[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 22 (Thursday, February 2, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 5294]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2357]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2012-0008]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with Part 211 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), this document provides the public notice that by a
document dated December 20, 2011, the Port Authority Trans-Hudson
Corporation (PATH) has petitioned the Federal Railroad Administration
(FRA) for a waiver of compliance from certain provisions of the Federal
railroad safety regulations contained at 49 CFR part 235. FRA assigned
the petition Docket Number FRA-2012-0008.
    PATH seeks relief from the requirements of 49 CFR 235.5 to expedite
successful installation of Positive Train Control (PTC), mandated by
the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008. In preparation for PTC, PATH
needs to install new microprocessor interlocking controls and digital
audio frequency track circuits, and add, relocate, remove, and/or
modify existing wayside signals, train stops, track circuits,
interlocking, and non-vital automatic train supervision controls.
    This work initially includes certain tracks within PATH's Harrison
Yard and South Street Yard for testing purposes, but will eventually
include all mainline revenue tracks, other yard tracks, and terminals
as the Automatic Train Control (ATC, which is a type of PTC) system
installation progresses.
    In conjunction with the request, PATH proposes to modify the
existing signal system while maintaining compliance with 49 CFR part
236 as provided for under 49 CFR 235.7(c)(24)(vi). This relief would
reduce the approval time while still providing FRA review and oversight
of the proposed changes in the same manner as pole line elimination
projects. PATH's request would be akin to adding the wording,
``modification of existing signal systems in preparation for the
installation and testing of PTC,'' or the first sentence in 49 CFR
235.7(c)(24)(vi).
    The relief sought would allow for expedited modification of the
existing signal system directly associated with the installation and
testing of PTC. This would also reduce the administrative workload for
both FRA and PATH.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov and in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation's (DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations
Facility is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal Holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by March 19, 2012 will be considered by FRA
before final action is taken. Comments received after that date will be
considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78), or online at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 30, 2012.
Michael W. Lestingi,
Acting Director for the Office of Safety Assurance and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2012-2357 Filed 2-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 17 (Friday, January 25, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5346-5347]
[FR Doc No: 2013-01462]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2012-0763; FRL-9772-5]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
Missouri; Control of Sulfur Emissions From Stationary Boilers

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve revisions to the Missouri State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted October 27, 2009. This revision
adds a new rule to reduce the concentration of fine particles
(PM2.5) in the St. Louis nonattainment area by limiting
sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions (a precursor pollutant to
PM2.5), from industrial boilers. EPA is approving this
revision because it strengthens the Missouri SIP. EPA's approval of
this SIP revision is being done in accordance with the requirements of
the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by
February 25, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2012-0763, by mail to Amy Bhesania, Environmental Protection
Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard,
Lenexa, Kansas 66219. Comments may also be submitted electronically or
through hand delivery/courier by following the detailed instructions in
the ADDRESSES section of the direct final rule located in the rules
section of this Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Bhesania, Environmental Protection
Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard,
Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the final rules section of the Federal
Register, EPA is approving the state's SIP revision as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial revision amendment and anticipates no relevant adverse
comments to this action. A detailed rationale for the approval is set
forth in the direct final rule. If no relevant adverse comments are
received in response to this action, no further activity is
contemplated in relation to this action. If EPA receives relevant
adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this
action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives
adverse comment on part of this rule and if that part can be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those parts of
the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For additional
information, see the direct final rule which is located in the rules
section of this Federal Register.

    Dated: January 9, 2013.
Karl Brooks,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 2013-01462 Filed 1-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 193 (Wednesday, October 5, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 61688]
[FR Doc No: 2011-25657]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER11-4678-000

Vasco Winds, 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
Vasco Winds, 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 October 19, 2011.
    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
14 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 review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 29, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-25657 Filed 10-4-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: May 13, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 93)]
[Notices]
[Page 27594-27595]
[DOCID:fr13my08-103]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-57764; File No. SR-NASD-2007-043]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc. (n/k/a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.);
Order Approving Proposed Rule Change as Modified by Amendment No. 1
Thereto To Amend NASD Rule 7001C To Increase the Percentage of Market
Data Revenue Shared With NASD/NSX TRF Participants

May 1, 2008.

I. Introduction

    On June 29, 2007, the National Association of Securities Dealers,
Inc. (``NASD'') (n/k/a Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc.),
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
adjust the percentage of market data revenue shared with NASD/NSX TRF
participants.\3\ On October 29, 2007, NASD filed Amendment No. 1 to the
proposed rule change. The proposed rule change, as amended, was
published for comment in the Federal Register on November 14, 2007.\4\
The Commission received one comment letter regarding the proposal.\5\
FINRA responded to the comment letter on March 27, 2008.\6\ National
Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NSX'') subsequently submitted a response to the
comment letter.\7\ This order approves the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ Effective July 30, 2007, Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'') was formed through the consolidation of
NASD and the member regulatory functions of NYSE Regulation, Inc.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56752 (November 6,
2007), 72 FR 64099.
    \5\ See letter from Christopher Gilkerson and Gregory Babyak,
Co-Chairs, Market Data Subcommittee of the SIFMA Technology and
Regulation Committee, to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Commission,
dated December 5, 2007 (``SIFMA letter''). This comment letter also
addressed the proposal, filed by NASD, to increase the percentage of
market data revenue shared with participants in the NASD/NYSE TRF.
See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56754 (November 6, 2007), 72
FR 64101 (November 14, 2007) (SR-NASD-2007-031).
    \6\ See letter from Lisa C. Horrigan, Associate General Counsel,
FINRA, to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Commission, dated March 27,
2008 (``FINRA letter'').
    \7\ See letter from Philip M. Pinc, Vice President, Counsel,
National Stock Exchange, Inc., to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary,
Commission, dated April 2, 2008 (``NSX letter'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    FINRA proposes to amend NASD Rule 7001C to increase the percentage
of market data revenue that is shared with FINRA members that report
trades in New York Stock Exchange (``Tape A''), American Stock Exchange
(``Tape B''), and Nasdaq Exchange (``Tape C'') stocks to the NASD/NSX
Trade Reporting Facility (the ``NASD/NSX TRF'').\8\ Currently, FINRA
members that report trades in Tape A, Tape B, and Tape C stocks to the
NASD/NSX TRF receive a 50% pro rata credit on the gross market data
revenue earned by the NASD/NSX TRF.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In establishing the NASD/NSX TRF, NASD and NSX entered into
the Limited Liability Company Agreement of NASD/NSX Trade Reporting
Facility LLC. Under that agreement, NASD, as the ``SRO Member,'' has
the sole regulatory responsibility for the NASD/NSX TRF. As the
``Business Member,'' NSX is responsible for the management of the
business affairs of the NASD/NSX TRF, to the extent those activities
are not inconsistent with FINRA's regulatory functions.
    \9\ ``Gross revenue'' is defined as the revenue received by the
NASD/NSX TRF from the three tape associations after the tape
associations deduct allocated support costs and unincorporated
business costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change increases from 50% to 75% the percentage
of market data revenue that is shared with members. FINRA members that
report trades in Tape A, Tape B and Tape C stocks to the NASD/NSX TRF
will thus receive a 75% pro rata credit on gross market data revenue
earned by the NASD/NSX TRF.

III. Summary of Comments

    The Commission received one comment letter in response to the
proposed rule change.\10\ The commenter stated that the proposed rebate
demonstrated that market data fees are excessive, and do not have a
fair and reasonable basis.\11\ The commenter noted that, in its
capacity as ``SRO Member,'' FINRA allocates and deducts costs before
passing market data revenue to each TRF. According to the commenter,
this ability to allocate costs in the context of a TRF rebuts earlier
arguments made by the exchanges that costs of collection and
distribution of market data could not be allocated, and should thus not
be a basis for determining the reasonableness of market data fees.\12\
Finally, the commenter asserted that the issue of transparency
regarding market data costs and revenues, which constitutes

part of the NetCoalition Petition,\13\ is also present in this
filing.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ SIFMA letter, supra note 5.
    \11\ SIFMA letter at 2.
    \12\ Id.
    \13\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55011 (December 27,
2006) (order granting petition for review of SR-NYSEArca-2006-21).
    \14\ SIFMA letter at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FINRA responded that none of the arguments made by the commenter
was germane to the proposed rule change.\15\ For example, FINRA stated
that the issue of the reasonableness of market data fees and the
purported lack of transparency regarding the cost of collecting market
data are at issue in the NetCoalition Petition and need not be resolved
in connection with this filing.\16\ FINRA also asserted that the costs
of collecting and distributing market data are not necessarily
determinative of the reasonableness of the proposed rebate.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ FINRA letter at 1.
    \16\ Id. at 2.
    \17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its response, NSX stated that it generally agreed with the SIFMA
letter.\18\ In particular, NSX agreed with SIFMA's assertion that the
proposal to rebate 100% of market data revenue for participants of the
NASD/NYSE TFF \19\ might drive smaller TRFs, such as the NASD/NSX TRF,
out of business.\20\ NSX requested that the Commission approve the
proposed rebate of market data revenue to participants in the NASD/NSX
TRF, as it was consistent with NSX's policy of rebating market data
revenues to investors.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ NSX letter at 2.
    \19\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 56754 (November 6,
2007), 72 FR 64101 (November 14, 2007) (SR-NASD-2007-031).
    \20\ NSX letter at 2.
    \21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Discussion and Commission Findings

    The Commission has carefully reviewed the proposed rule change, the
comment letter, and the responses of both FINRA and NSX to the comment
letter, and finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities association \22\ and, in
particular, the requirements of Section 15A(b)(5) of the Act,\23\ which
requires that FINRA rules provide for the equitable allocation of
reasonable dues, fees, and other charges among its members and issuers
and other persons using its facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \23\ 15 U.S.C. 78o-3(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that it is reasonable for FINRA to amend
Rule 7001C to adjust the percentage of market data revenue shared with
NASD/NSX TRF participants, effective retroactively to April 1, 2007.
FINRA seeks to increase the rebate of market data revenue to NASD/NSX
TRF participants. Neither the costs incurred in collecting that market
data, nor the calculation of market data fees are directly at issue in
this filing. The fact that NSX, as the Business Member, has determined
to rebate a greater percentage of market data revenue does not
establish that the underlying fees are excessive. The SIFMA letter does
not raise any other issue that would preclude approval of the FINRA
proposal.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (SR-NASD-2007-043), as modified by
Amendment No. 1, be, and it hereby is, approved.

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

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

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-10567 Filed 5-12-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


Maryland Department of the Environment

Mobile Sources Control Program

	Cecil County MOBILE6 Modeling Emission Analysis

R.O.P Runs using the 2002-based MD-EMIS System

	Cecil Area

Step

Modeling Scenario

VOC	NOx

Remarks

1

2002 RFP Base-Year Inventory	 	4.0	14.2

All 2002 control programs in place, 2002 VMT

	2

2002 RFP Adjusted Year Inventory

5.4	16.1

CAA Off, 7.8 RVP, 1990 I/M, 2002 Eval Yr & 2002 VMT

3

2008 RFP Adjusted Year Inventory

4.7	13.9

CAA Off, 7.8 RVP, 1990 I/M, 2008 Eval Yr & 2002 VMT

4

2009 RFP Adjusted Year Inventory

4.7	13.8

CAA Off, 7.8 RVP, 1990 I/M, 2009 Eval Yr & 2002 VMT

	7

2008 Projected Emission Inventory

2.3	7.9

All 2008 control programs in place

8

2009 Projected Emission Inventory

2.2	7.2

All 2009 control programs in place

9

2010 Projected Emission Inventory

2.03	6.4

All 2010 control programs in place

	2008 RFP Analysis

2008 Non-Creditables (Step 2 minus Step 3)

0.7	2.2

2008 Adjstd Base-Year minus Non-Creditables

3.0	10.8

2008 Target Emissions (w/15% Reductions)

2.5	9.2

2008 Target Emissions (w/18% Reductions)

2.4	8.9

	2008 Projctd Emissions (14% Projctd VMT Growth)

2.6	9.4

	Note: The New MD-EMIS system with 2005 updates may show a similar trend buth the absolute numbers will be different

	Prepared by: MDE's Mobile Sources Control Program,  Phone (410) 537-4183                          Nov. 27, 2006