed to "in"
         b. Line 5: "The" changed to "A"
   5. Page 8, paragraph 3, line 2: Insertion. "...space to maintain..."
   6. Page 9, last paragraph, line 2: Insertion. "...space where existing..."
   7. Page 10, paragraph 1, line 5: "uses" changed to "used"


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 132 (Tuesday, July 10, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40513-40515]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16780]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2012-0577]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Major Motion Picture Filming, Atlantic Intracoastal
Waterway; Southport, NC

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway near Southport, North Carolina. The
safety zone is intended to restrict vessels from a portion of the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway due to the filming of a movie involving
explosions and other dangerous stunts on water. The temporary safety
zone is necessary to protect the surrounding public and vessels from
the hazards associated with the stunts that will be performed on the
river during the filming of this motion picture.

DATES: This rule is effective from July 25, 2012, until August 3, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble are part of docket
[USCG-2012-0577]. To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type the
docket number in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rulemaking. You may also
visit the Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground
floor of the Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email BOSN4 Joseph M. Edge, Coast Guard Sector North Carolina,
Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If
you have questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket,
call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
(202) 366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Acronyms

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

A. Regulatory History and Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because the final details for this event was
not provided to the Coast Guard until June 10, 2012. As such, it is
impracticable to provide a full comment period due to lack of time. In
addition, given the high risks of injury and damage that will be
created during the filming of the movie, a delay in enacting this
safety zone would be contrary to 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. For the same reasons discussed in
the preceding paragraph, waiting for 30 day notice period run would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest.

B. Basis and Purpose

    The temporary safety zone is necessary to protect vessels from the
hazards associated with the stunts that will be performed during the
filming of a major motion picture. The filming will involve explosions
and highly choreographed stunts. The Captain of the Port, Sector North
Carolina, has determined that the stunts associated with the filming of
this motion picture do pose significant risks to public safety and
property and that a safety zone is necessary.

C. Discussion of the Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway at Southport, NC. This safety zone will
be enforced between 8 p.m. and 6 a.m. from July 25, 2012 until July 27,
2012 and again from 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. on August 1, 2012 until August 3,
2012 and encompasses all navigable waters within a 300 yard radius from
latitude 33[deg]54.9' North, longitude 078[deg]01.44' West. [DATUM: NAD
83]
    While the enforcement periods are scheduled for approximately 10
hour blocks, filming and execution of the stunts will not take place
continuously during those periods. There will be periods of set up,
break down, preparation, et cetera. It is anticipated that actual
filming will take place in 20 minute increments throughout the
enforcement periods and that, in some cases; the filming may end prior
to the 6 a.m. enforcement deadlines. All persons and vessels shall
comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port, Sector North
Carolina, or his or her on-scene representative. Entry into,
transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port, Sector North Carolina, or his or
her on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port, Sector North
Carolina, or his or her on-scene representative may be contacted via
VHF-FM channel 16.

D. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, as
supplemented by Executive Order 13563, Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, and does not require an assessment of potential
costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of Executive Order 12866 or
under section 1 of Executive Order 13563. The Office of Management and
Budget has not reviewed it under those Orders.
    Although this regulation will restrict access to the area, the
effect of the rule will not be significant since this rule will only be
enforced while unsafe conditions exist. The Coast Guard also expects
that traffic will generally be very low based on the time of night that
this closure will occur.

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 Coast Guard
certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    This rule may affect the following entities, some of which might be
small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit
or anchor in this portion of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway from 8
p.m. to 6 a.m. from July 25, 2012 to July 27, 2012 and from 8 p.m. to 6
a.m. from August 1, 2012 to August 3, 2012.
    The safety zone will not have significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This
rule will only be enforced while unsafe conditions exist. Traffic will
only be prohibited from passing through the zone when actual filming is
being conducted. Traffic will only be stopped for a short duration not
to exceed twenty minutes during any one closure. In the event that the
safety zone affects shipping, commercial vessels may request permission
from the Captain of the Port, Sector North Carolina, or his or her on-
scene representative to transit through the safety zone. The Coast
Guard will give notice to the public via a Broadcast Notice to Marines
that the regulation is in effect.

3. Assistance for Small Entities

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

4. Collection of Information

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

5. Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the

various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that
Order and determined that this rule does not have implications for
federalism.

6. Protest Activities

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

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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

8. Taking of Private Property

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

9. Civil Justice Reform

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

10. Protection of Children

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

11. Indian Tribal Governments

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

12. Energy Effects

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

13. Technical Standards

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

14. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined
that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves the establishment of safety zones. 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.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

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

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

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

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

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

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T05-0577 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T05-0577  Safety zone; major motion picture filming, Atlantic
Intracoastal Waterway, Southport, NC.

    (a) Definitions. For the purposes of this section, Captain of the
Port means the Commander, Sector North Carolina. Representative means
any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer who has been
authorized to act on the behalf of the Captain of the Port.
    (b) Location. The following area is a safety zone: This safety zone
will encompass all waters on the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway with a
300 yards radius of latitude 33[deg]54.9' North, longitude
078[deg]01.44' West. All geographic coordinates are North American
Datum 1983 (NAD 83).
    (c) Regulations. (1) The general regulations contained in Sec.
165.23 of this part apply to the area described in paragraph (b) of
this section.
    (2) Persons or vessels requiring entry into or passage through any
portion of the safety zone must first request authorization from the
Captain of the Port, or a designated representative, unless the Captain
of the Port previously announced via Marine Safety Radio Broadcast on
VHF Marine Band Radio channel 22 (157.1 MHz) that this regulation will
not be enforced in that portion of the safety zone. The Captain of the
Port can be contacted at telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER> or by radio on
VHF Marine Band Radio, channels 13 and 16.
    (d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast Guard may be assisted in the patrol
and enforcement of the zone by Federal, State, and local agencies.
    (e) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 8 p.m.
to 6 a.m. from July 25, 2012 until July 27, 2012 and from 8 p.m. to 6
a.m. from August 1, 2012 until August 3, 2012 unless cancelled earlier
by the Captain of the Port.

    Dated: June 25, 2012.
A. Popiel,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port North Carolina.
[FR Doc. 2012-16780 Filed 7-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: July 17, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 136)]
[Notices]
[Page 40484]
[DOCID:fr17jy06-41]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2145]

Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, WA; Notice of
Authorization for Continued Project Operation

July 11, 2006.
    On June 29, 2004, Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County,
licensee for the Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project, filed an
application for a new or subsequent license pursuant to the Federal
Power Act (FPA) and the Commission's regulations. The Rocky Reach
Project is located on the Columbia River in the Town of Entiat, Chelan
County, Washington.
    The license for Project No. 2145 was issued for a period ending
June 30, 2006. 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. 2145 is issued to
Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County for a period effective
July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2007, 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 June 30, 2007, 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
Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, is authorized to
continue operation of the Rocky Reach Project until such time as the
Commission acts on its application for a subsequent license.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-11262 Filed 7-14-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


 [Federal Register: October 23, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 204)] [ Notices]                [Page 54876] [DOCID:fr23oc09-99]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

  Aircraft Noise Impacts Research Roadmap

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting participation.

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

SUMMARY: This notice advises interested persons that the FAA is

conducting workshops to develop an aircraft noise impacts research

roadmap. The roadmap is intended to advance our scientific knowledge in

order to optimally address the impacts of aircraft noise on society.

The main objective of the workshops is to outline key research elements

of the roadmap, prioritize research questions, and identify ways to

overcome potential research challenges.

DATES: The first workshop will be held in Washington, DC, on December

10 and 11, 2009 from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. A follow-on workshop will be held

on March 4, 2010, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The first workshop will be held at the National Academy of

Sciences Keck Center, 500 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC. The

follow-on workshop will be held in conjunction with the University of

California-Davis Symposium on Aviation Noise and Air Quality and will

be held at the Holiday Inn-San Diego--On the Bay, 1355 North Harbor

Drive, San Diego, CA 92101. Attendance is open to all interested

parties.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Friesenhahn, Office of

Environment and Energy (AEE-100), Federal Aviation Administration, 800

Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; e-mail

<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile (202)

267-5594. Please register by November 20; there is no registration fee.

Additional details will soon be available at http://www.fican.org under

FAA Workshop.

    Background: Based on the advice of its Research, Engineering and

Development Advisory Committee (REDAC), the FAA is developing a

comprehensive aircraft noise impacts research roadmap for the FAA and

other interested parties to implement more systematic, effective, and

complementary research programs. The FAA held a preliminary forum with

international noise researchers in conjunction with Internoise 2009 in

August 2009 to discuss research needed to advance the current

understanding of the relationship between aircraft noise and its

impacts such as community annoyance and sleep disturbance. The FAA now

invites researchers, practitioners, and other interested parties to

participate in a series of upcoming Aircraft Noise Impacts Research

Roadmap workshops to contribute to developing the research roadmap with

information received from that forum.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 19, 2009.

Lourdes Q. Maurice,

Acting Director of Environment and Energy.

[FR Doc. E9-25610 Filed 10-22-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: November 21, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 224)]
[Notices]
[Page 65630-65631]
[DOCID:fr21no07-103]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Investment Company Act Release No. 28047; 813-367]

Kiewit Investment Fund LLLP; Notice of Application

November 15, 2007.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').

ACTION: Notice of an application for an order under section 6(b) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'').

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

    Summary of the Application: Applicant requests an order that would
amend a prior order (``Prior Order'') \1\ to expand the class of
persons eligible to purchase and hold shares of an employees'
securities company to include certain specified immediate family
members and grandchildren of eligible employees. In addition, the order
would permit certain trusts and other investment vehicles formed for
the benefit of lineal descendants of eligible employees to purchase and
hold shares of the employees' securities company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc. and Kiewit Investment Fund LLLP,
Investment Company Act Release Nos. 27066 (Sept. 14, 2005) (notice)
and 27115 (Oct. 12, 2005) (order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Applicant: Kiewit Investment Fund LLLP (the ``Fund'').
    Filing Dates: The application was filed on July 10, 2007, and
amended on November 13, 2007.
    Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the
application will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing.
Interested persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's
Secretary and serving applicant with a copy of the request, personally
or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by
5:30 p.m. on December 10, 2007, and should be accompanied by proof of
service on applicant, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues
contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request
notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicant, Robert L. Giles,
Jr., Chief Executive Officer, Kiewit Investment Fund LLLP, 73 Tremont
Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02108.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shannon Conaty, Senior Counsel, at
(202) 551-6827 or Janet M. Grossnickle, Branch Chief, at<PHONE_NUMBER>
(Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company
Regulation).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained for a fee at the
Commission's Public Reference Desk, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549-0102 (tel.<PHONE_NUMBER>).

Applicant's Representations

    1. The Fund, a Delaware limited liability limited partnership, is
registered under the Act as a non-diversified, closed-end management
investment company, and at all times operates as an ``employees'
securities company'' within the meaning of section 2(a)(13) of the Act.
The Fund is designed as a long-term investment vehicle for current and
former employees and their immediate family members of Peter Kiewit
Sons', Inc. (``Kiewit'') and its affiliated companies. Kiewit, a
Delaware corporation, is a large construction contractor operating
primarily in the North American market that provides construction
services to a broad range of public and private customers.
    2. Pursuant to the Prior Order, units of limited partnership
interests of the Fund (``Units'') may be purchased only by Eligible
Holders. Eligible Holders consist of (i) current and former employees
or persons on retainer of the Kiewit Group,\2\ within the meaning of
section 2(a)(13) of the Act (``Eligible Employees''); (ii) board
directors retained by the Fund (``Directors''); (iii) immediate family
members, within the meaning of section 2(a)(13) of the Act, of such
Directors or Eligible Employees; or (iv) members of the Kiewit Group.
Units are offered pursuant to offerings registered under the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended (the ``Securities Act'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The term ``Kiewit Group'' refers to Kiewit and any
affiliated company of Kiewit of which Kiewit is an affiliated
company, as defined in section 2(a)(2) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Under the terms of the Prior Order, the Fund has in the past
limited investment to those individuals who constitute immediate family
members, within the meaning of section 2(a)(13) of the Act, of Eligible
Employees and Directors of the Fund. Applicant proposes to amend the
Prior Order solely to the extent necessary to expand the class of
immediate family members of Eligible Employees and Directors who may
invest in the Fund to include any parent, spouse of a parent, child,
spouse of a child, spouse, brother, sister or grandchild of such
Eligible Employee or Director (including step and adoptive
relationships), regardless of whether such person currently resides
with or is a dependent of such Eligible Employee or Director
(``Eligible Family Members''). In addition, Applicant seeks to amend
the Prior Order solely to the extent necessary to permit Units to be
offered and sold to (i) certain trusts and other investment vehicles
(including self-directed retirement plan vehicles such as individual
retirement accounts) of which the trustees and/or grantors are Eligible
Employees or Directors or that were established solely for the benefit
of Eligible Employees or Directors or their Eligible Family Members, or
for the benefit of other more distant lineal descendants, including
great-grandchildren, of Eligible Employees or Directors (including, in
each case, step and adoptive relationships), and (ii) partnerships,
corporations or other entities of which at least a majority of the
voting power is controlled by Eligible Employees or Directors
(collectively clauses (i) and (ii), ``Qualified Investment Vehicles'').
Such Qualified Investment Vehicles also shall constitute Eligible
Holders to which Units may be transferred with the prior written
consent of the Fund, provided that, as a result of such transfer, the
Fund would not cease to be an

employees' securities company under the Act.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The inclusion of entities controlled by an Eligible Employee
or Director in the definition of Eligible Holder is intended to
enable Eligible Employees and Directors and their Eligible Family
Members to make investments in the Fund through private investment
vehicles for the purpose of personal and family investment and
estate planning objectives. Eligible Employees and Directors will
exercise investment discretion and control over these investment
vehicles, thereby creating a close nexus between Kiewit and these
investment vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Applicant's Legal Analysis

    1. Section 6(b) of the Act provides, in part, that the Commission
will exempt employees' securities companies from the provisions of the
Act to the extent that the exemption is consistent with the protection
of investors. Section 2(a)(13) defines an employees' securities company
as any investment company all of whose securities (other than short-
term paper) are beneficially owned (a) by current or former employees,
or persons on retainer, of one or more affiliated employers, (b) by
immediate family members of such persons, or (c) by such employer or
employers together with any of the persons in (a) or (b).
    2. Applicant requests an order under section 6(b) of the Act to
amend the Prior Order solely to the extent necessary to permit the Fund
to expand the class of persons eligible to purchase and hold Units of
the Fund, an employees' securities company, to include any individual
that is covered by the term ``member of the immediate family'' in
section 2(a)(19) of the Act, as well as grandchildren, of Eligible
Employees and Directors. In addition, the amended order would permit
certain trusts and other investment vehicles formed for the benefit of
lineal descendants of Eligible Employees and Directors to purchase and
hold Units of the Fund. For the reasons discussed below, applicant
believes that the requested exemption pursuant to section 6(b) is
consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes of the
Act.
    3. Applicant states that an employees' securities company is a
labor-related entity that exists primarily to promote the economic
welfare of its employee-investors. Applicant states that the requested
relief would permit Eligible Employees and Directors to achieve certain
tax and economic goals through the effective use of estate planning and
retirement tools. Applicant states that the requested relief is
consistent with the protection of investors because permitting Eligible
Family Members of Eligible Employees and Directors to invest in the
Fund, and Qualified Investment Vehicles to purchase and hold Units,
would preserve the status of the Fund as an entity designed primarily
to promote the economic welfare of Eligible Employees and Directors.
Applicant further states that the permitting the Fund to directly offer
and sell Units to Qualified Investment Vehicles eases the burden of
administering the Fund and provides a means for certain such vehicles
to hold Units. The participation of Qualified Investment Vehicles
generally will result in cost savings and tax efficiencies for Eligible
Employees, Directors and their Eligible Family Members. Moreover,
Applicant notes that the Fund is registered under the Act, operates in
compliance with all applicable provisions of the Act (other than
section 15(a) to the extent it received relief in the Prior Order) and
offers and sells its Units pursuant to offerings registered under the
Securities Act.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
pursuant to delegated authority.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-22736 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


From:
Brenna M Harden<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Tue, 27 Sep 2022 15:44:20
To:
"Jones; DonnaLee"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>"French; Chuck"<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Cc:
Marion M Krchmar<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Fadi K Mourad<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Todd A Richards<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Laura J Harris<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Rob Sanch<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Ronald K Burnette<EMAIL_ADDRESS>'Knight, Jeffrey A.'<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Robert H Carlin<EMAIL_ADDRESS>David W Fanning Jr<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
Coke Oven Section 114 ICR Enclosure 1 - Part 2 of 7 (Section A files Partial of 23 and SAME files for Q 24)

On June 29, 2022, DTE Vantage (DTE) received Section 114 of the Clean Air Act Information Collection Request (ICR) in relation to development of Risk and Technology Review of Coke Oven Facilities related to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart CCCCC, Pushing Quenching and Battery Stacks. The ICR also included risk and technology review, testing, interior and fenceline monitoring, and other information collection activities related to potential new regulations for coke byproduct recovery plants (CBRP) in relation to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart L, Coke Oven Batteries. DTE owns and operates EES Coke Battery, L.L.C. (EES Coke) located in River Rouge, MI.

The June 28, 2022 ICR requires Enclosure 1 to be submitted September 27, 2022 (as Part 2 of 7 of this submittal).

Regards,
Brenna Harden
DTE Vantage | EES Coke Battery, L.L.C., Senior Environmental Engineer
PO Box 18309, River Rouge, MI 48218o<PHONE_NUMBER> | m<PHONE_NUMBER>
dtevantage.com

<<Q23b12 S2 2021 Cert Dev Rpt 10102022 signed.pdf>>
<<Q23b9 S1 2020 Cert Dev Rpt 09152020 signed.pdf>>
<<Q23b10 S2 2020 Cert Dev Rpt 03122021 signed.pdf>>
<<Q23b11 S1 2021 Cert Dev Rpt 09142021 signed.pdf>>


[Federal Register: May 11, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 91)]
[Notices]
[Page 26853-26854]
[DOCID:fr11my07-102]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55714; File No. SR-Amex-2007-43]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; American Stock Exchange LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule Change
Relating to a One-Year Extension of the $1 Strike Price Pilot Program

May 7, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on April 30, 2007, the American Stock Exchange LLC (``Amex'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by Amex.
The Exchange has filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial'' rule
change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \3\ and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6) thereunder,\4\ which renders it effective upon filing with the
Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange seeks to extend the $1 strike price pilot program
(``Pilot Program'') for one year through June 5, 2008. The text of the
proposed rule change is available at Amex, the Commission's Public
Reference Room, and http://www.amex.com.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Pilot Program was established in June 2003,\5\ with three one-
year extensions granted by the Commission in June 2004, June 2005, and
May 2006.\6\ The Exchange believes that the Pilot Program has operated
as designed, providing investors with greater flexibility in achieving
their investment strategies in connection with stocks trading below
$20. Accordingly, the Exchange believes that a one-year extension is
reasonable and consistent with the intent of the Pilot Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 48024 (June 12,
2003), 68 FR 36617 (June 18, 2003) (SR-Amex-2003-36) (``Pilot
Approval Order'').
    \6\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 49813 (June 4,
2004), 69 FR 33088 (June 14, 2004) (SR-Amex-2004-45); 51770 (May 31,
2005), 70 FR 33226 (June 7, 2005) (SR-Amex-2005-40); and 53843 (May
19, 2006), 71 FR 30455 (May 26, 2006) (collectively, ``Pilot Program
Extension Notices'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Pilot Program permits the Exchange to select a total of five
individual stocks on which options series may be listed at $1 strike
price intervals. To be eligible for the Pilot Program, an underlying
stock must close below $20 on its primary market on the previous
trading day. If selected, the Exchange may list $1 strike prices at $1
intervals from $3 to $20, however, a $1 strike price may not be listed
that is greater than $5 from the underlying stock's closing price on
its primary market on the previous day. The Exchange may also list $1
strikes on any other options class designated by another options
exchange that employs a similar pilot program approved by the
Commission.
    The Pilot Program prohibits the Exchange from listing $1 strikes on
any series of individual equity options classes that have greater than
nine months until expiration. In addition, the Exchange is also
restricted from listing any series that would result in strike prices
being $0.50 apart.
    To date, the Exchange believes that the Pilot Program has been
beneficial to investors and the options market by providing investors
with greater flexibility in the trading of equity options that overlie
stocks trading below $20. In this manner, options investors are able to
better tailor their strategies through the availability of $1 strikes.
The Pilot Program Report, attached as Exhibit 3 to the proposal,
provides data regarding the Pilot Program as required

in the Pilot Program Extension Notices.\7\ Amex notes that, as the data
indicates, the $1 strikes exhibited higher volume and open interest
than the ``standard'' strike price intervals. Specifically, the five
options classes selected by Amex for $1 strikes had a trading volume of
327,115 contracts, while the ``standard'' strikes for the same options
classes had a trading volume 290,191 contracts. Of even greater
significance is the difference in open interest between the $1 strikes
and ``standard'' strikes. As of April 30, 2007, $1 strikes open
interest totaled 685,808 contracts versus 396,777 contracts for
``standard'' strikes. Given the limited nature of the Pilot Program,
the Exchange submits that the impact on systems has been minimal.
Accordingly, Amex believes that an extension of the Pilot Program for
one year through June 5, 2008, is warranted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Pilot Program Extension Notices, supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the Section 6(b) of the Act,\8\ in general, and furthers the
objective of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\9\ in particular, in that it
is designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade and to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change will impose no
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in the
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

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

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

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

    Because the foregoing rule change does not: (1) Significantly
affect the protection of investors or the public interest; (2) impose
any significant burden on competition; and (3) become operative for 30
days from the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the
Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) of the Act\10\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \11\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). Rule 19b-4(f)(6) also requires the
self-regulatory organization to give the Commission notice of its
intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief
description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five
business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule
change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. Amex
has satisfied the five-day pre-filing requirement. As set forth in
the Commission's initial approval of the Pilot Program, if Amex
proposes to: (1) Extend the Pilot Program; (2) expand the number of
options eligible for inclusion in the Pilot Program; or (3) seek
permanent approval of the Pilot Program, it must submit a Pilot
Program report to the Commission along with the filing of its
proposal to extend, expand, or seek permanent approval of the Pilot
Program. Amex must file any proposal to expand or seek permanent
approval of the Pilot Program and the Pilot Program report with the
Commission at least 60 days prior to the expiration of the Pilot
Program. The Pilot Program report must cover the entire time the
Pilot Program was in effect and must include: (1) Data and written
analysis on the open interest and trading volume for options (at all
strike price intervals) selected for the Pilot Program; (2) delisted
options series (for all strike price intervals) for all options
selected for the Pilot Program; (3) an assessment of the
appropriateness of $1 strike price intervals for the options Amex
selected for the Pilot Program; (4) an assessment of the impact of
the Pilot Program on the capacity of Amex's, the Options Price
Reporting Authority's, and vendors' automated systems; (5) any
capacity problems or other problems that arose during the operation
of the Pilot Program and how Amex addressed them; (6) any complaints
that Amex received during the operation of the Pilot Program and how
Amex addressed them; and (7) any additional information that would
help to assess the operation of the Pilot Program. See Pilot
Approval Order, supra note 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File No. SR-Amex-2007-43 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File No. SR-Amex-2007-43. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of Amex. All comments received will be posted without
change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information
from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to
make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-
Amex-2007-43 and should be submitted on or before June 1, 2007.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-9076 Filed 5-10-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 60 (Tuesday, March 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17511-17513]
[FR Doc No: 2016-06994]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-77429; File No. SR-BX-2016-017]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NASDAQ BX, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Chapter XI
(Doing Business With the Public), Section 8 (Supervision of Accounts)
of the Exchange's Rulebook

March 23, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 14, 2016, NASDAQ BX, Inc. (``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II, and III, below, which Items have
been substantially prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Chapter XI (Doing Business with the
Public), Section 8 (Supervision of Accounts) of the Exchange's rulebook
to remove outdated references to three

National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (``NASD'') rules and
to replace those references with references to four successor Financial
Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'') rules which have
replaced them.
    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://nasdaqomxbx.cchwallstreet.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 Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such
statements.

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to amend Chapter XI (Doing Business with
the Public), Section 8 (Supervision of Accounts) of the Exchange's
rulebook (the ``BX Options Supervision Rules'') to remove outdated
references to three NASD rules and to replace those references with
references to four successor FINRA rules which have replaced them.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The current FINRA rulebook consists of: (1) FINRA rules; (2)
NASD rules; and (3) rules incorporated from NYSE (Incorporated NYSE
Rules) (together, the NASD rules and Incorporated NYSE Rules are
referred to as the ``Transitional Rulebook''). As part of the
process of developing a new consolidated rulebook (the
``Consolidated FINRA Rulebook'') FINRA adopted FINRA Rules 3110,
3120, 3130 and 3170 which the Exchange seeks to incorporate in the
BX Options Supervision Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, the BX Options Supervision Rules provide in Section 8(a)
that each member that conducts a public customer options business shall
ensure that its written supervisory system policies and procedures
pursuant to NASD Rules 3010, 3012, and 3013 (the ``Old NASD Rules'')
adequately address the member's public customer options business. Since
the adoption by the Exchange of the BX Options Supervision Rules, FINRA
has updated its own rulebook and deleted the Old NASD Rules, adopting
in their place FINRA Rules 3110, 3120, 3130 and 3170.\4\ The Exchange
therefore proposes to make a conforming change to the BX Options
Supervision Rules by deleting references to the Old NASD Rules and
replacing them with references to FINRA Rules 3110, 3120, 3130 and
3170.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ FINRA Rules 3110 (Supervision) and 3120 (Supervisory Control
System) were adopted by FINRA to replace NASD Rules 3010
(Supervision), and 3012 (Supervisory Control System). In addition,
new FINRA Rule 3170 (Tape Recording of Registered Persons by Certain
Firms) replaced NASD Rule 3010(b)(2). The new rules became effective
on December 1, 2014. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 71179
(Dec. 23, 2013), 78 FR 79542 (Dec. 30, 2013) (Order Approving
Proposed Rule Change as Modified by Amendment No. 1) (File No. SR-
FINRA-2013-025); see also FINRA Regulatory Notice 08-24 (May 2008)
(Proposed Consolidated FINRA Rules Governing Supervision and
Supervisory Controls). FINRA Rule 3130 (Annual Certification of
Compliance and Supervisory Processes) replaced NASD Rule 3013
(Annual Certification of Compliance and Supervisory Processes) in
2008. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58661 (Sept. 26,
2008), 73 FR 57395 (Oct. 2, 2008) (SR-FINRA-2008-030).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \5\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \6\ in particular, in that it is designed to promote
just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general to protect investors and the public interest,
by removing references to outdated NASD rules, thus minimizing any
potential confusion on the part of members and other market
participants regarding the standards and rules to which Exchange
members are subject.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. As the amendments merely
correct the Exchange rules to refer to the current FINRA rules
discussed above, it has no impact on competition.

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

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not: (i)
Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (ii) impose any significant burden on competition; and (iii)
become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was filed, or
such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \7\ and Rule
19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(a)(iii).
    \8\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
requires a self-regulatory organization to give the Commission
written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change at
least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed
rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission.
The Exchange has satisfied this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: (i)
necessary or appropriate in the public interest; (ii) for the
protection of investors; or (iii) 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 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-BX-2016-017 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2016-017. 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 20549-1090, on official business days between the hours of 10:00
a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BX-2016-017 and
should be submitted on or before April 19, 2016.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-06994 Filed 3-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Supplemental Material Document Title: CATEX (Categorical Exclusion Determination) and Environmental Checklist 5 Pages


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

CORRECTED NOTICE*

Issued by the Department of Transportation on  February 11, 2004

   NOTICE OF ACTION TAKEN -- DOCKET OST-99-6720

________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________

This serves as notice to the public of the action described below, taken
by the Department official indicated (no additional confirming order
will be issued in this matter).

Application of    United Air Lines, Inc.    filed  12/29/03    to:

XX Renew exemption under 49 U.S.C. 40109 to provide the following
service:

Scheduled foreign air transportation of persons, property, and mail
between points in the United States, via intermediate points, and a
point or points in Ghana and Nigeria, and beyond, without local traffic
rights between the intermediate and beyond points and points in Ghana
and Nigeria, and to integrate this authority with its existing
certificate and exemption authority.  United will operate these services
pursuant to code-share arrangements with any of its foreign carrier
code-share partners.

Applicant rep:   Jeffrey A. Manley<PHONE_NUMBER>    DOT Analyst:
Sylvia Moore<PHONE_NUMBER>

D I S P O S I T I O N

XX  Granted  (subject to conditions, see below)

The above action was effective when taken:   February 10, 2004, through
 February 10, 2006, (coextensive with United’s existing authority in
this Docket) or until 90 days after final action on United’s
corresponding certificate application in Docket OST-95-6385, whichever
occurs earlier.

Action taken by:   Paul L. Gretch, Director

		    Office of International Aviation

XX  The exemption authority granted is consistent with the aviation
agreements between the United States and Nigeria and the United States
and Ghana.

Except to the extent exempted or waived, this authority is subject to
the terms, conditions, and limitations indicated:  XX Holder’s
certificates of public convenience and necessity

	   XX  Standard exemption conditions (attached)

	   XX  Statements of authorization approving United/foreign carrier
code-share

	           operations, and conditions therein

*Corrects Notice of Action Taken dated February 10, 2004, to reflect
correct filing date of 12/29/03.

2

Conditions:  The route integration authority granted is subject to the
condition that any service provided

under this exemption shall be consistent with all applicable agreements
between the United States and the foreign countries involved.
Furthermore, (a) nothing in the award of the route integration authority
requested should be construed as conferring upon United rights
(including fifth-freedom intermediate and/or beyond rights) to serve
markets where U.S. carrier entry is limited unless United notifies the
Department of its intent to serve such a market and unless and until the
Department has completed any

necessary carrier selection procedures to determine which carrier(s)
should be authorized to exercise such rights; and (b) should there be a
request by any carrier to use the limited-entry route rights that are
included in United’s authority by virtue of the route integration
exemption granted here, but that are not then being used by United, the
holding of such authority by route integration will not be considered as
providing any preference for United in a competitive carrier selection
proceeding to determine which carrier(s) should be entitled to use the
authority at issue.

The authority granted to serve intermediate and beyond points is limited
to countries with which the United States has signed open-skies
agreements and/or countries for which United holds authority to serve
under certificates and exemptions issued by the Department, and for
which it holds route integration authority by virtue of either the
present action or other action of the Department.

The code-share operations involving Ghana must be operated within the
frequencies allocated United for U.S.-Ghana third-country code-share
services.  (See Notices of Action Taken dated July 13, 2000, and

May 29, 2002, Docket OST-2000-7149.)

________________________________________________________________________
______________

On the basis of data officially noticeable under Rule 24(g) of the
Department's regulations, we found the applicant qualified to provide
the services authorized.

Under authority assigned by the Department in its regulations, 14 CFR
Part 385, we found that (1) our

action was consistent with Department policy; (2) grant of the exemption
authority was consistent with the public interest; and (3) grant of the
authority would not constitute a major regulatory action under the
Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975.  To the extent not granted,
we denied all requests in the referenced Docket.  We may amend, modify,
or revoke the authority granted in this Notice at any time without
hearing at our discretion.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of the action set
forth in this Notice under the Department’s regulations, 14 CFR
§385.30, may file their petitions within seven (7) days after the date
of issuance of this Notice.  This action was effective when taken, and
the filing of a petition for review will not alter such effectiveness.

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide
Web at:

http://dms.dot.gov//reports/reports_aviation.asp

U.S. Carrier Exemption Conditions

In the conduct of the operations authorized, the U.S. carrier
applicant(s) shall:

(1)  Hold at all times effective operating authority from the government
of each country served;

(2)  Comply with applicable requirements concerning oversales contained
in 14 CFR 250 (for scheduled operations, if authorized);

(3)  Comply with the requirements for reporting data contained in 14 CFR
241;

(4)  Comply with requirements for minimum insurance coverage, and for
certifying that coverage to the Department, contained in 14 CFR 205;

(5)  Except as specifically exempted or otherwise provided for in a
Department Order, comply with the requirements of 14 CFR 203, concerning
waiver of Warsaw Convention liability limits and defenses;

(6)  Comply with all applicable requirements of the Federal Aviation
Administration and with all applicable U.S. Government requirements
concerning security.  To assure compliance with all applicable U.S.
Government requirements concerning security, the holder shall, before
commencing any new service (including charter flights) to or from a
foreign airport, contact its Principal Security Inspector (PSI) to
advise the PSI of its plans and to find out whether the Transportation
Security Administration has determined that security is adequate to
allow such airport(s) to be served; and

(7)  Comply with such other reasonable terms, conditions, and
limitations required by the public interest as may be prescribed by the
Department of Transportation, with all applicable orders and regulations
of other U.S. agencies and courts, and with all applicable laws of the
United States.

The authority granted shall be effective only during the period when the
holder is in compliance with the conditions imposed above.

										08/2003


Date: September 3, 2003 Subject: Meeting with NEDA/ CARP Attendees: See attached signature page A meeting was held with the above reference organization upon that organization's request. The attached agenda and attendees list was provided to EPA in advance of the meeting. During the meeting Bill Harnett, Division Director for the Information Transfer and Program Integration Division, in the Office of Air, Quality, Planning and Standards discussed the general approach EPA will take for determining program equivalency. He also provided an overview of the upcoming aggregation, debottlenecking and allowables PALs proposed rulemaking and the potential for additional rulemaking on the issue of routine, maintenance, repair and replacement. Leslie Ritts of NEDA/ CARP asked whether EPA would be pursuing any further rulemaking to codify additional, sector specific, definitions of process unit. Mr. Harnett indicated that there are no plans for doing this at this time. Mr. Harnett also discussed EPA's intent to codify the 1990 amendments sometime in the future.