[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 167 (Tuesday, August 28, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43942-43946]
[FR Doc No: 2018-18571]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-83900; File No. SR-NYSENAT-2018-19]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE National, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend
Rule 7.31 Relating to Reserve Orders and Re-Name Two Order Types

August 22, 2018.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that on August 9, 2018, NYSE National, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
National'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.31 relating to Reserve Orders
and re-name two order types. The proposed rule change is available on
the Exchange's website at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.31 relating to Reserve Orders
and re-name two order types.
Background
    Rule 7.31(d)(1) defines a Reserve Order as a Limit or Inside Limit
Order with a quantity of the size displayed and with a reserve quantity
of the size (``reserve interest'') that is not displayed. The displayed
quantity of a Reserve Order is ranked Priority 2--Display Orders and
the reserve interest is ranked Priority 3--Non-Display Orders.\4\ Rule
7.31(d)(1)(A) provides that on entry, the display quantity of a Reserve
Order must be entered in round lots and the displayed portion of a
Reserve Order will be replenished following any execution. That rule
further provides that the Exchange will display the full size of the
Reserve Order when the unfilled quantity is less than the minimum
display size for the order. Rule 7.31(d)(1)(B) provides that each time
a Reserve Order is replenished from reserve interest, a new working
time is assigned to the replenished quantity of the Reserve Order,
while the reserve interest retains the working time of original order
entry. Pursuant to Rule 7.31(d)(1)(C), a Reserve Order must be
designated Day and may be combined with a Limit Non-Routable Order or a
Primary Pegged Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The terms ``Priority 2--Display Orders'' and ``Priority 3--
Non-Display Orders'' are defined in Rule 7.36(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Rule 7.31(d)(2) defines a ``Limit Non-Displayed Order,'' which is a
Limit Order that is not displayed and does not route. Rule 7.31(e)(1)
defines a ``Limit Non-Routable Order,'' which is a Limit Order that
does not route.

Proposed Rule Change Relating to Order Type Names
    The Exchange proposes non-substantive amendments to Rules 7.31 and
7.46 to re-name the ``Limit Non-Routable Order'' as the ``Non-Routable
Limit Order.'' This proposed rule change is based on the term used by
the Exchange's affiliate, NYSE American LLC (``NYSE American'') for the
same order type.
    The Exchange also proposes non-substantive amendments to Rules 7.31
and 7.46 to re-name the ``Limit Non-Displayed Order'' as the ``Non-
Displayed Limit Order.'' In both cases, the Exchange believes that it
promotes clarity and consistency in its rules to move the respective
modifier for each of these rules before the term ``Limit Order.''
Proposed Rule Change Relating to Reserve Orders
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.31(d)(1) to change the manner
by which the display portion of a Reserve Order would be replenished.
As proposed, rather than replenishing the display quantity following
any execution, the Exchange proposes to replenish the Reserve Order
when the display quantity is decremented to below a round lot. The
changes that the Exchange is proposing to Rule 7.31 relating to Reserve
Orders (and Primary Pegged Orders) are identical to changes that were
recently approved for the Exchange's affiliate, New York Stock Exchange
LLC (``NYSE'').\5\ In addition, the proposed changes to how Reserve
Orders would be replenished are consistent with how Reserve Orders are
replenished on other equity exchanges.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 83768 (August 3,
2018), 83 FR 39488 (August 9, 2018) (SR-NYSE-2018-26) (Approval
Order).
    \6\ See Cboe BZX Exchange, Inc. (``BZX'') Rule 11.9(c)(1);
Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (``Nasdaq'') Rule 7503(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As is currently the case, the replenish quantity would be the
minimum display size of the order or the remaining quantity of reserve
interest if it is less than the minimum display quantity. To reflect
this functionality, the Exchange proposes that Rule 7.31(d)(1)(A) would
be amended as follows (deleted text bracketed; new text underlined):
    (A) On entry, the display quantity of a Reserve Order must be
entered in round lots. The displayed portion of a Reserve Order will be
replenished when the display quantity is decremented to below a round
lot. The replenish quantity will be the minimum display quantity of the
order or the remaining quantity of the reserve interest if it is less
than the minimum display quantity[following any execution. The Exchange
will display the full size of the Reserve Order when the unfilled
quantity is less than the minimum display size for the order].
    Under current functionality, because the replenished quantity is
assigned a new working time, it is feasible for a single Reserve Order
to have multiple replenished quantities with separate working times,
each, a ``child'' order. The proposed change to limit when a Reserve
Order would be replenished to when the display quantity is decremented
to below a round lot only would reduce the number of child orders for a
Reserve Order. The Exchange believes that minimizing the number of
child orders for a Reserve Order would reduce the potential for market
participants to detect that a child order displayed on the Exchange's
proprietary market data feeds is associated with a Reserve Order.
    In most cases, the maximum number of child orders for a Reserve
Order would be two. For example, assume a Reserve Order to buy has a
display quantity of 100 shares and an additional 200 shares of reserve
interest. A sell order of 50 shares would trade with the display
quantity of such Reserve Order, which would decrement the display
quantity to 50 shares. As proposed, the Exchange would then replenish
the Reserve Order with 100 shares from the reserve interest, i.e., the
minimum display size for the order. After this second replenishment,
the Reserve Order would have two child orders, one for 50 shares, the
other for 100 shares, each with different working times.
    Generally, when there are two child orders, the older child order
of less than a round lot will be executed before the second child
order. However, there are limited circumstances when a Reserve Order
could have two child orders that equal less than a round lot, which, as
proposed, would trigger a replenishment. For such circumstance, the
Exchange proposes that when a Reserve Order is replenished from reserve
interest and already has two child orders that equal less than a round
lot, the child order with the later working time would be reassigned
the new working time assigned to the next replenished quantity.
    For example, taking the same Reserve Order as above:
     If 100 shares of such order (``A'') are routed on arrival,
it would have a display quantity of 100 shares (``B'') and 100 shares
in reserve interest.
     While ``A'' is routed, a sell order of 50 shares would
trade with ``B,'' decrementing ``B'' to 50 shares and the Reserve Order
would be replenished from reserve interest, creating a second child
order ``C'' of 100 shares.
     Next, the Exchange receives a request to reduce the size
of the Reserve Order from 300 shares to 230 shares. Because ``A'' is
still routed away and there is no reserve interest, and as described in
more detail below, this 70 share reduction in size would be applied
against the most recent child order of ``C,'' which would be reduced to
30 shares. Together with ``B,'' which would still be 50 shares, the two
displayed child orders would equal less than a round lot, but with no
quantity in reserve interest.
     Next, ``A'' is returned unexecuted, and as described
below, becomes reserve interest and is evaluated for replenishment.
Because the total display quantity (``B'' + ``C'') is less than a round
lot, this Reserve Order would be replenished. But because the Reserve
Order already has two child orders, the child order with the later
working time, ``C,'' would be returned to the reserve interest, which
would now have a quantity of 130 shares (``C'' + ``A''), and the
Reserve Order would be replenished with 100 shares from the reserve
interest with a new working time, which would be a new child order
``D.''
     After this replenishment, this Reserve Order would have
two child orders of ``B'' for 50 shares and ``D'' for 100 shares, and a
reserve interest of 30 shares.
    To effect these changes, the Exchange proposes to amend current
Rule 7.31(d)(1)(B) to specify that each display quantity of a Reserve
Order with a different working time would be referred to as a child
order. The Exchange further proposes new Rule 7.31(d)(1)(B)(i) that
would provide that when a Reserve Order is replenished from reserve
interest and already has two child orders that equal less than a round
lot, the child order with the later working time would rejoin the
reserve interest and be assigned the new working time assigned to the
next replenished quantity.
    The Exchange also proposes new Rule 7.31(d)(1)(B)(ii) to provide
that if a Reserve Order is not routable (i.e., is combined with either
a Non-Routable Limit Order or a Primary Pegged Order), the replenish
quantity would be assigned a display and working price consistent with
the instructions for the order, which represents current functionality.
For example, for a Non-Routable Limit Reserve Order, if the display
price would lock or cross the contra-side PBBO, the replenished
quantity would be assigned a display price one MPV worse than the PBBO

and a working price equal to the contra-side PBBO, as provided for in
Rule 7.31(e)(1)(A)(i).\7\ The Exchange believes that this proposed rule
text would provide transparency and clarity to Exchange rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The term ``PBBO'' is defined in Rule 1.1. The term ``MPV''
is defined in Rule 7.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For a Primary Pegged Reserve Order, the Exchange proposes that the
replenished quantity would follow Rule 7.31(h)(2)(B), which provides
that a Primary Pegged Order would be rejected if the PBBO is locked or
crossed. Because a Primary Pegged Reserve Order would have resting
reserve interest, the Exchange proposes to amend Rule 7.31(h)(2)(B) to
provide that if the PBBO is locked or crossed when the display quantity
of a Primary Pegged Reserve Order is replenished, the entire order
would be cancelled. The Exchange believes that cancelling the entire
order is consistent with the current rule that provides that the entire
order would be rejected on arrival if the display quantity would lock
or cross the PBBO.
    The Exchange further proposes to add new subsection (D) to Rule
7.31(d)(1) to describe when a Reserve Order would be routed. As
proposed, a routable Reserve Order would be evaluated for routing both
on arrival and each time the display quantity is replenished.
    Proposed Rule 7.31(d)(1)(D)(i) would provide that if routing is
required, the Exchange would route from reserve interest before
publishing the display quantity. In addition, if after routing, there
is less than a round lot available to display, the Exchange would wait
until the routed quantity returns (executed or unexecuted) before
publishing the display quantity. In the example described above, the
Exchange would have published the display quantity before the routed
quantity returned because the display quantity was at least a round
lot. If, however, 250 shares of a Reserve Order of 300 shares had been
routed on arrival, because the unrouted quantity was less than a round
lot (50 shares), the Exchange would wait for the routed quantity to
return, either executed or unexecuted, before publishing the display
quantity.
    The Exchange proposes this functionality to reduce the possibility
for a Reserve Order to have more than one child order. If the Exchange
did not wait, and instead displayed the 50 shares when the balance of
the Reserve Order has routed, if the 250 shares returns unexecuted,
such Reserve Order would be replenished and would have two child
orders--one for the 50 shares that was displayed when the order was
entered and a second for the 100 shares that replenished the Reserve
Order from the quantity that returned unexecuted. By contrast, by
waiting for a report on the routed quantity, if the routed quantity was
not executed, the Exchange would display the minimum display quantity
as a single child order. If the routed quantity was executed, the
Exchange would display the 50 shares, but only because that would be
the full remaining quantity of the Reserve Order.
    Proposed Rule 7.31(d)(1)(D)(ii) would provide that any quantity of
a Reserve Order that is returned unexecuted would join the working time
of the reserve interest, which is current functionality. If there is no
quantity of reserve interest to join, the returned quantity would be
assigned a new working time as reserve interest. As further proposed,
in either case, such reserve interest would replenish the display
quantity as provided for in Rules 7.31(d)(1)(A) and (B). The Exchange
believes that this proposed rule text would promote transparency and
clarity in Exchange rules. The Exchange further believes it is
appropriate for a returned quantity of a Reserve Order to join the
reserve interest first because the order may not be eligible for a
replenishment to the display quantity.
    Proposed Rule 7.31(d)(1)(E) would provide that a request to reduce
in size a Reserve Order would cancel the reserve interest before
canceling the display quantity and if there is more than one child
order, the child order with the later working time would be cancelled
first. This represents current functionality and the example set forth
above demonstrates how this would function. The Exchange believes that
canceling reserve interest before a child order would promote the
display of liquidity on an exchange. The Exchange further believes that
canceling a later-timed child order would respect the time priority of
the first child order, and any priority such child order may have for
allocations.
* * * * *
    Because of the technology changes associated with the proposed rule
changes relating to Reserve Orders, the Exchange will announce by
Trader Update when these changes will be implemented, which the
Exchange anticipates will be in the third quarter of 2018.
2. Statutory Basis
    The proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Act''),\8\ in general, and
furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(5),\9\ in particular, because
it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change to replenish a
Reserve Order only if the display quantity is decremented to below a
round lot would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system because it would
reduce the number of child orders associated with a single Reserve
Order. By reducing the number of child orders, the Exchange believes it
would reduce the potential for market participants to detect that a
child order is associated with a Reserve Order. The proposed changes to
Reserve Orders and Primary Pegged Orders are identical to recently
approved changes to the rules of its affiliated exchange, NYSE, and how
a Reserve Order would be replenished is also consistent with how
Reserve Orders function on BZX and Nasdaq.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See supra notes 5 and 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For similar reasons, the Exchange believes that if a Reserve Order
has two child orders that equal less than a round lot, it would remove
impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and
a national market system to assign a new working time to the later
child order so that when such Reserve Order is replenished, it would
have a maximum of only two child orders. The Exchange believes that
this proposed change would streamline the operation of Reserve Orders
and meet the objective to reduce the potential for market participants
to be able to identify that a child order is associated with a Reserve
Order.
    The Exchange further believes that the proposed rule change to
evaluate a Reserve Order for routing both on arrival and when
replenishing would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a
free and open market and a national market system because it would
reduce the potential for the display quantity of a Reserve Order to
lock or cross the PBBO of an away market. The Exchange further believes
that routing from reserve interest would

promote the display of liquidity on the Exchange, because if there is
at least a round lot remaining of a Reserve Order that is not routed,
the Exchange would display that quantity. The Exchange also believes
that it would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free
and open market and a national market system to wait to display a
Reserve Order if there is less than a round lot remaining after routing
because it would reduce the potential for such Reserve Order to have
more than one child order. Finally, the Exchange believes that joining
any quantity of a Reserve Order that is returned unexecuted with
reserve interest first would be consistent with the proposed
replenishment logic that a Reserve Order would be replenished only if
the display quantity is decremented to below a round lot.
    The Exchange believes that it would remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system to apply a request to reduce in size a Reserve Order to the
reserve interest first, and then next to the child order with the later
working time, because such functionality would promote the display of
liquidity on the Exchange and honor the priority of the first child
order with the earlier working time. The Exchange believes that
including this existing functionality in Rule 7.31 would promote
transparency and clarity in Exchange rules.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change to Primary Pegged
Reserve Orders would remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of
a free and open market and a national market system because similar to
how a Primary Pegged Order would function on arrival, if the replenish
quantity of a Primary Pegged Reserve Order would lock or cross the
PBBO, the entire Reserve Order would be cancelled. The Exchange
believes that by cancelling the entire order, the Exchange would reduce
the potential for such order to be displayed at a price that would lock
or cross the PBBO.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed non-substantive amendments
to rename the ``Limit Non-Displayed Order'' as the ``Non-Displayed
Limit Order'' and to rename the ``Limit Non-Routable Order'' as the
``Non-Routable Limit Order'' would remove impediments to and perfect
the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system
because the proposed changes are designed to promote clarity and
consistency in Exchange rules by moving the modifier describing the
function of the order type before the term ``Limit Order.''

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

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change is
not designed to address any competitive issues. Rather, the proposed
rule change to Reserve Orders is designed to reduce the potential for
market participants to identify that a child order is related to a
Reserve Order. The additional proposed rule changes are non-substantive
and are designed to promote clarity and consistency in Exchange rules.

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

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

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

    The Exchange has filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\12\
Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect the
protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, 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 and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \13\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, pursuant to Rule 19b4(f)(6)(iii),\14\ the Commission
may designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \14\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \15\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSENAT-2018-19 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSENAT-2018-19. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (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 website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549, on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of 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. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All

submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSENAT-2018-19 and should
be submitted on or before September 18, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-18571 Filed 8-27-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 181 (Wednesday, September 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 64910]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20336]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL 11397-01-OA]

Farm, Ranch, and Rural Communities Advisory Committee (FRRCC);
Notice of Public Meeting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), notice
is hereby given that the next meeting of the Farm, Ranch, and Rural
Communities Advisory Committee (FRRCC) will be held virtually on
September 28, 2023. Due to unforeseen administrative circumstances, EPA
is announcing this meeting with less than 15 calendar days public
notice. The FRRCC provides independent policy advice, information, and
recommendations to the Administrator on a range of environmental issues
and policies that are of importance to agriculture and rural
communities.

DATES: This meeting will be held virtually Thursday, September 28,
2023, from approximately 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. ET. This meeting will take
place virtually. To register and receive information on how to listen
to the meeting and to provide comments, please visit: www.epa.gov/faca/frrcc. Attendees must register online to receive instructions for
virtual attendance.

ADDRESSES: Virtual attendance will be via Zoom. The link to register
for the meeting can be found on the FRRCC web page, www.epa.gov/faca/frrcc.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Venus Welch-White, Designated Federal
Officer (DFO), at [email protected] or<PHONE_NUMBER>. General information
regarding the FRRCC can be found on the EPA website at: www.epa.gov/faca/frrcc.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Meetings of the FRRCC are open to the public. An agenda will be
posted at www.epa.gov/faca/frrcc.
    Access and Accommodations: For information on access or services
for individuals with disabilities, please visit: www.epa.gov/faca/frrcc.

Rodney Snyder,
Senior Advisor for Agriculture, U.S. EPA.
[FR Doc. 2023-20336 Filed 9-19-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 21 (Wednesday, February 1, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4947-4948]
[FR Doc No: 2012-2200]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 721

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2010-0279; FRL-9336-8]
RIN 2070-AB27

Proposed Significant New Use Rules on Certain Chemical
Substances; Reopening of Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of comment period.

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

SUMMARY: EPA issued a proposed rule in the Federal Register of December
28, 2011, concerning proposed significant new use rules (SNURs) under
section 5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for 17
chemical substances which were the subject of premanufacture notices
(PMNs). In order to address public comments, EPA is reopening the
comment period for 45 days.

DATES: Comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-
HQ-OPPT-2010-0279, must be received on or before March 19, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Follow the detailed instructions as provided under ADDRESSES
in the Federal Register document of December 28, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information contact:
Kenneth Moss, Chemical Control Division (7405M), Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202) 564-9232; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document reopens the public comment
period established in the Federal Register of December 28, 2011 (76 FR
81447) (FRL-9326-2). In that document, EPA proposed SNURs under section
5(a)(2) of TSCA for 17 chemical substances which were the subject of
PMNs. Fifteen of these chemical substances are subject to TSCA section
5(e) consent orders issued by EPA. EPA received comments in response to
the proposed SNURs, noting that the proposed SNURs and corresponding
consent orders present many complicated technical and scientific issues
and meaningful public input will require a substantial amount of time
and effort. The commenters requested that additional time be allotted
to provide interested parties an appropriate opportunity to develop
meaningful comments on the agency's proposed action. EPA is hereby
reopening the comment period for 45 days to allow for any public
comments for any of the chemical substances in the proposed rule.
    To submit comments, or access the docket, please follow the
detailed instructions as provided under

ADDRESSES in the December 28, 2011 Federal Register document. If you
have questions, consult the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 721

    Environmental protection, Chemicals, Hazardous substances,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: January 24, 2012.
Maria J. Doa,
Director, Chemical Control Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics.
[FR Doc. 2012-2200 Filed 1-31-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 213 (Monday, November 4, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66103-66104]
[FR Doc No: 2013-26121]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Notice of Application for Special Permits

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

action: list of Applications for Special Permits

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures governing the application
for, and the processing of, special permits from the Department of
Transportation's Hazardous Material Regulations (49 CFR Part 107,
Subpart B), notice is hereby given that the Office of Hazardous
Materials Safety has received the application described herein. Each
mode of transportation for which a particular special permit is
requested is indicated by a number in the ``Nature of Application''
portion of the table below as follows: 1--Motor vehicle, 2--Rail
freight, 3--Cargo vessel, 4--Cargo aircraft only, 5--Passenger-carrying
aircraft.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 4, 2013.
    Address Comments To: Record Center, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Washington, DC 20590.
    Comments should refer to the application number and be submitted in
triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of comments is desired, include
a self-addressed stamped postcard showing the special permit number.

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

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 29, 2013.
Don Burger,
Chief, General Approvals and Permits.

                                               New Special Permits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Regulation(s)       Nature of special
        Application No.             Docket No.          Applicant           affected          permits thereof
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15973-N.......................  ..................  Codman &           49 CFR Parts 171-  To authorize the
                                                     Shurtleff, Inc.    180.               transportation in
                                                     Raynham, MA.                          commerce of small
                                                                                amounts of butane
                                                                                contained within a
                                                                                Medstream Pump as
                                                                                unregulated. (modes
                                                                                4, 5)
15980-N.......................  ..................  Windward           49 CFR 175.9(a)..  To authorize the
                                                     Aviation, Inc.                        transportation in
                                                     Puunene, HI.                          commerce of aviation
                                                                                turbine engine fuel
                                                                                by external load.
                                                                                (mode 4)
15985-N.......................  ..................  Space Exploration  49 CFR Part 172    To authorize the
                                                     Technologies       and 173.           transportation in
                                                     Corp. Hawthorne,                      commerce of certain
                                                     CA.                                   hazardous material as
                                                                                part of the Falcon
                                                                                space capsule without
                                                                                requiring shipping
                                                                                papers, marking and
                                                                                labeling. (mode 1)
15986-N.......................  ..................  Helicopter         49 CFR 172.101     To authorize the
                                                     Consultants of     Column (9B),       transportation in
                                                     Maui, Inc. dba     172.204(c)(3),     commerce of certain
                                                     Blue Hawaiian      173.27(b)(2),      hazardous materials
                                                     Helicopters        175.30(a)(1),      by external load in
                                                     Kahului, HI.       172.200, 172.300   remote areas of the
                                                                        and 172.400.       US without being
                                                                                subject to hazard
                                                                                communication
                                                                                requirements and
                                                                                quantity limitations
                                                                                where no other means
                                                                                of transportation is
                                                                                available. (modes 2,
                                                                                4)
15991-N.......................  ..................  Dockweiler         49 CFR             To authorize the
                                                     Neustadt-Glewe,    178.50(d)(1) and   manufacture, marking,
                                                     Germany.           (d) (2).           sale and use of non-
                                                                                DOT specification
                                                                                cylinders similar to
                                                                                DOT 4BW for the
                                                                                transportation in
                                                                                commerce of certain
                                                                                hazardous materials.
                                                                                (modes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
15992-N.......................  ..................  Ledwell & Son      49 CFR 178.345-3.  To authorize the
                                                     Enterprises,                          transportation in
                                                     Inc. Texarkana,                       commerce of certain
                                                     TX.                                   cargo tank motor
                                                                                vehicles that have
                                                                                had an appurtenance
                                                                                welded to the cargo
                                                                                tank wall without
                                                                                meeting the
                                                                                requirements of 49
                                                                                CFR 178.345-3. (mode
                                                                                1)
15994-N.......................  ..................  Pinnacle           49 CFR 175.9.....  To authorize the
                                                     Helicopter                            transportation in
                                                     Lubbock, TX.                          commerce of hazardous
                                                                                materials in external
                                                                                load. (mode 4)
15996-N.......................  ..................  University of      49 CFR 171.23,     To authorize the
                                                     York York.         173.301(a) (1),    transportation in
                                                                        and 173.301(j).    commerce of 53 non-
                                                                                DOT specification EU
                                                                                certified cylinders
                                                                                from the United
                                                                                Kingdom into the U.S.
                                                                                Territory of Guam for
                                                                                the atmospheric
                                                                                research field
                                                                                campaign
                                                                                ``CONTRAST''. (mode
                                                                                3)
15997-N.......................  ..................  Hi-Shear           49 CFR 173.56(b),  To authorize the
                                                     Technology         173.61 and         transportation in
                                                     Corporation        173.63.            commerce Sealed Scrap
                                                     Torrance, CA.                         Parts (small parts
                                                                                containing milligram
                                                                                explosive loads) as
                                                                                as UN0352, Articles,
                                                                                explosive, n.o.s.
                                                                                1.4D without having
                                                                                them re-examined when
                                                                                transported for
                                                                                disposal. (mode 1)
15998-N.......................  ..................  U.S. Department    49 CFR 171.22(e)   To authorize the
                                                     of Defense (DOD)   and 173.62.        transportation in
                                                     Scott AFB, IL.                        commerce of certain
                                                                                Class 1 material
                                                                                which is forbidden
                                                                                for transportation by
                                                                                cargo air or exceeds
                                                                                the quantity
                                                                                limitations in
                                                                                172.101 Column (9B)
                                                                                in alternative
                                                                                packaging. (mode 4)

15999-N.......................  ..................  National           49 CFR Part 172    To authorize the
                                                     Aeronautics &      and 173.           transportation in
                                                     Space                                 commerce of certain
                                                     Administration                        hazardous material as
                                                     (NASA)                                part of the Orion
                                                     Washington, DC.                       space capsule without
                                                                                requiring shipping
                                                                                papers, marking and
                                                                                labeling. (modes 1,
                                                                                3)
16001-N.......................  ..................  VELTEK Malvern,    49 CFR Parts 100-  To authorize
                                                     PA.                180.               exceptions to
                                                                                specification
                                                                                packaging, marking
                                                                                and labeling
                                                                                requirements for
                                                                                certain isopropyl
                                                                                alcohol formulations.
                                                                                (modes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
16002-N.......................  ..................  Sky Aviation,      49 CFR 175.9(a)..  To authorize the
                                                     Inc. Worland, WY.                     transportation in
                                                                                commerce of certain
                                                                                hazardous materials
                                                                                by external load.
                                                                                (mode 4)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2013-26121 Filed 11-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


[Federal Register: January 31, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 21)]
[Notices]
[Page 5835]
[DOCID:fr31ja08-56]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP08-13-000]

Floridian Natural Gas Storage Company, LLC; Notice of Technical
Conference

January 25, 2008.
    On Thursday, February 21, 2008, at 9 a.m. (EST), staff of the
Office of Energy Projects will convene an engineering design and
technical conference regarding the proposed Floridian Natural Gas
Storage Project. The conference will be held at the Radisson Hotel in
West Palm Beach, Florida. The hotel is located at 1808 South Australian
Avenue, West Palm Beach, FL 33409. For hotel details call (561) 689-
6888.
    In view of the nature of Critical Energy Infrastructure Information
and security issues to be explored, the cryogenic conference will not
be open to the public. Attendance at this conference will be limited to
existing parties to the proceeding (anyone who has specifically
requested to intervene as a party) and to representatives of interested
federal, state, and local agencies. Any person planning to attend the
February 21st cryogenic conference must register by close of business
on Tuesday, February 19th, 2008. Registrations may be submitted either
online at http://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/cryo-conf-form.asp
or by faxing a copy of the form (found at the referenced online link)
to<PHONE_NUMBER>. All attendees must sign a non-disclosure statement
prior to entering the conference. Upon arrival at the hotel, check the
reader board in the hotel lobby for venue. For additional information
regarding the cryogenic conference, please contact Sentho White at
(202) 502-6216.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-1740 Filed 1-30-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 247 (Friday, December 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 94458-94460]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30939]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79591; File Nos. SR-CBOE-2016-076; SR-C2-2016-022]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated; Order Approving a
Proposed Rule Change in Connection With a Proposed Corporate
Transaction Involving CBOE Holdings, Inc. and Bats Global Markets, Inc.

December 19, 2016.

I. Introduction

    On November 4, 2016, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(``CBOE'') and C2 Options Exchange, Incorporated (``C2'' and, together
with CBOE, the ``CBOE Exchanges'') each filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\2\ and Rule 19b-4
thereunder,\3\ proposed rule changes in connection with the proposed
corporate transaction (the ``Transaction''), as described in more
detail below, involving their ultimate parent company, CBOE Holdings,
Inc. (``CBOE Holdings''), two wholly owned subsidiaries of CBOE
Holdings, CBOE Corporation and CBOE V, LLC (``CBOE

V''), and Bats Global Markets, Inc. (``BGM''). BGM is the ultimate
parent company of Bats BZX Exchange, Inc. (``Bats BZX''), Bats BYX
Exchange, Inc. (``Bats BYX''), Bats EDGX Exchange, Inc. (``Bats
EDGX''), and Bats EDGA Exchange, Inc. (``Bats EDGA'' and, together with
Bats BZX, Bats BYX, and Bats EDGX, the ``Bats Exchanges''). Upon
completion of the Transaction (the ``Closing''), CBOE Holdings will
become the ultimate parent of the Bats Exchanges. The proposed rule
changes were published for comment in the Federal Register on November
15, 2016.\4\ The Commission received no comments on the proposals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 79268 (November 8,
2016), 81 FR 80157 (SR-CBOE-2016-076); and 79267 (November 8, 2016),
81 FR 80132 (SR-C2-2016-022) (``Notices'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Changes

A. Corporate Structure

1. Current Structure
    The CBOE Exchanges are each Delaware corporations that are national
securities exchanges registered with the Commission pursuant to Section
6(a) of the Act.\5\ The CBOE Exchanges are each direct, wholly owned
subsidiaries of CBOE Holdings, a publicly traded Delaware corporation.
CBOE V is a Delaware limited liability company and a direct, wholly
owned subsidiary of CBOE Holdings, which currently has no material
assets and conducts no operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Each Bats Exchange is a Delaware corporation that is a national
securities exchange registered with the Commission pursuant to Section
6(a) of the Act.\6\ BGM is a publicly traded Delaware corporation and
the ultimate parent of the Bats Exchanges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

2. The Transaction
    On September 25, 2016, CBOE Holdings, CBOE Corporation, CBOE V, and
BGM entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger, as it may be amended
from time to time (the ``Merger Agreement'').\7\ Pursuant to and
subject to the terms of the Merger Agreement, each share of BGM common
stock (whether voting or non-voting) issued and outstanding (other than
shares owned by CBOE Holdings, BGM, or any of their respective
subsidiaries, and certain shares held by BGM stockholders that are
entitled to and properly demand appraisal rights) will be converted
into the right to receive a particular number of shares of CBOE
Holdings common stock, an amount of cash, or a combination of both, at
the election of the holder of such share of BGM common stock.\8\ BGM
will ultimately merge with and into CBOE Holdings' wholly owned
subsidiary CBOE V, at which time the separate existence of BGM will
cease and CBOE V will be the surviving company.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Notices, supra note 4, at 80157 and 80132.
    \8\ See id. at 80158 and 80133.
    \9\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of the Transaction, CBOE Holdings will be the ultimate
parent of the Bats Exchanges, each of which will continue to operate
separately.\10\ CBOE Holdings will continue to be a publicly owned
company and the ultimate parent of the CBOE Exchanges, each of which
will continue to operate separately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See id.; see also Securities Exchange Act Release Nos.
79266 (November 8, 2016), 81 FR 80101 (November 15, 2016) (SR-
BatsBZX-2016-68); 79269 (November 8, 2016), 81 FR 80093 (November
15, 2016) (SR-BatsBYX-2016-29); 79265 (November 8, 2016), 81 FR
80146 (November 15, 2016) (SR-BatsEDGA-2016-24) and 79264 (November
8, 2016), 81 FR 80114 (November 15, 2016) (SR-BatsEDGX-2016-60)
(notice of filing of proposed rule changes related to a corporate
transaction involving BGM and CBOE Holdings).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Proposed Rule Change

    Section 19(b) of the Act \11\ and Rule 19b-4 \12\ thereunder
require a self-regulatory organization (``SRO'') to file proposed rule
changes with the Commission. Although CBOE Holdings is not an SRO,
certain provisions of its certificate of incorporation and bylaws,
along with other corporate documents, are rules of the CBOE Exchanges,
as defined in Rule 19b-4 under the Act, and must be filed with the
Commission pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Act and Rule 19b-4
thereunder. Accordingly, each of the CBOE Exchanges filed with the
Commission to seek approval of a provision in the Merger Agreement
regarding the composition of the CBOE Holdings Board upon Closing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b).
    \12\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CBOE Exchanges represented that in connection with the
Transaction, CBOE Holdings agreed in the Merger Agreement to take all
requisite actions so, as of the Closing, the CBOE Holdings Board will
include three individuals designated by BGM who (1) are serving as BGM
directors immediately prior to the Closing and (2) comply with the
policies (including clarifications of the policies provided to BGM) of
the Nominating and Governance Committee of the CBOE Holdings Board as
in effect on the date of the Merger Agreement and previously provided
to BGM (each of whom will be appointed to the CBOE Holdings Board as of
the Closing).\13\ The CBOE Holdings Board currently consists of 14
directors.\14\ The CBOE Exchanges expect three current CBOE Holdings
directors to resign prior to the Closing, at which point the CBOE
Holdings Board will fill those vacancies by appointing the three
individuals designated by BGM that have complied with the policies of
the Nominating and Governance Committee of the CBOE Holdings Board.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Notices, supra note 4, at 80158 and 80133.
    \14\ See id.
    \15\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    The Commission has reviewed carefully the proposed rule changes and
finds that the proposed rule changes are consistent with the
requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to a national securities exchange.\16\ In particular, the
Commission finds that the proposed rule changes are consistent with
Sections 6(b)(1) and (3) of the Act,\17\ which, among other things,
require a national securities exchange to be so organized and have the
capacity to be able to carry out the purposes of the Act, and to
enforce compliance by its members and persons associated with its
members with the provisions of the Act, the rules and regulations
thereunder, and the rules of the exchange, and assure the fair
representation of its members in the selection of its directors and
administration of its affairs, and provide that one or more directors
shall be representative of issuers and investors and not be associated
with a member of the exchange, broker, or dealer. The CBOE Exchanges
represented that the proposal is consistent with CBOE Holdings'
governing documents previously filed with the Commission and noted that
they are not proposing any changes to existing rules or governing
documents of CBOE Holdings or the CBOE Exchanges.\18\ The CBOE
Exchanges' proposed rule changes are limited to the provision in the
Merger Agreement regarding the ability of BGM to designate three
directors to the CBOE Holdings Board one time in connection with
Closing. The Nominating and Governance Committee of the CBOE Holdings
Board, consistent with the governing documents of CBOE

Holdings, must follow its policies in determining whether to recommend
those candidates for election as directors to the Board. Accordingly,
BGM's ability to recommend specific candidates is subject to CBOE
Holdings' governance process and procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ In approving the proposed rule changes, the Commission has
considered their impact on efficiency, competition and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1) and (b)(3).
    \18\ See Notices, supra note 4, at 80158 n.10 and accompanying
text and 80133 n. 10 and accompanying text. See also id. at 80157-58
and 80132-33.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\19\ that the proposed rule changes (SR-CBOE-2016-076 and SR-C2-2016-
022), be, and hereby are, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-30939 Filed 12-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


From:
"Jones, DonnaLee"<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sent:
Thu, 01 Sep 2022 11:52:07
To:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Subject:
EPA follow-up from meeting with COETF on Coke section 114 request

David  -  Please see attached for EPA's response to the requests made by the COETF and discussions with us on 8/9/22 in regard to the 2022 Coke section 114 request. Let me know if you have any questions.

Regards,
Donna Lee Jones, Ph.D.
Senior Technical Advisor, Metals Sector
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Sector Policies and Programs Division / Metals & Inorganic Chemicals Group (D243-02)
Research Triangle Park, NC  27711
Tele:<PHONE_NUMBER>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fax<PHONE_NUMBER>
"Reasonableness never fails to be appreciated."  - anon.

Pronouns - She/Her/Hers
Salutation - Dr./Ms.

<<Coke Ovens Section 114 Letter to COETF.pdf>>
<<Enclosure-Table-with-EPA-responses-COETF-Comments-re-Coke-Ovens-section 114-request-8-31-2022.pdf>>


   DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES default		         		Public Health Service

 ADVANCE \r360  ADVANCE \d3 	Food and Drug Administration

 ADVANCE \r360 	Rockville, MD  20857

October 4, 2004

Mr. Jerry S. Roth

Hill Dermaceuticals, Inc.

2650 South Mellonville Avenue

Sanford, Florida 32773-9361

Dear  Mr. Roth:

Your petition requesting the Food and Drug Administration to not approve any generic equivalent version of the petitioner's proprietary drug product DERMA-SMOOTHE/FS (fluocinolone acetonide 0.01% topical oil) unless and until ANDA applicants comply with statutory requirements,  was received by this office on 10/01/2004.  It was assigned docket number 2004P-0448/CP 1 and it was filed 10/01/04.  Please refer to this docket number in future correspondence on this subject with the Agency.

Please note that the acceptance of the petition for filing is a procedural matter in that it in  no way reflects an agency decision on the substantive merits of the petition.

Sincerely,

Lyle D. Jaffe

Division of Dockets Management

Office of Management Programs

Office of Management

x

x

x

x

Dear x:

Your petition requesting the Food and Drug Administration to xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, was received by this office on 08/12/2004. It was assigned docket number 2004V-0364/VAR1 and it was filed on 08/12/2004.  Please refer to this docket number in future correspondence on this subject with the Agency.

Please note that the acceptance of the petition for filing is a procedural matter in that it in no way reflects an agency decision on the substantive merits of the petition.

Sincerely,

Jennie C. Butler, Director

Division of Dockets Management

Office of Management Programs

Office of Management


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 201 (Thursday, October 19, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 48716]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22656]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14859-000]

Big Chino Valley Pumped Storage LLC; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On September 29, 2017, Big Chino Valley Pumped Storage LLC (Big
Chino) filed an application for a preliminary permit, pursuant to
section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act, proposing to study the
feasibility of the Big Chino Valley Pumped Storage Project (project) to
be located near Chino Valley in Yavapai, Coconino, and Mohave Counties,
Arizona. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to
grant the permit holder priority to file a license application during
the permit term. A preliminary permit does not authorize the permit
holder to perform any land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter
upon lands or waters owned by others without the owners' express
permission.
    The proposed project will be closed-loop. Water to initially fill
the reservoirs and required make-up water will be pumped from locally
available groundwater sources. The proposed project would consist of an
upper and lower reservoir, a 10.1-mile-long water conveyance system
connecting the two reservoirs, a powerhouse, and three 500-kV
transmission lines. A 2,900-foot-long, 360-foot-high rockfill,
concrete-faced dam would be constructed to form the 50-acre upper
reservoir, which would have a storage capacity of 19,739-acre-foot at
an elevation of 6,560 feet. A 2,700-foot-long, 250-foot-high rockfill,
concrete-faced dam would be constructed to form a 50-acre lower
reservoir with a storage capacity of 19,811-acre-foot at an elevation
of 5,294 feet. Water would be conveyed from the upper reservoir to the
lower reservoir via two upper reservoir inlet/outlets, two vertical
shafts, two horizontal power tunnels, two penstock manifold tunnels,
and eight 12-foot-diameter, steel-lined penstocks. The powerhouse would
contain eight pump-turbine/motor-generator units rated at 250 MW each.
From the powerhouse, water will discharge into eight, 16-foot diameter
draft tubes from each unit and then into two, 32-foot-diameter tailrace
tunnels, which will discharge into the lower reservoir through a lower
reservoir inlet/outlet structure. Project power would be transmitted
through a 30-mile-long 500-kilovolt (kV), line traversing northerly to
interconnect with the existing Arizona Public Service owned- and
operated Eldorado-Moenkopi 500-kV line or a planned and sited new Dine
Navajo Transmission Project 500-kV line from Moenkopi to Marketplace; a
54-mile long 500-kV traversing westerly to interconnect with an
existing Western Area Power Administration owned and operated 230-kV
line from Prescott to Peacock that would be upgraded to 500 kV; and a
47-mile-long 500-kV line traversing easterly to interconnect with two
Navajo Southern Transmission 500-kV lines owned by participants of the
Navajo Generating Plant and operated by Arizona Public Service.
    The estimated annual generation of the project would be 4,614
gigawatt-hours.
    Applicant Contact: Brian Studenka, Director, Grid Development ITC
Holdings Corp., 27175 Energy Way, Novi, MI 48377, phone<PHONE_NUMBER>;
Andrew M. Jamieson, Counsel--Regulatory & Legislative ITC Holdings
Corp., 27175 Energy Way, Novi, MI 48377, phone<PHONE_NUMBER>; Jay
Ryan, Baker Botts L.L.P., The Warner--Suite 1000, 1299 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20016, phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Kim Nguyen,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing
applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file
competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice.
Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements
of 18 CFR 4.36.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-14859-000.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the eLibrary link of
Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14859) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: October 13, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-22656 Filed 10-18-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: March 31, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 62)]
[Notices]
[Page 16961-16962]
[DOCID:fr31mr08-141]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0058]

Notice of Receipt of Petition for Decision That Nonconforming
1994 and 1995 Land Rover Defender 90 Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles
Are Eligible for Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for decision that nonconforming
1994 and 1995 Land Rover Defender 90 multipurpose passenger vehicles
are eligible for importation.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces receipt by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of a petition for a decision that
1994 and 1995 Land Rover Defender 90 multipurpose passenger vehicles
that were not originally manufactured to comply with all applicable
Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) are eligible for
importation into the United States because (1) they are substantially
similar to vehicles that were originally manufactured for sale in the
United States and that were certified by their manufacturer as
complying with the safety standards, and (2) they are capable of being
readily altered to conform to the standards.

DATES: The closing date for comments on the petition is April 30, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to the docket and notice numbers above
and be submitted by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Instructions: Comments must be written in the English language, and
be no greater than 15 pages in length, although there is no limit to
the length of necessary attachments to the comments. If comments are
submitted in hard copy form, please ensure that two copies are
provided. If you wish to receive confirmation that your comments were
received, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard with the
comments. Note that all comments received will be posted without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
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 (65 FR 19477-78).
    How to Read Comments submitted to the Docket: You may read the
comments received by Docket Management at the address and times given
above. You may also view the documents from the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for accessing the
dockets. The docket ID number and title of this notice are shown at the
heading of this document notice. Please note that even after the
comment closing date, we will continue to file relevant information in
the Docket as it becomes available. Further, some people may submit
late comments. Accordingly, we recommend that you periodically search
the Docket for new material.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Coleman Sachs, Office of Vehicle
Safety Compliance, NHTSA<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A), a motor vehicle that was not
originally manufactured to conform to all applicable FMVSS shall be
refused admission into the United States unless NHTSA has decided that
the motor vehicle is substantially similar to a motor vehicle
originally manufactured for sale in the United States, certified under
49 U.S.C. 30115, and of the same model year as the model of the motor
vehicle to be compared, and is capable of being readily altered to
conform to all applicable FMVSS.
    Petitions for eligibility decisions may be submitted by either
manufacturers or importers who have registered with NHTSA pursuant to
49 CFR part 592. As specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA publishes notice
in the Federal Register of each petition that it receives, and affords
interested persons an opportunity to comment on the petition. At the
close of the comment period, NHTSA decides, on the basis of the

petition and any comments that it has received, whether the vehicle is
eligible for importation. The agency then publishes this decision in
the Federal Register.
    Export Auto sales, Inc., of Chicopee, Massachusetts (Export
Auto)(Registered Importer 01-284) has petitioned NHTSA to decide
whether nonconforming 1994 and 1995 Land Rover Defender 90 multipurpose
passenger vehicles are eligible for importation into the United States.
The vehicles which Export Auto believes are substantially similar are
1994 and 1995 Land Rover Defender 90 multipurpose passenger vehicles
that were manufactured for sale in the United States and certified by
their manufacturer as conforming to all applicable FMVSS.
    The petitioner claims that it carefully compared non-U.S. certified
1994 and 1995 Land Rover Defender 90 multipurpose passenger vehicles to
their U.S.-certified counterparts, and found the vehicles to be
substantially similar with respect to compliance with most FMVSS.
    Export Auto submitted information with its petition intended to
demonstrate that non-U.S. certified 1994 and 1995 Land Rover Defender
90 multipurpose passenger vehicles, as originally manufactured, conform
to many FMVSS in the same manner as their U.S. certified counterparts,
or are capable of being readily altered to conform to those standards.
    Specifically, the petitioner claims that non-U.S. certified 1994
and 1995 Land Rover Defender 90 multipurpose passenger vehicles are
identical to their U.S.-certified counterparts with respect to
compliance with Standard Nos. 102 Transmission Shift Lever Sequence,
103 Defrosting and Defogging Systems, 104 Windshield Wiping and Washing
Systems, 105 Hydraulic and Electric Brake Systems, 106 Brake Hoses, 107
Reflecting Surfaces, 113 Hood Latch Systems, 114 Theft Protection, 115
Vehicle Identification Number--Basic Requirements, 116 Brake Fluid, 124
Accelerator Control Systems, 202 Head Restraints, 203 Impact Protection
for the Driver from the Steering Control System, 204 Steering Control
Rearward Displacement, 205 Glazing Materials, 206 Door Locks and Door
Retention Components, 207 Seating Systems, 210 Seat Belt Assembly
Anchorages, 211 Wheel Nuts, Wheel Discs and Hub Caps, 212 Windshield
Retention, 216 Roof Crush Resistance, 219 Windshield Zone Intrusion,
and 302 Flammability of Interior Materials.
    Petitioner states that the vehicle is equipped with a vehicle
identification number plate that complies with the requirements of 49
CFR Part 565.
    Petitioner also observes that the vehicle is not subject to the
Theft Prevention Standard found in 49 CFR part 541.
    Petitioner also contends that the vehicle is capable of being
readily altered to meet the following standards, in the manner
indicated:
    Standard No. 101 Controls and Displays: (a) replacement or
conversion of the speedometer to read in miles per hour; (b) inspection
of all vehicles to ensure that components subject to the standard are
identical to those found on the vehicle's U.S.-certified counterpart
and replacement of noncompliant components with U.S-model parts on
vehicles that are not already so equipped.
    Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective Devices and Associated
Equipment: (a) Installation of U.S.-model headlights; (b) modification
of the amber sidemarker lights to meet the requirements of the
standard; (c) inspection of all vehicles and replacement of
noncompliant lighting system components with U.S-model parts on
vehicles that are not already so equipped.
    Standard No. 111 Rearview Mirror: inscription of the required
warning statement on the face of the passenger side rearview mirror, or
replacement of the mirror with one that is already so marked.
    Standard No. 118 Power Window Systems: inspection of all vehicles
and modification of the wiring system, where necessary, to ensure
compliance with the standard.
    Standard No. 119 New Pneumatic Tires for Vehicles other than
Passenger Cars: inspection of all vehicles to ensure compliance with
the standard.
    Standard No. 120 Tire Selection and Rims for Vehicles other than
Passenger Cars: inspection of all vehicles to ensure compliance with
the standard. The petitioner asserts that the tires and rims on the
non-U.S. certified vehicle it has examined are properly marked.
    Standard No. 201 Occupant Protection in Interior Impact: inspection
of all vehicles and replacement of any components subject to the
standard that are not identical to those found on the vehicle's U.S.-
certified counterpart. The petitioner asserts that those components on
the non-U.S. certified vehicle it has examined are identical to those
found on the vehicle's U.S.-certified counterpart.
    Standard No. 208 Occupant Crash Protection: inspection of all
vehicles and modification, as necessary, to ensure compliance with the
standard. The petitioner asserts that the occupant crash protection
system on the non-U.S. certified vehicle it has examined is identical
to that found on the vehicle's U.S.-certified counterpart.
    Standard No. 209 Seat Belt Assemblies: inspection of all vehicles
and modification, as necessary, to ensure compliance with the standard.
The petitioner asserts that the seat belt assemblies on the non-U.S.
certified vehicle it has examined are in compliance with the standard.
    Standard No. 214 Side Impact Protection: inspection of all vehicles
and modification, as necessary, to ensure compliance with the standard.
The petitioner asserts that the door beams on the non-U.S. certified
vehicle it has examined are identical to those found on the vehicle's
U.S.-certified counterpart.
    Standard No. 301 Fuel System Integrity: installation of an U.S.-
model rollover valve to meet the requirements of the standard.
    All comments received before the close of business on the closing
date indicated above will be considered, and will be available for
examination in the docket at the above addresses both before and after
that date. To the extent possible, comments filed after the closing
date will also be considered. Notice of final action on the petition
will be published in the Federal Register pursuant to the authority
indicated below.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A) and (b)(1); 49 CFR 593.8;
delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8.

    Issued on: March 25, 2008.
Claude H. Harris,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
 [FR Doc. E8-6503 Filed 3-28-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P