[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 248 (Monday, December 28, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 80683-80686]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32545]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

49 CFR Part 225

[FRA-2008-0136, Notice No. 8]
RIN 2130-ZA13

Monetary Threshold for Reporting Rail Equipment Accidents/
Incidents for Calendar Year 2016

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule maintains the rail equipment accident/incident
monetary reporting threshold at $10,500 for railroad accidents/
incidents involving property damage that occur during calendar year
(CY) 2016 that FRA's accident/incident reporting regulations require to
be reported to the agency. FRA is maintaining the reporting threshold
at the same level it did in CY 2015, and CY 2014, because, in part, the
wage and equipment data for the second-quarter of 2015 (i.e., the data
used to calculate the threshold) changed only slightly (about 1
percent) from second-quarter 2014 values. In addition, FRA is
maintaining the monetary threshold for CY 2016 at the CY 2015 level
while it reexamines the method for calculating the monetary threshold.

DATES: This final rule is effective January 1, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kebo Chen, Staff Director, U.S.
Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Office
of Safety Analysis, RRS-22, Mail Stop 25, West Building 3rd Floor, Room
W33-314, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20590 (telephone 202-
493-6079); or Sara Mahmoud-Davis, Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Office of Chief
Counsel, RCC-10, Mail Stop 10, West Building 3rd Floor, Room W33-435,
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20590 (telephone 202-366-
1118).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    A ``rail equipment accident/incident'' is a collision, derailment,
fire, explosion, act of God, or other event involving the operation of
railroad on-track equipment (standing or moving) that results in
damages to railroad on-track equipment, signals, tracks, track
structures, or roadbed, including labor costs and the costs for
acquiring new equipment and material, greater than the reporting
threshold for the year in which the event occurs. 49 CFR 225.19(c).
Each rail equipment accident/incident must be reported to FRA using the
Rail Equipment Accident/Incident Report (Form FRA F 6180.54). See 49
CFR 225.19(b), (c) and 225.21(a). Paragraphs (c) and (e) of 49 CFR
225.19 further provide that FRA will adjust the dollar figure that
constitutes the reporting threshold for rail equipment accidents/
incidents, if necessary, every year under the procedures in appendix B
to 49 CFR part 225 (Appendix B) to reflect any cost increases or
decreases.
    In this rule, FRA is keeping the monetary threshold for CY 2016, at
$10,500, the same as the monetary threshold for CY 2014 and CY 2015.
FRA is maintaining the reporting threshold at the same level as CY 2015
because, in part, the wage and equipment data for the second-quarter of
2015 (i.e., the data used to calculate the threshold) changed only
slightly (about 1 percent) from second-quarter 2014 values. FRA
believes that the wage and equipment data support keeping the reporting
threshold the same for CY 2016. Also, FRA anticipates making changes to
the methodology for calculating the reporting threshold in the coming
year.
    In addition to periodically reviewing and adjusting the annual
threshold under Appendix B, FRA periodically amends its method for
calculating the threshold. In 49 U.S.C. 20901(b), Congress requires
that FRA base the threshold on publicly available information obtained
from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), other objective government
source, or be subject to notice and comment. In 1996, FRA adopted a new
method for calculating the monetary reporting threshold for accidents/
incidents. See 61 FR 60632, Nov. 29, 1996. In 2005, FRA again amended
its method for calculating the reporting threshold because the BLS
ceased collecting and publishing the railroad wage data FRA used in the
calculation. Consequently, FRA substituted railroad employee wage data
the Surface Transportation Board (STB) collects for the data BLS ceased
to collect. See 70 FR 75414, Dec. 20, 2005. In 2016, FRA intends to
evaluate and amend, if appropriate, its method for calculating the
monetary threshold for accident/incident reporting and, as a result,
the formula utilized to calculate the threshold may change. FRA intends
to reexamine its method for calculating the reporting threshold because
new methodologies for calculating the threshold are available. FRA
believes updating its methodology to include these advances will ensure
the reporting threshold reflects changes in equipment and labor costs
as accurately as possible.

Maintaining Current Reporting Threshold

    Approximately one year has passed since FRA reviewed the rail
equipment accident/incident reporting threshold. See 79 FR 77397, Dec.
24, 2014. Consequently, FRA reviewed the threshold as 49 CFR 225.19(c)
requires, and found that costs for labor remained the same and costs
for equipment increased only slightly relative to approximately one
year ago.
    In reviewing the threshold, FRA gathered wage and equipment data
from the STB and BLS respectively. Under the procedure in Appendix B,
FRA averaged the wages for Group No. 300 (Maintenance of Way and
Structures) and Group No. 400 (Maintenance of Equipment and Stores
employees). FRA averaged the monthly equipment indices from the
Producer Price Index (PPI) to produce a quarterly average. Consistent
with Appendix B, FRA utilized data from the second-quarter of 2014 to
the second-quarter of 2015.
    To determine the changes in wages and prices over this time period,
FRA calculated the quarter-to-quarter changes (i.e., changes between
each consecutive quarter from the second-quarter of 2014 to the second-
quarter of 2015). In addition, FRA calculated the quarter-over-quarter
change (i.e., the change using only the beginning and ending quarters
of the selected time period). The results are illustrated in the table
below.
    Considering the wage input to the threshold first, the average
quarter-to-quarter change in wages is 0 percent, although individual
quarter-to-quarter changes ranged from negative 3 percent to 5 percent.
The quarter-over-quarter change in wages is negative 0.1 percent
(rounded to 0 percent in the table). Based on no overall change in
wages, the reporting threshold would not change for 2016.
    Examining the change in equipment PPI over the same time period
shows an average quarter-to-quarter increase of 0.5 percent. The
quarter-over-quarter change is about 2 percent. The 2 percent change,
when applied to the current $10,500 reporting threshold, would indicate
an increase of about $200. However, the formula for calculating the

reporting threshold weights the wage input to the formula by 40 percent
and the equipment input by 60 percent. The weights in the formula cause
the impact of the equipment index to be reduced to 1.2 percent, or
about one-half the 2 percent quarter-to-quarter increase. The 1.2
percent change applied to the current threshold would yield a new
reporting threshold of $10,600, a relatively small change. Considering
that such a change would only affect accidents/incidents with damages
near this reporting threshold amount, FRA expects the number of
affected accidents/incidents to be small. Only accidents/incidents that
occurred in 2015 which were slightly below the current $10,500
reporting threshold may become reportable in 2016.\1\ Given FRA's
intent to reexamine its method for calculating the reporting threshold
in 2016, the small changes in wages and equipment during the current
analysis period, and the and the resulting minimal effect on the
reporting threshold for CY 2016, FRA is maintaining the current
reporting threshold of $10,500 for reporting rail equipment accidents/
incidents that occur in CY 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For example, if an accident/incident occurred in 2015 that
resulted in damages of $10,450, it would not be reportable. Given a
potential increase in equipment and wages of 1.2 percent (weighted),
reported damages for that same accident if it occurred in 2016 would
be $10,575 ($10,450 *1.012 = $10,575). If FRA increased the
threshold to $10,600 for 2016, that accident/incident would still
not be reportable. However, if FRA keeps the threshold at $10,500,
that accident will be reportable in 2016.

                               Table--Small Changes in Wages and Equipment Indices
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Equipment
                    Quarter                           Wage*      Percent change      index*       Percent change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q2 2014........................................          $29.65  ..............           196.6  ...............
Q3 2014........................................           28.76              -3           198.0              1
Q4 2014........................................           29.78               0           199.6              1
Q1 2015........................................           30.31               5           200.3              0
Q2 2015........................................           29.60              -2           200.6              0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Change Quarter-to-Quarter..............................               0  ..............              0.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent Change Quarter-over-Quarter (Q2 2014 to Q2 2015).......               0  ..............              2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Source for wage is STB. Source for equipment index is BLS.

Notice and Comment Procedures

    In this rule, FRA is maintaining the current monetary reporting
threshold for the reasons explained above, and, under the final rule
published December 20, 2005. See 70 FR 75414. FRA finds this rule
imposes no additional burden on any person, but rather is intended to
provide a benefit by permitting the valid comparison of accident data
over time. Accordingly, finding that notice and comment procedures are
either impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest,
FRA is proceeding directly to a final rule.
    As appropriate, FRA regularly recalculates the monetary reporting
threshold using the formula published in Appendix B near the end of
each calendar year. FRA attempts to use the most recent data available
to calculate the updated reporting threshold prior to the next calendar
year. FRA believes that issuing this rule no later than December of
each calendar year and making the rule effective on January 1, of the
next year, allows FRA to use the most up-to-date data to calculate the
reporting threshold and to compile data that accurately reflects rising
wages and equipment costs. As such, FRA finds that it has good cause to
make this final rule effective January 1, 2016.

Regulatory Impact

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures

    FRA evaluated this rule under existing policies and procedures, and
determined it to be non-significant under both Executive Orders 12866
and 13563 in addition to DOT policies and procedures. See 44 FR 11034,
Feb. 26, 1979.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601-612) requires
a review of proposed and final rules to assess their impact on small
entities, unless the Secretary certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Pursuant to Section 312 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-121), FRA issued a final policy
statement that formally establishes ``small entities'' are railroads
that meet the line-haulage revenue requirements of a Class III
railroad. 49 CFR part 209, app. C. For other entities, the same dollar
limit in revenues governs whether a railroad, contractor, or other
respondent is a small entity. Id.
    FRA considers about 730 of the approximately 779 railroads in the
United States small entities. FRA certifies this final rule will have
no significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. To the extent that this rule has any impact on small
entities, the impact will be neutral or insignificant. The frequency of
rail equipment accidents/incidents and required reporting, is generally
proportional to the size of the railroad. A railroad that employs
thousands of employees and operates trains millions of miles is exposed
to greater risks than one whose operation is substantially smaller.
Small railroads may go for months at a time without having a reportable
occurrence of any type, and even longer without having a rail equipment
accident/incident. For example, current FRA data indicate that
railroads reported 1,902 rail equipment accidents/incidents in 2010,
with small railroads reporting 303 of them. Data for 2011 show that
railroads reported 2,022 rail equipment accidents/incidents, with small
railroads reporting 307 of them. In 2012, railroads reported 1,760 rail
equipment accidents/incidents, with small railroads reporting 292 of
them. In 2013, railroads reported 1,824 rail equipment accidents/
incidents, with small railroads reporting 299 of them. In 2014,
railroads reported 1,758 rail equipment accidents/incidents, with small
railroads reporting 247 of them. On average over those five calendar
years, small railroads reported about 16 percent of the total number of
rail equipment accidents/incidents,

ranging from 14 percent to 16 percent annually. FRA notes that this
data is accurate as of the date of issuance of this final rule, and is
subject to minor changes due to additional reporting.
    This rulemaking maintains the monetary reporting threshold at the
CY 2014 and CY 2015 level of $10,500. Increasing the reporting
threshold would have potentially slightly decreased the reporting
burden for railroads in 2016. However, only accidents/incidents with
reportable damages near the reporting threshold will be affected. In
any case, railroads still maintain records of accountable accidents/
incidents that are below the reporting threshold, thus minimizing any
potential additional burden to report these accidents to FRA caused by
keeping the threshold the same in CY 2016. Railroads would potentially
incur a small reporting burden, but not the burden to gather this
accident/incident information. Also, overall wage rates have not
increased, and equipment costs have increased only about 1 percent from
the second-quarter of CY 2015 compared to the second-quarter of CY
2014, according to the average PPI Series WPU144 for group
transportation equipment and item railroad equipment the BLS published
for April, May, and June 2015. Therefore, the overall effect of this
rule likely will be neutral or minimal. Any change in recordkeeping
burden will not be significant and will affect the large railroads more
than the small entities, due to the higher proportion of reportable
rail equipment accidents/incidents experienced by large entities.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    There are no new or additional information collection requirements
associated with this final rule. FRA's collection of accident/incident
reporting and recordkeeping information is currently approved under OMB
No. 2130-0500. Therefore, FRA is not required to provide an estimate of
a public reporting burden in this document.

Federalism Implications

    Executive Order 13132, entitled, ``Federalism,'' signed on August
4, 1999, requires that each agency

in a separately identified portion of the preamble to the regulation
as it is to be issued in the Federal Register, provide[] to the
Director of the Office of Management and Budget a federalism summary
impact statement, which consists of a description of the extent of
the agency's prior consultation with State and local officials, a
summary of the nature of their concerns and the agency's position
supporting the need to issue the regulation, and a statement of the
extent to which the concerns of the State and local officials have
been met.

    FRA analyzed this final rule under the principles and criteria in
Executive Order 13132. This rule will not have a substantial direct
effect on States, on the relationship between the National Government
and the States, or on the distribution of power and the
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in the Executive Order 13132. Accordingly, FRA determined this rule
will not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant
consultation with State and local officials or the preparation of a
federalism assessment. Therefore, FRA did not prepare a federalism
assessment.

Environmental Impact

    FRA evaluated this rule under its ``Procedures for Considering
Environmental Impacts'' (FRA's Procedures) (64 FR 28545, May 26, 1999)
as the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.),
other environmental statutes, Executive Orders, and related regulations
require. FRA determined this regulation is not a major FRA action
(requiring the preparation of an environmental impact statement or
environmental assessment) because it is categorically excluded from
detailed environmental review under section 4(c)(20) of FRA's
Procedures. See 64 FR 28545, 28547, May 26, 1999. Under section 4(c)
and (e) of FRA's Procedures, FRA further concluded that no
extraordinary circumstances exist with respect to this rule that might
trigger the need for a more detailed environmental review. Accordingly,
FRA finds this rule is not a major Federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human environment.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Under Section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Public Law 104-4, 2 U.S.C. 1531), each Federal agency ``shall, unless
otherwise prohibited by law, assess the effects of Federal regulatory
actions on State, local, and tribal governments, and the private sector
(other than to the extent that such regulations incorporate
requirements specifically set forth in law).'' Section 202 of the Act
(2 U.S.C. 1532) further requires that ``before promulgating any general
notice of proposed rulemaking that is likely to result in the
promulgation of any rule that includes any Federal mandate that may
result in expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted
annually for inflation) in any 1 year, and before promulgating any
final rule for which a general notice of proposed rulemaking was
published, the agency shall prepare a written statement'' detailing the
effect on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector.
When adjusted for inflation using BLS' Consumer Price Index for All
Urban Consumers, the equivalent value of $100,000,000 in year 2014
dollars is $155,000,000.\2\ The final rule will not result in the
expenditure, in the aggregate, of $155,000,000 or more in any one year,
and thus preparation of such a statement is not required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See U.S. Department of Transportation guidance at, ``2015
Threshold of Significant Regulatory Actions Under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995,'' May 6, 2015 (update), http://www.transportation.gov/office-policy/transportation-policy/2015-threshold-significant-regulatory-actions-under-unfunded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Energy Impact

    Executive Order 13211 requires Federal agencies to prepare a
Statement of Energy Effects for any ``significant energy action.'' 66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001. Under the Executive Order, a ``significant
energy action'' is defined as

[a]ny action by an agency (normally published in the Federal
Register) that promulgates or is expected to lead to the
promulgation of a final rule or regulation, including notices of
inquiry, advance notices of proposed rulemaking, and notices of
proposed rulemaking: (1)(i) that is a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866 or any successor order, and (ii) is
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy; or (2) that is designated by the
Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as
a significant energy action.

    FRA has evaluated this final rule under Executive Order 13211. FRA
has determined that this final rule is not likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.
Consequently, FRA has determined that this regulatory action is not a
``significant energy action'' within the meaning of Executive Order
13211.

Privacy Act

    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to
better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without
edit, including any personal information the commenter provides, to
www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/
ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 225

    Investigations, Penalties, Railroad safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

The Rule

    In consideration of the foregoing, FRA amends part 225 of chapter
II, subtitle B of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

PART 225-[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 225 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 103, 322(a), 20103, 20107, 20901-02,
21301, 21302, 21311; 28 U.S.C. 2461, note; and 49 CFR 1.89.

0
2. Amend Sec.  225.19 by revising the first sentence of paragraph (c)
and revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:

Sec.  225.19  Primary groups of accidents/incidents.

* * * * *
    (c) Group II--Rail equipment. Rail equipment accidents/incidents
are collisions, derailments, fires, explosions, acts of God, and other
events involving the operation of on-track equipment (standing or
moving) that result in damages higher than the current reporting
threshold (i.e., $6,700 for calendar years 2002 through 2005, $7,700
for calendar year 2006, $8,200 for calendar year 2007, $8,500 for
calendar year 2008, $8,900 for calendar year 2009, $9,200 for calendar
year 2010, $9,400 for calendar year 2011, $9,500 for calendar year
2012, $9,900 for calendar year 2013, $10,500 for calendar year 2014,
$10,500 for calendar year 2015, and $10,500 for calendar year 2016) to
railroad on-track equipment, signals, tracks, track structures, or
roadbed, including labor costs and the costs for acquiring new
equipment and material. * * *
* * * * *
    (e) The reporting threshold is $6,700 for calendar years 2002
through 2005, $7,700 for calendar year 2006, $8,200 for calendar year
2007, $8,500 for calendar year 2008, $8,900 for calendar year 2009,
$9,200 for calendar year 2010, $9,400 for calendar year 2011, $9,500
for calendar year 2012, $9,900 for calendar year 2013, $10,500 for
calendar year 2014, $10,500 for calendar year 2015, and $10,500 for
calendar year 2016. The procedure for determining the reporting
threshold for calendar years 2006 and beyond appears as paragraphs 1-8
of appendix B to part 225.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 21, 2015.
Sarah Feinberg,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-32545 Filed 12-24-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 105 (Wednesday, June 1, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33302-33303]
[FR Doc No: 2022-11658]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

[Docket No. PHMSA-2022-0035]

Pipeline Safety: Request for Special Permit; Tennessee Gas
Pipeline Company, LLC

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

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: PHMSA is publishing this notice to solicit public comments on
a request for special permit received from the Tennessee Gas Pipeline
Company, LLC (TGP). The special permit request is seeking relief from
compliance with certain requirements in the federal pipeline safety
regulations. At the conclusion of the 30-day comment period, PHMSA will
review the comments received from this notice as part of its evaluation
to grant or deny the special permit request.

DATES: Submit any comments regarding this special permit request by
July 1, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Comments should reference the docket number for this special
permit request and may be submitted in the following ways:
     E-Gov Website: http://www.Regulations.gov. This site
allows the public to enter comments on any Federal Register notice
issued by any agency.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management System: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Docket Management System: U.S. Department
of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
    Instructions: You should identify the docket number for the special
permit request you are commenting on at the beginning of your comments.
If you submit your comments by mail, please submit two (2) copies. To
receive confirmation that PHMSA has received your comments, please
include a self-addressed stamped postcard. Internet users may submit
comments at http://www.Regulations.gov.
    Note: There is a privacy statement published on http://www.Regulations.gov. Comments, including any personal information
provided, are posted without changes or edits to http://www.Regulations.gov.
    Confidential Business Information: Confidential Business
Information (CBI) is commercial or financial information that is both
customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from
public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this notice contain
commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as
private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or
responsive to this notice, it is important that you clearly designate
the submitted comments as CBI. Pursuant to 49 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) 190.343, you may ask PHMSA to give confidential
treatment to information you give to the agency by taking the following
steps: (1) Mark each page of the original document submission
containing CBI as ``Confidential''; (2) send PHMSA, along with the
original document, a second copy of the original document with the CBI
deleted; and (3) explain why the information you are submitting is CBI.
Unless you are notified otherwise, PHMSA will treat such marked
submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed
in the public docket of this notice. Submissions containing CBI should
be sent to Kay McIver, DOT, PHMSA-PHP-80, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Any commentary PHMSA receives that is not
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for
this matter.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    General: Ms. Kay McIver by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email
at [email protected].
    Technical: Mr. Steve Nanney by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PHMSA received a special permit request from
the TGP, a subsidiary of Kinder Morgan, Inc., seeking a waiver from the
requirements of 49 CFR 192.611(a) and (d): Change in class location:
Confirmation or revision of maximum

allowable operating pressure, and 49 CFR 192.619(a): Maximum allowable
operating pressure: Steel or plastic pipelines.
    This special permit is being requested in lieu of pipe replacement,
pressure reduction, or new pressure tests for 17 proposed natural gas
transmission special permit segments totaling 41,508.27 feet
(approximately 7.861 miles). These special permit segments, which have
changed from a Class 1 to Class 3 location, are as follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Maximum
                                                                                allowable
                                                                              Outside                                                        operating
       Special permit segment number                County, state            diameter        Line name     Length (feet)  Year installed     pressure
                                                                             (inches)                                                       (pounds per
                                                                                square inch
                                                                                gauge)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
667.......................................  Cheatham, TN................              30           500-1          495.65            1959             936
671.......................................  Robertson, TN...............              30           500-1        2,410.73            1959             936
672.......................................  Robertson, TN...............              30           500-1        3,888.06            1959             936
673.......................................  Robertson, TN...............              30           500-2        4,229.45            1965             936
674.......................................  Robertson, TN...............              30           500-2        2,409.11            1965             936
675.......................................  Robertson, TN...............              30           500-2        3,153.17            1965             936
676.......................................  Robertson, TN...............              30           800-1          664.71            1954             936
677.......................................  Robertson, TN...............              30           800-1        2,414.56            1954             936
678.......................................  Robertson, TN...............              30           800-1        3,882.31            1954             936
679.......................................  Dickson, TN.................              30           800-1        3,906.15            1954             936
680.......................................  Cheatham, TN................              30           800-1          425.09            1954             936
707.......................................  Robertson, TN...............              30           500-1        3,415.69            1959             936
708.......................................  Robertson, TN...............              30           800-1        3,410.81            1954             936
709.......................................  Dickson, TN.................              30           800-1        2,345.02            1954             936
710.......................................  Hickman, TN.................              30           500-2        2,492.68            1968             936
714.......................................  Robertson, TN...............              30           500-1          997.68            1959             936
715.......................................  Lobelville, TN..............              30           800-1          967.40            1954             936
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The special permit request, proposed special permit with
conditions, and draft environmental assessment (DEA) for the above
listed TGP special permit segments are available for review and public
comments in Docket No. PHMSA-2022-0035. PHMSA invites interested
persons to review and submit comments on the special permit request and
DEA in the docket. Please include any comments on potential safety and
environmental impacts that may result if the special permit is granted.
Comments may include relevant data.
    Before issuing a decision on the special permit request, PHMSA will
evaluate all comments received on or before the comments closing date.
Comments received after the closing date will be evaluated, if it is
possible to do so without incurring additional expense or delay. PHMSA
will consider each relevant comment it receives in making its decision
to grant or deny this special permit request.

    Issued in Washington, DC on May 16, 2022, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.
Alan K. Mayberry,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2022-11658 Filed 5-31-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register: May 28, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 103)]
[Notices]
[Page 30008-30010]
[DOCID:fr28my10-63]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. IC10-917-000 and IC10-918-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities; Comment Request;
Extension

May 20, 2010.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed information collections and request for
comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of section 3506(c)(2)(A)
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A) (2006),
(Pub. L. 104-13), the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission
or FERC) is soliciting public comment on the proposed information
collections described below.

DATES: Comments in consideration of the collections of information are
due July 27, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be filed either electronically (eFiled) or in
paper format, and should refer to Docket Nos. IC10-917-000 and IC10-
918-000. For comments that only pertain to one of the collections,
specify the appropriate collection and related docket number. Documents
must be prepared in an acceptable filing format and in compliance with
Commission submission guidelines at http://www.ferc.gov/help/
submission-guide.asp. eFiling instructions are available at: http://
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. First time users must follow
eRegister instructions at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
eregistration.asp, to establish a user name and password before
eFiling. The Commission will send an automatic acknowledgement to the
sender's e-mail address upon receipt of eFiled comments. Commenters
making an eFiling should not make a paper filing. Commenters that are
not able to file electronically must send an original and two (2) paper
copies of their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    Users interested in receiving automatic notification of activity in
this docket may do so through eSubscription at http://www.ferc.gov/
docs-filing/esubscription.asp. In addition, all comments and FERC
issuances may be viewed, printed or downloaded remotely through FERC's
eLibrary at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp, by searching
on Docket Nos. IC10-917 and IC10-918. For user assistance, contact FERC
Online Support by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone,
toll-free, at:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by e-mail
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at
(202) 273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 17, 2007, the Commission issued
Order No. 890 to address and remedy opportunities for undue
discrimination under the pro forma Open Access Transmission Tariff
(OATT) adopted in 1996 by Order No. 888.\1\ Through Order No. 890, the
Commission:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Promoting Wholesale Competition Through Open Access Non-
discriminatory Transmission Services by Public Utilities; Recovery
of Stranded Costs by Public Utilities and Transmitting Utilities,
Order No. 888, 61 FR 21540 (May 10, 1996), FERC Stats. & Regs. ]
31,036 (1996), order on reh'g, Order No. 888-A, 62 FR 12274 (Mar.
14, 1997), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,048 (1997), order on reh'g,
Order No. 888-B, 81 FERC ] 61,248 (1997), order on reh'g, Order No.
888-C, 82 FERC ] 61,046 (1998), aff'd in relevant part sub nom.
Transmission Access Policy Study Group v. FERC, 225 F.3d 667 (DC
Cir. 2000), aff'd sub nom. New York v. FERC, 535 U.S. 1 (2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Adopted pro forma OATT provisions necessary to keep imbalance
charges closely related to incremental costs;
    (2) Increased nondiscriminatory access to the grid by requiring
public utilities, working through the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC), to develop consistent methodologies for
available transfer capability (ATC) calculation and to publish those
methodologies to increase transparency.
    (3) Required an open, transparent, and coordinated transmission
planning process thereby increasing the ability of customers to access
new generating resources and promote efficient utilization of
transmission.
    (4) Gave the right to customers to request from transmission
providers, studies addressing congestion and/or integration of new
resource loads in areas of the transmission system where they have
encountered transmission problems due to congestion or where they
believe upgrades and other investments may be necessary to reduce

congestion and to integrate new resources.
    (5) Required both the transmission provider's merchant function and
network customers to include a statement with each application for
network service or to designate a new network resource that attests,
for each network resource identified, that the transmission customer
owns or has committed to purchase the designated network resource and
the designated network resource comports with the requirements for
designated network resources. The network customer includes this
attestation in the customer's comment section of the request when it
confirms the request on the Open Access Same-Time Information System
(OASIS).
    (6) Required with regard to capacity reassignment that: (a) All
sales or assignments of capacity be conducted through or otherwise
posted on the transmission provider's OASIS on or before the date the
reassigned service commences; (b) assignees of transmission capacity
execute a service agreement prior to the date on which the reassigned
service commences; and (c) transmission providers aggregate and
summarize in an electric quarterly report the data contained in these
service agreements.
    (7) Adopted an operational penalties annual filing that provides
information regarding the penalty revenue the transmission provider has
received and distributed.
    (8) Required creditworthiness information to be included in a
transmission provider's OATT. Attachment L must specify the qualitative
and quantitative criteria that the transmission provider uses to
determine the level of secured and unsecured credit required.
    The Commission required a NERC/NAESB \2\ team to draft and review
Order No. 890 reliability standards and business practices. The team
was to solicit comment from each utility on developed standards and
practices and utilities were to implement each, after Commission
approval. Public utilities, working through NERC, were to revise
reliability standards to require the exchange of data and coordination
among transmission providers and, working through NAESB, were to
develop complementary business practices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ NAESB is the North American Energy Standards Board.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Required OASIS postings included:
    (1) Explanations for changes in ATC values;
    (2) Capacity benefit margin (CBM) reevaluations and quarterly
postings;
    (3) OASIS metrics and accepted/denied requests;
    (4) Planning redispatch offers and reliability redispatch data;
    (5) Curtailment data;
    (6) Planning and system impact studies;
    (7) Metrics for system impact studies;
    (8) All rules.
    Incorporating the Order No. 890 standards into the Commission's
regulations benefits wholesale electric customers by streamlining
utility business practices, transactional processes, and OASIS
procedures, and by adopting a formal ongoing process for reviewing and
upgrading the Commission's OASIS standards and other electric industry
business practices. These practices and procedures benefit from the
implementation of generic industry standards.
    The Commission's Order No. 890 regulations can be found in 18 CFR
35.28 (pro forma tariff requirements), and 37.6 and 37.7 (OASIS
requirements).
    Action: The Commission is requesting a three-year extension of the
current FERC-917 and FERC-918 (Order No. 890) reporting requirements,
with no change to the existing requirements.
    Burden Statement: FERC-917 and FERC-918 are both included in OMB
Control Number 1902-0233. The estimated annual public reporting burdens
for FERC-917 (requirements in 18 CFR 35.28) and FERC-918 (requirements
in 18 CFR 37.6 and 37.7) are reduced from the original estimates made
three years ago. The reductions are due to the incorporation and
completion of: (1) One-time pro forma tariff changes by utilities in
existence at that time; (2) completed development and comment
solicitation of the required NERC/NAESB reliability standards and
business practices; and (3) the transfer of burden associated with the
implementation of some of the NERC/NAESB business practices, in Order
No. 729, issued November 11, 2009,\3\ to the Commission's FERC-725A
information collection (OMB Control Number 1902-0244). The estimated
annual figures follow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Calculation of
Available Transfer Capability, Capacity Benefit Margins,
Transmission Reliability Margins, Total Transfer Capability, and
Existing Transmission Commitments and Mandatory Reliability
Standards for the Bulk-Power System, Order No. 729, 74 FR 64884
(Dec. 3, 2009) 129 FERC ] 61,155.
     The FERC-725A requirements (Mandatory Reliability Standards for
the Bulk-Power System, which now includes the utilities'
implementation) are separate and are not a subject of this Notice in
Docket Nos. IC10-917 and IC10-918. The FERC-725A reporting and
recordkeeping requirements in Order 729 (Docket No. RM08-19, et.
al.) were approved by OMB (in ICR Number<PHONE_NUMBER>-005) on 3/12/
2010.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Average No. of  Average burden
           FERC Information collection             Annual No. of   reponses per      hours per     Total annual
                                                    respondents     respondent       response      burden hours
                                                             (1)             (2)             (3)     (1) x (2) x
                                                                                (3)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             18 CFR 35.28 (FERC-917)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conforming tariff changes.......................               6               1              25             150
Revision of Imbalance Charges...................               6               1               5              30
ATC revisions...................................               6               1              40             240
Planning (Attachment K).........................             134               1             100          13,400
Congestion studies..............................             134               1             300          40,200
Attestation of network resource commitment......             134               1               1             134
Capacity reassignment...........................             134               1             100          13,400
Operational Penalty annual filing...............             134               1              10           1,340
Creditworthiness--include criteria in the tariff               6               1              40             240
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    FERC-917--Sub Total Part 35.................  ..............  ..............  ..............          69,134
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                          18 CFR 37.6 & 37.7 (FERC-918)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATC-related standards:
    NERC/NAESB Team to develop..................               0               0               0               0
    Review and comment by utility...............               0               0               0               0
    Implementation by each utility \3\..........               0               0               0           \3\ 0
    Mandatory data exchanges....................             134               1              80          10,720
Explanation of change of ATC values.............             134               1             100          13,400
Reevaluate CBM and post quarterly...............             134               1              20           2,680
Post OASIS metrics; requests accepted/denied....             134               1              90          12,060
Post planning redispatch offers and reliability              134               1              20           2,680
 redispatch data................................
Post curtailment data...........................             134               1              10           1,340
Post Planning and System Impact Studies.........             134               1               5             670
Posting of metrics for System Impact Studies....             134               1             100          13,400
Post all rules to OASIS.........................             134               1               5             670
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    FERC-918--Sub Total of Part 37 Reporting      ..............  ..............  ..............          57,620
     Requirements...............................
    FERC-918--Recordkeeping Requirements........             134               1              40           5,360
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    FERC-918--Sub Total of Reporting and          ..............  ..............  ..............          62,980
     Recordkeeping Requirements.................
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
        Total FERC-917 and FERC-918 (Part 35 +    ..............  ..............  ..............         132,114
         Part 37, Reporting and Recordkeeping
         Requirements)..........................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Total combined annual burden for FERC-917 and FERC-918 is 132,114
hours (126,754 reporting hours + 5,360 recordkeeping hours). This is a
reduction of 24,922 hours from the combined FERC-917 and FERC-918
burden OMB previously approved.
    Total combined estimated annual cost for FERC-917 and FERC-918 is
$21,941,076.\4\ This includes:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Using the hourly rate figures of the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, occupational series and market rates as applicable, the
hourly rate is a composite of the respondents who will be
responsible for implementing and responding to the collection of
information (support staff, engineering, and legal).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) Reporting costs of $14,449,956; (126,754 hours @ $114 an hour
(average cost of attorney ($200 per hour), consultant ($150), technical
($80), and administrative support ($25)) and
    (2) Recordkeeping (labor and storage) costs of $7,491,120; (labor =
$91,120; 5,360 hours x $17/hour (file/record clerk @ $17 an hour) and
off-site storage costs = $7,400,000; (8,000 sq. ft. x $925/sq. ft.).
    The reporting burden includes the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide
the information including: (1) Reviewing instructions; (2) developing,
acquiring, installing, and utilizing technology and systems for the
purposes of collecting, validating, verifying, processing, maintaining,
disclosing, and providing information; (3) adjusting the existing ways
to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
(4) training personnel to respond to the collections of information;
(5) searching data sources; (6) completing and reviewing the
collections of information; and (7) transmitting or otherwise
disclosing the information.
    The estimate of cost for respondents is based upon salaries for
professional and clerical support, as well as direct and indirect
overhead costs. Direct costs include all costs directly attributable to
providing this information, such as administrative costs and the cost
for information technology. Indirect or overhead costs are costs
incurred by an organization in support of its mission. These costs
apply to activities which benefit the whole organization rather than
any one particular function or activity.
    Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collections of
information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the Commission, including whether the information will have
practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the
burden of the proposed collections of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance
the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected;
and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collections of information
on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate
automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-12853 Filed 5-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 92 (Thursday, May 12, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27699-27701]
[FR Doc No: 2011-11619]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-64430; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2011-059]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Establish a Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order

May 6, 2011.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 \2\ thereunder, notice is hereby given
that on April 28, 2011 The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (the ``Exchange'' or
``NASDAQ'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''
or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been 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 is filing this proposed rule change to establish the
Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order as a new order type. NASDAQ proposes to
implement the rule change on May 9, 2011 or as soon thereafter as
practicable. The text of the proposed rule change is available at
http://www.nasdaq.cchwallstreet.com, at NASDAQ's principal office, and
at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item 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
    In order to provide enhanced functionality, NASDAQ proposes to
adopt an additional order type known as the Midpoint Peg Post-Only
Order. Like a regular Midpoint Peg Order, a Midpoint Peg Post-Only
Order is a non-displayed order that is priced at the midpoint between
the national best bid and best offer (``NBBO'') (as determined using
the consolidated tape). However, like a Post-Only Order, the Midpoint
Peg Post-Only Order does not remove liquidity from the System upon
entry if it would lock a non-displayed order on the NASDAQ Market
Center system (the ``System''). Rather, the Midpoint Peg Post-Only
Order will post and lock the pre-existing order, but will remain
undisplayed.\3\ For example, if the NBBO is $1.10 bid and $1.11 offer,
and there is a non-displayed Midpoint Peg Order to buy on the book at
$1.105, an incoming Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order to sell will also post
to the book at $1.105 and will not execute. By contrast, a regular
Midpoint Peg Order would execute against the posted order at $1.105. If
the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order would cross a pre-existing order,
however, the crossing orders will execute.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ SEC Rule 610(d) under Regulation NMS, 17 CFR 242.610(d),
restricts displayed quotations that lock or cross protected
quotations in NMS Stocks, but does not apply to non-displayed
trading interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Midpoint Peg Post-Only Orders that post to the book and lock a pre-
existing non-displayed order will execute against an incoming order
only if the price of the incoming buy (sell) order is higher (lower)
than the price of the pre-existing order. This restriction ensures that
the non-displayed Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order will not execute before
an order already on the book unless the incoming order against which it
executes has price priority over the already posted order. For example,
if the NBBO is $1.10 bid and $1.11 offer, and there is a non-displayed
Midpoint Peg Order to buy on the book at $1.105, an incoming Midpoint
Peg Post-Only Order to sell will also post to the book at $1.105 and
will not execute. If another Midpoint Peg Order to buy is entered, it
would also post to the book, rather than executing against the Midpoint
Peg Post-Only Order. On the other hand, an order to buy at $1.11 would
execute against the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order, receiving $0.005
price improvement. Thus, the order provides a means by which a market
participant may offer price improvement in exchange for receiving
greater certainty with respect to its trading costs.
    If, on the other hand, a Midpoint Peg Order and a Midpoint Peg
Post-Only Order are locked, and a Midpoint Peg Order is entered on the
same side of the market as the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order, the new
order will execute against the original Midpoint Peg Order. Thus, in
the above example, if a Midpoint Peg Order to buy at $1.105 is locked
by a Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order to sell at $1.105, a subsequent
Midpoint Peg Order to sell at $1.105 would execute against the original
buy order. This is the case because the market participant entering the
Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order has expressed its intention not to execute
against posted liquidity, and therefore cedes execution priority to the
new order.
    A Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order will only be posted to the book at a
price of more than $1. Accordingly, if the midpoint between the NBBO
for a particular stock is $1 or less, all Midpoint Peg Post-Only Orders
for that stock will be rejected or cancelled, as applicable. This
limitation reflects the fact that the difference between the inside
market and the midpoint for stocks at this price level is likely to be
extremely small, and therefore the price improvement opportunities
associated with the order in such stock are unlikely to justify making
the order available. NASDAQ's opening cross (Rule 4752), halt and
imbalance cross (Rule 4753), and closing cross (Rule 4754) require
various ongoing calculations of the best bid and offer within NASDAQ.
For purposes of these calculations, a Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order to
buy (sell) that is locking another non-displayed order shall be deemed
to have a price equal to the price of the highest sell order (lowest
buy order) that would be eligible to execute against the Midpoint Peg
Post-Only Order in such circumstances.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In addition to amending Rule 4751 to add a description of
the Midpoint Peg Post-Only Order's functionality, NASDAQ is also
amending the list of order types in Rule 4755 to add a reference
both to the new order type and also the existing Post-Only Order,
which had been inadvertently omitted from that rule when the Post-
Only Order was introduced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed order is virtually identical to functionality
previously introduced by the National Stock Exchange (``NSX'').\5\
NSX's Zero Display

Order can be pegged to the midpoint between the national best bid and
offer (``NBBO'') and can also be designated as a Post Only Order. ``If
a Zero Display Order is designated as a Post Only Order and is
immediately marketable, the order will not be executed, but will be
posted to the NSX Book, unless the contra-side order with which it
would interact is a Zero Display Order that has not been designated as
Post Only, in which case the order will be executed.'' \6\ In that
case, however, the incoming Zero Display Order that has been designated
as Post Only is deemed to provide liquidity for purposes of NSX's fees
and rebates, while ``the non-Post Only Zero Display Order will be
considered liquidity taking by the Exchange, regardless of which order
arrives at NSX first.'' \7\ Because all orders priced at the midpoint
between the NBBO must be non-displayed (since they would otherwise
establish a new NBBO), NSX's Zero Display Order functionality allows
conditions under which an incoming Post Only Zero Display order, pegged
to the midpoint and designated as Post Only, locks an identical order
on the other side of the market and both orders post to the book. As
NSX noted, however, ``[t]his will not result in a locking or crossing
quote, because the Zero Display Order will not be displayed and
therefore will not be a quote.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57311 (February 12,
2008), 73 FR 9148 (February 19, 2008) (SR-NSX-2008-03) (amending NSX
Rule 11.14 to adopt a Zero Display Reserve Order, which includes
both a pegging option and a post-only option).
    \6\ Id.
    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NASDAQ believes that such orders serve a valid purpose in the
current market environment. Although Rule 610 limits access fees,
market participants remain focused on their trading costs, and in a
pricing environment characterized by fees on one side of a trade being
used to fund rebates on the other side,\8\ it is entirely
understandable that some market participants may wish to structure
their trading activity in a manner that is more likely to avoid a fee
and earn a rebate. In this respect, the order is conceptually similar
to a limit order: just as a limit order allows market participants to
control the price that they will pay or receive for a stock, the
proposed new order will allow market participants to exercise greater
control over the fees associated with order execution. Moreover, the
order type will operate in a manner calculated to require members
posting the order generally to provide price improvement in order to
justify the ability to earn a rebate. Thus, as long as a Midpoint Peg
Post-Only Order is locking a pre-existing Midpoint Order, the order can
execute only if it offers price improvement. By means of price
improvement, the market participant effectively shares a portion of its
rebate with the counterparty with whom it is matched, thereby reducing
its trading costs as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ It should be noted that some markets, such as NASDAQ OMX BX,
the BATS-Y Exchange, the EDGA Exchange, and CBSX, feature fees for
liquidity providers and rebates for liquidity takers, while all
other cash equities markets now have a taker fee/maker rebate
structure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    NASDAQ believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act,\9\ in general, and with Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\10\ in particular, in that the proposal 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. Specifically, the Midpoint
Peg Post-Only Order is designed to provide market participants with
better control over their execution costs and to provide a means to
offer price improvement opportunities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    NASDAQ does not believe that the proposed rule change will result
in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended. The Midpoint Peg
Post-Only Order will enhance the functionality offered by NASDAQ to its
members, thereby promoting its competitiveness with other exchanges and
non-exchange trading venues.

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

    Written comments were neither solicited nor received.

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

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change: (1) Does not
significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest; (2) does not impose any significant burden on competition;
and (3) by its terms does not become operative for 30 days after the
date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may
designate if consistent with the protection of investors and the public
interest, the proposed rule change has become effective pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6)
thereunder.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires a self-regulatory organization to provide the Commission
with written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change,
along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change,
at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the
proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the
Commission. The Exchange has fulfilled 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 necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NASDAQ-2011-059 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2011-059. 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 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
a.m. and 3 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-NASDAQ-2011-059 and should
be submitted on or before June 2, 2011.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-11619 Filed 5-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 125 (Friday, June 28, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31060-31061]
[FR Doc No: 2019-13847]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER19-2231-000]

Chief Conemaugh Power II, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Chief Conemaugh Power II, LLC's application for market-based rate
authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such
application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR
part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and

385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is July 15, 2019.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
5 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: June 24, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-13847 Filed 6-27-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 50 (Thursday, March 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 14063]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05270]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC
20549-2736.

Extension: Form 6-K, OMB Control No. 3235-0116, SEC File No. 270-
107.

    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 extension and approval.
    Form 6-K (17 CFR 249.306) is a disclosure document under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.) that must be
filed by a foreign private issuer to report material information
promptly after the occurrence of specified or other important corporate
events that are disclosed in the foreign private issuer's home country.
The purpose of Form 6-K is to ensure that U.S. investors have access to
the same information that foreign investors do when making investment
decisions. Form 6-K takes approximately 8.7 hours per response and is
filed by approximately 20,974 issuers annually. We estimate that 75% of
the 8.7 hours per response (6.525 hours) is prepared by the issuer for
a total annual reporting burden of 136,855 hours (6.525 hours per
response x 20,974 responses).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether this collection of
information is necessary for the proper 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.
    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 control number.
    Please direct your written comment to Pamela Dyson, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549 or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: March 13, 2017.
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-05270 Filed 3-15-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 19 (Friday, January 28, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4520-4522]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01719]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2022-0027; Airspace Docket No. 21-ANM-70]
RIN 2120-AA66

Proposed Amendment of Domestic VOR Federal Airway V-356; Mile
High, CO

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend Domestic VOR Federal Airway V-
356, by revoking the segment between the FIDLE and ELORE intersections
due to the absence of a supporting navigational aid signal.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 14, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone:
1(800) 647-5527, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2022-0027; Airspace Docket No. 21-ANM-70 at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is also available for inspection at the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of FAA Order JO 7400.11F at NARA, email:
[email protected] or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher McMullin, Rules and
Regulations Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration,
800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it would modify the route structure as necessary to
preserve the safe and efficient flow of air traffic within the National
Airspace System.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they
may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
    Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No.
FAA-2022-0027; Airspace Docket No. 21-ANM-70) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may also submit comments through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
    Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to FAA Docket No. FAA-2022-0027; Airspace Docket No. 21-ANM-70.'' The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received on or before the specified comment
closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed
rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of
comments received. All comments submitted will be available for
examination in the public docket both before and after the comment
closing date. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with
FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRM

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see ADDRESSES section for address and phone number) between
9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the Western Service Center, Operations
Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 2200 South 216th
Street, Des Moines, WA 98198.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021, and effective
September 15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order JO 7400.11F
lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service
routes, and reporting points.

Background

    While conducting a routine flight inspection of V-356 in the
vicinity of Mile High, CO, the FAA has determined that the Mile High,
CO, (DVV) VHF Omnidirectional Radar and Tactical Air Navigational
System (VORTAC) beacon is unusable on the airway below 18,000 mean sea
level (MSL) between the FIDLE and ELORE intersections. The section of
V-356 in this area is dependent upon the DVV signal for identification
of the airway. The FAA is proposing to revoke the section between FIDLE
and ELORE, since it can no longer be supported. There are several
alternate routes that can be utilized when navigating between Red
Table, CO and DVV, including V-134 to V-328, and V-361 to V-8, as well
as other combinations of airways in between.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 to revoke the
segment of the Domestic VOR Federal Airway V-356 between the FIDLE and
ELORE intersection due to the lack of usable signal transmitted from
DVV.
    V-356: V-356 currently extends from Red Table, CO via the
intersection of Red Table 058[deg] and Mile High, CO 265[deg] radials,
to Mile High. The proposed route would revoke the segment between the
intersection of Red Table 058[deg] (T) 046[deg] (M) and Kremling, CO
190[deg] (T) 176[deg] (M) radials and the intersection of Gill, CO
211[deg] (T) 198[deg] (M) and Mile High, CO 265[deg] (T) 257[deg] (M)
radials. The rest of the route would remain unchanged.
    Domestic VOR Federal Airways are published in paragraph 6010(a) of
FAA Order JO 7400.11F dated August 10, 2021 and effective September 15,
2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Domestic
VOR Federal Airway listed in this document would be published
subsequently in FAA Order JO 7400.11.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
is published yearly and effective on September 15.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves
an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule,
when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1   [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10,
2021, and effective September 15, 2021, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6010 (a)--Domestic VOR Federal Airways.

* * * * *

V-356 [Amended]

From Red Table, CO; to INT Red Table 058[deg] (T) 046[deg] (M) and
Kremmling, CO 190[deg] (T) 176[deg] (M) radials. From INT Gill, CO
211[deg] (T) 198[deg] (M) and Mile High, CO 265[deg] (T) 257[deg]
(M) radials; to Mile High.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 25, 2022.
Michael R. Beckles,
Acting Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2022-01719 Filed 1-27-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P